|
Sentenryu wrote: Does not take that much more effort to create a dummy user and copy it's
password over the root, at least not on the debian distro we were using.
Creating a new account? Editing the (shadow) password file? Well, yeah, when you're root, its trivial to get root 
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
The trick was based on appending /init=sh on the bootloader config, or something like that, i don't remember (alread more than a year since i did it last time), i don't remember how to get elevation once in the shell 
|
|
|
|
|
probably "init=single" -- boot system into single user mode with a shell running as root. That's why they repeatedly say, if the bad guy has physical access to the machine, its not secure 
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
it was "init=/bin/sh", but I think it basically does the same thing.
and yeah, with physical access, there's no stoping the bad guy.
there was also some other bad thing he showed us that could be done using ssh, but i don't remember anymore, first thing i did after being aproved was to forget all that was mentioned in class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which is why mount is supposed to be restricted to root users. If that works as a mere mortal user, then it means someone lobotomized the existing security mechanisms. Hard to fault the OS for a configuration flaw... although you could lambaste those who created such an insecure distro
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
That boot time is the result of
0) Whatever bloatware your company uses for A/V
1) Updating system policies
2) Updating your shares
3) Loading corporate spy-ware that keeps track of what you're doing on your machine
4) Unneeded drivers to configure parts of your system that you're not using (and never will use)
5) Whatever other startup stuff is configured on your system.
When I reboot at work, it takes about four minutes to finish booting. At home, it's about 20 seconds.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. This is all true. But it's still Windows. I just spent the whole morning re-installing VS2010 twice. It's possible to break Linux programmes too, but you don't have to pay for them, and you could rebuild the entire system from the ground up four or five times while waiting for windows to do it's thing. 
|
|
|
|
|
I never had to reinstall VS. You may want to look at your extensions.
Also, "you don't have to pay for them" is no argument. On todays world, there's Free/Open Source/Freemium software for all systems. Just to mention some for developers: Apache, Mono Develop, Sharp Develop, Code::Blocks, LinqPad, Fiddler, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Mono is deliberately targeted at Linux as an open source version of .NET.
Probably doesn't have any NSA back doors in the encryption routines either, although I couldn't swear to that; Windows and Linux .net mesh very well, getting agreement with Java encryption is a trick.
As for 'you don't have to pay for them', that's a great argument for open source Linux, which is where all those came from. Talk about dropping context.
|
|
|
|
|
Where a project starts isn't all that relevant, they all have versions on both platforms and they cost the same on both platforms, that's what i meant.
The culture of open source is indeed stronger on the linux world, that i must agree.
Also, NSA has backdoors on the encription algorithm, so every implementation has those backdoors. And getting an agreement between Java and .NET on anything is a pain 
|
|
|
|
|
Simon O'Riordan from UK wrote: I just spent the whole morning re-installing VS2010 twice.
And how long does it take to install that on Linux?
|
|
|
|
|
Simon O'Riordan from UK wrote: and you could rebuild the entire system from the ground up four or five times
while waiting for windows to do it's thing
You must work on some really, really different systems then.
Spent many years on windows and unix variants and performance problems in the OS were always a result of the environment that I set up.
If I changed the environment then it worked better. True for unix. True for windows.
|
|
|
|
|
Simon O'Riordan from UK wrote: 15 minute boot time?
Only way I can imagine that happening is if you have basically everything on the box in the system tray. Which means they all start up every time you reboot.
Or alternatively there is something seriously messed up with your hardware.
|
|
|
|
|
"Next, teach your "senior recruiters" a little something about US geography. For the record, Houston and Dallas are NOWHERE NEAR San Antonio. Neither location qualifies as a "longish commute" (and yes, I had some idiot call it that today)."
