 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
What's better? Windows 2000 Server or Linux Server?
 |
i was refering to the fact of how it loads moduals onto its already running system sorta like Linux does
•
•
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,414
Reputation: 
Solved Threads: 123
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Tekmaven
Actually, all novell servers, from 1.0 and on run on DOS! FreeDOS, Dr. Dos, MS-Dos, some type of dos. Basically, dos loads, loads the autoexec.bat and runs SERVER.EXE, the Novell loader. Novell isn't a kernel, just everything else. Just an interesting fact
Novell NetWare 7.0 will run on a Linux kernel, thats all.
NetWare is 3000x easier to set up then Linux, and it runs almost all of the most popular Linux open source software now - PHP/MySQL/Apache and so on.
Now, only if it did ASP.NET.
I remember a little bit from the Netware class I took...
So, it does turn out that Netware 7 will use the Linux kernel after all?
Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
•
•
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,414
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 123
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Faranth
i was refering to the fact of how it loads moduals onto its already running system sorta like Linux does
Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by njwnews
I currently have a Gateway Desktop with 120 Gig Hard Disk! I was wondering, what server software should I put on this computer. Windows 2000 Server or a Linux Server. The reason I need a server is for my 2 domains. I currently host DCDJ.net with another server and dcwdservices.com is parked. If you could please help me by telling me which software to install, that would be great. By the way, if you think Linux is better, tell me a place where I can put it on a disk and It will boot from the CD disk drive. Thanks. My email is admin@dcdj.net.
Nick
Ok, you want to know which is better I guessing here you mean security wise.
Lets take a look at OpenBSD and Mandrake
OpenBSD for example offers no additional security functionality over Mandrake Linux, but people think it is more secure because it ships with a more secure configuration. My arguemnt is that after setting up a real world system, the Mandrake one will have greater implementation assurances and consequently will be more secure for the same efforts than the OpenBSD one.
"the 'secure by default' system cant be blamed the first time some knownot configures his web server wrong on his box and gets rooted."
There is an internet full of documents on locking systems down, there are virtually none on how to open up a hardened system in a secure manner. Are they a knownot, or are they doing the best they can (at a more difficult task) in absence of good/any information?
(no comments were directed towards anyone)
Last edited by )BIG"B"Affleck; Jan 14th, 2004 at 5:23 pm. Reason: changinf of two words for political correctness reasons
•
•
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 898
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 27
The C# Man, Myth, Legend
First of all, next time you reply, please use BBCode for the quotes. I edited your post and fixed the problem.
Secondly, I don't understand the point of your post. Are you saying that Mandrake Linux is better then Windows and OpenBSD? I understand your views about 'secure by default' but I disagree.
When setting up a real world system, we lock down everything that we don't need, and try to secure everything else. This requires people to understand whats running and how to secure it. Newbies aren't going to know how to secure everything. If everything is secure by default, this makes life much easier.
Secondly, I don't understand the point of your post. Are you saying that Mandrake Linux is better then Windows and OpenBSD? I understand your views about 'secure by default' but I disagree.
When setting up a real world system, we lock down everything that we don't need, and try to secure everything else. This requires people to understand whats running and how to secure it. Newbies aren't going to know how to secure everything. If everything is secure by default, this makes life much easier.
-Ryan Hoffman
.NET Specialist / Webmaster, Extended64.com.
Please do not email or PM me with support questions. Please direct them to the forums instead.
.NET Specialist / Webmaster, Extended64.com.
Please do not email or PM me with support questions. Please direct them to the forums instead.
1st of all(opinion) Do we really need more comments made by people who fail to read the information in question and my post, which was so kindly and clearly provided to them?
2nd of all(opinion) Do we really need more people just chirping in with unsupported, unsubstantiated opinions and claims?
Confused yet it doesn't take much?
Let me help you out here you probably became confused.
I speak of default configurations. I can't recall how many times I've come across "X is already hardened, so it is more secure." Operating systems like OpenBSD and Windows 2003 both fine examples of tribute to this fallacy. BIG"B"Affleck can & will demonstrate to NJWnews you and the readers of this thread that “more secure by default” actually results in a less secure real world system. How is that for facts shmacts?
Want me to continue?
2nd of all(opinion) Do we really need more people just chirping in with unsupported, unsubstantiated opinions and claims?
Confused yet it doesn't take much?
Let me help you out here you probably became confused.
I speak of default configurations. I can't recall how many times I've come across "X is already hardened, so it is more secure." Operating systems like OpenBSD and Windows 2003 both fine examples of tribute to this fallacy. BIG"B"Affleck can & will demonstrate to NJWnews you and the readers of this thread that “more secure by default” actually results in a less secure real world system. How is that for facts shmacts?
Want me to continue?
