[buug] Linux Security Site

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Zeke Krahlin (ezekielk at iname.com):
> Hi Rick Moen, you wrote on 2/16/2000 8:59:57 PM:
> 
>> I don't think Linux is a good option for such people.  They will
>> inevitably evaluate Linux by how closely it approximates what they're
>> used to, while being blind to what it has that they've never seen.
> 
> I don't find that to always be the case. I have five clients who
> already took my advice to drop AOL, and go for one of the local
> services for a lot less cost (and some even chose a free service).
> They are all glad they did so. Any client who would not consider
> taking the brave leap from AOL to a generic ISP, I do not bother to
> offer any other PC alternatives (like Linux).

OK, so they're at least a little bit enterprising.  This helps a great
deal.  

In fact, it's the essential ingredient.  Otherwise, you run into the
"What do you mean it won't run my copy of Quicken?" syndrome.  Such
people are not worth the trouble.

Let me be clear about this:  It's _eminently_ possible to set up Linux
as a preconfigured desktop box that meets people's needs.  In fact, it's
better at that than just about anything else, because it _stays_
configured, once set up, and doesn't suffer (e.g.) Registry and DLL
bitrot.

I know this is the case, because I saw people off the street using Linux
workstations with no troubles whatsoever for four years at The
CoffeeNet (http://www.coffeenet.net/), which was my downstairs neighbour
in San Francisco. 

However, if you pitch it as an MS Windows replacement, it will be
evaluated on those terms and found wanting.  So, as the old joke goes,
don't do that, then.  Promote Linux in a way that highlights its
strengths.

It just happens that many of the things that are distinctively good
about Linux have to do with networking and long-lived processe.  When
you set up dual-booting, you are crippling Linux in both of those areas.

>>You can get non-graphical access from MS Windows to your Linux box
>>using telnet or ssh (latter preferred -- see
>>http://linuxmafia.com/pub/linux/security/ssh-clients).  
> 
> Thanx. I've downloaded puTTY. But It seems repugnant to use Windoze to
> access Linux.  Are there methods to accomplish same via DOS? (If so,
> would it be only non-graphics?)

Your wording in the latter part (would it be only non-graphics) suggests 
that we must be having some sort of severe misunderstanding.

Why ssh into a Linux box from MS Windows?  Because it's necessary at 
various times, and telnet is no longer acceptable for security reasons.
The point is to _generally_ wean people off of relying on telnet.  It's
obsolete, now that no-cost ssh 1.x clients are available for all OS
platforms (and ssh 1.x servers for three platforms):

http://linuxmafia.com/pub/linux/security/ssh-clients

> The VNC site is not accessible...but maybe it's just temporary downtime. 

It was.

> But why would this method of accessing the Linux box be more
> practical, than using a split video cable, where I can run Linux
> directly...with no Windoze shell holding it all up? Is this method
> almost just as fast and robust as using Linux directly? 

I apparently was tired when I wrote my earlier message, since the real
win from VNC is not the configuration I described, but rather the
reverse:  The Win32 VNC server allows you to export Win32 programs'
graphical calls across a LAN to a VNC client.  Thus, you can have your
bloatware PIII Win32 box running "headless" (no monitor) and exporting
its graphics over VNC, and your cheapo Linux P90 running VNC client on
top of X, with the two machines connected using nothing more high-tech
than a $5 crossover cable and two $30 NetGear Tulip cards.

The point is that, then, your P90 Linux box will be able to run local
X and console Linux applications, and also run remote Win32 applications
right alongside them.  And the software to do this is free (in both
senses of the term).

This allows the user to slowly acculturate himself to Linux and X, while
at the same time having instant access to any desired Win32 application.

So, we won't hear "I want my Quicken back" any more.

It also gets people to understand that networks are a natural and
expected part of computing, so that they feel constrained when those are 
_not_ present, as they should.  Just as they should feel cheated if it's
not practical to leave their applications running and maintaining state
for months at a time.

-- 
Cheers,     Founding member of the Hyphenation Society, a grassroots-based, 
Rick Moen   not-for-profit, locally-owned-and-operated, cooperatively-managed,
rick (at) linuxmafia.com  modern-American-English-usage-improvement association