The Circuit of the Americas is nearer, if I lived there I know where I would be this weekend. Are you a fan?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't follow any professional racing series anymore, and generally, open-wheel stuff holds no interest for me.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John, you and me both. AFAIK all I want them to do is put me in contact with the jobs I want, not the other way around. Examples include an 'easy commute' to the other side of London, around 3 hours each way, or salaries equating to what I was earning 20 years ago.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
I understand your pain. Like you I have been working in the field for an extended time, 20+ years. I have on my resume that I do not want to relocate, but constantly get recruiters contacting me about opportunities "up north." At the beginning of my career I lived in one of those northern states whose name begins with "New", and have since escaped to the mountains of eastern Tennessee via Atlanta. I guess that since I worked up north at one time, recruiters think I would be eager to return to snow-blower country, places like Boston, Philly, NJ, or NYC. I found that no matter how much I would indicate I was not interested nothing seemed to deter recruiters from repeatedly wasting my time and theirs. I finally got smart and started speaking their language, $$$$. Now when contacted by a recruiter about a position in an area I am not interested in I simply state "To get me even remotely interested in going to so-and-so the rate will have to be something God-aweful, like $100,000/hr. Now if you have something closer to my area I can come down significantly." I just love the shocked silence that ensues. I have yet to have a recruiter contact me a second time.
Cheers,
Tim W.
|
|
|
|
|
You're the God of exageration. I alread asked for $100/hr for the comute, but $100,000? that's just mean.
|
|
|
|
|
I figure if a recruiter wants to attempt to convince me to go to a location I do not want to work, then the rate should capture my interest. Having worked in the northeast US before, it would take far more than $100/hr to want to deal with living in a big city. Besides, if I ever do find a sucker, I mean an opportunity that would pay like that, I could retire after a couple of weeks.
Cheers,
Tim W.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is that they can't pay me enough to work in a blue state, especially if it's above the snow line. To be honest, it's hard enough to stay in Texas.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: The problem is that they can't pay me enough to work in a blue state, especially if it's above the snow line.
I feel the same way. But if a company want me bad enough to pay $100,000/hr then I could manage "force" myself to work there, for a couple of weeks. Even in the heavily taxed Northeast, I would be taking a nice chunk of change home. I would be able pay off all the bills and still be able to take a few months/years off after working a few weeks.
Do I think a company will really pay me that kind of money? No. Never. But it does encourage the northern recruiters to remove me from their databases, which is what I want.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: To be honest, it's hard enough to stay in Texas.
It is the same here in northeast Tennessee. Most employers here do not want to pay much but then want you to work like a slave. Right now I am working as a consultant/contractor; The pay is okay and I get treated better than the employees. I have had to work away from home at times. I can make 2X what I make locally when I work away from home. I limit myself to areas within the Southeast when I do consider working out of the area. I tend to work near Atlanta a lot, mostly because (a) I have college friends there who are amenable to leasing me a couple of rooms in the basement at a decent rate and (b) I already have working relationships with the local recruiters.
Cheers,
Tim W.
|
|
|
|
|
SirTreveyan wrote: To get me even remotely interested in going to so-and-so the rate will have to
be something God-aweful, like $100,000/hr
Perfectly reasonable but you should actually pick a rate which, presumably, isn't ridiculous and yet if they did agree to that then you would be happy accepting the job. You might also want some other requirements as well such as length of employment and early termination severance.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote:
Perfectly reasonable but you should actually pick a rate which, presumably, isn't ridiculous and yet if they did agree to that then you would be happy accepting the job. You might also want some other requirements as well such as length of employment and early termination severance.
You are totally missing the point.
I have clearly written in my resume I am only interested in specific areas of Southeastern US. If a recruiter would just read my resume they would know I am not interested in opportunities in say Philly or Dallas or San Francisco. In the past I have asked recruiters from these areas to remove me from their databases and subsequently I would still be contacted. I found giving a ridiculous rate achieves what a polite request fails to do.
Cheers,
Tim W.
|
|
|
|
|
SirTreveyan wrote: You are totally missing the point.
No I understand your point.
My point is that everything is always a negotiation. For example the fact that you specifically state that you only want a job in your local area probably doesn't mean that you are willing to accept such a job for minimum wage. And although, just like you, I don't want to relocate I would in fact do it if they wanted to pay me enough. I also understand that it possible, although unlikely, that they would in fact pay me what I would consider worthwhile. But for that to be meaningful I at least need to have some idea what a real the actual rate that I would need where I would actually do it.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