•
•
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 898
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 27
The C# Man, Myth, Legend
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by )BIG"B"Affleck
that “more secure by default” actually results in a less secure real world system. How is that for facts shmacts?
Want me to continue?
-Ryan Hoffman
.NET Specialist / Webmaster, Extended64.com.
Please do not email or PM me with support questions. Please direct them to the forums instead.
.NET Specialist / Webmaster, Extended64.com.
Please do not email or PM me with support questions. Please direct them to the forums instead.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Tekmaven
Yes, I really do. I want to see you make fun of yourself. That thought is so... wrong that I thought you were kidding...
If you want to talk about which system is more secure in the hands of an Knownot (untrained ), than yes. OpenBSD is king and NT is the worst OS ever.
More chirping!
Yeah, you disagree but you fail to post any facts. Basically its all unsupported, unsubstantiated claims ect .ect... Which fails to suprise me! Allow me to continue.
Seriously, pick up a book an OS security theory, the lot of you... it'll make for more interesting conversations.
Still talking default security and application level bugs?
*cries*
Why does no one ever talk about actual system security, always with the default installs or application level bugs. Who cares? I mean honestly.
There is no truth or deeper understanding to be had talking about how a product's default configuration or what buffer wasn't checked. For some reason there is never any discussion of the actual security mechanisms. The types of access controls, audit trails, etc, etc....
Default configurations are a dead horse that never had anything to offer in the first place, seriously, . Does it really matter if a system by default has 0 full compromisable exploits or 1 or 3,000? All that matters is if the system can be configured in a manner offering sufficient assurances as justified by your threats and asset values.
Thats what now Im telling you.
RTFM .... ....ect,ect......
Soon after you start posting fact behind your now, unsubstantiaded claims.
I will explain to the masses why
"more secure by default" actually results in a less scure real world system" until then let that saturate.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Tekmaven
Secondly, I don't understand the point of your post. Are you saying that Mandrake Linux is better then Windows and OpenBSD? I understand your views about 'secure by default' but I disagree.
Yeah, you disagree but you fail to post any facts. Basically its all unsupported, unsubstantiated claims ect .ect... Which fails to suprise me! Allow me to continue.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Tekmaven
When setting up a real world system, we lock down everything that we don't need, and try to secure everything else.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Temaven
. If everything is secure by default, this makes life much easier.
*cries*
Why does no one ever talk about actual system security, always with the default installs or application level bugs. Who cares? I mean honestly.
There is no truth or deeper understanding to be had talking about how a product's default configuration or what buffer wasn't checked. For some reason there is never any discussion of the actual security mechanisms. The types of access controls, audit trails, etc, etc....
Default configurations are a dead horse that never had anything to offer in the first place, seriously, . Does it really matter if a system by default has 0 full compromisable exploits or 1 or 3,000? All that matters is if the system can be configured in a manner offering sufficient assurances as justified by your threats and asset values.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Tekmaven
Sounds like an uneducated user to me..
People, don't talk about things you don't know.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Tekmaven
I'm fed up with all these shit Linux distros giving me 20 text editors and 30 GUIs. Whats the problem with Linux - its not the power - or the speed. Its that there is to much of everything.
Shit hard to configure.
man man
Soon after you start posting fact behind your now, unsubstantiaded claims.
I will explain to the masses why
"more secure by default" actually results in a less scure real world system" until then let that saturate.
•
•
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 898
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 27
The C# Man, Myth, Legend
Just so you know, I'm pretty good at everything Linux. I've been using it on and off for a few years - I'm no newbie by any definition.
Where is your evidence for your claims? Give me some numbers, some research findings, anything...! All you have right now is your word, and honestly your word could use grammer and spell checking.
[Edit] Two wrongs don't make a right, so im contracting my distasteful remark.
Where is your evidence for your claims? Give me some numbers, some research findings, anything...! All you have right now is your word, and honestly your word could use grammer and spell checking.
[Edit] Two wrongs don't make a right, so im contracting my distasteful remark.
Last edited by Tekmaven; Jan 17th, 2004 at 2:39 am. Reason: I was pretty upset at the time of the post, I'm taking offensive material out of the post.
-Ryan Hoffman
.NET Specialist / Webmaster, Extended64.com.
Please do not email or PM me with support questions. Please direct them to the forums instead.
.NET Specialist / Webmaster, Extended64.com.
Please do not email or PM me with support questions. Please direct them to the forums instead.
|
Other Threads in the Windows Servers and IIS Forum
- Previous Thread: life is full of work
- Next Thread: Cannot get to Website from within the company
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
You need to join our community in order to build your list of favorite forums. You can visit the forum index for a listing of all forums.
Related Forum Features
Latest Windows Servers and IIS Posts
- Today's Posts
- Unanswered Threads
