Re: [Sheflug] GUI vs. text ;))

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <nospam [at] sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>]

>>>>> "Al" == Alex Hudson <eah106 [at] york.ac.uk> writes:

    Al> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

    >> The issue is if kppp _doesn't_ work.  There is no graceful
    >> failure mode; the automatic response seems to be "post to
    >> ShefLUG."  :-(

    Al> I don't see why a user has to become fully conversant with the
    Al> ins and outs of ppp config on linux just to set up a dial-in
    Al> line? Okay, if kppp doesn't work, you're stuck. Most users
    Al> don't care to work out how ppp works, in exactly the same way
    Al> that people don't learn how to fix their car. Cars should just
    Al> work ... ?

    Al> But what if the car breaks down? There is no graceful failure
    Al> mode; the automatic response seems to be "take it to a
    Al> garage."

Well, one difference is that you think of the issue in general terms;
But I have no objection to GUIs in general (that's not what I said,
but that's because I was presuming the sys admin context; sorry, my
bad), except that I think they mostly suck.  But if that were all, I'd
just shut up, and not use them.

However, I'm mostly interested in sys admin issues here.  From the
point of view of a general user, configuring ppp is like fixing a car,
and they don't wanna know.  And they shouldn't have to.  But for the
sys admin, the proper analogy is _driving_ the car.  This entails
certain responsibilities, enforced on drivers by licensing
requirements.

On a Linux box connected to the Internet, most admin tasks have
security implications.  An insecure Linux box is a potential hazard to
other hosts on the 'net.  Most GUI Linux boxes today are of little
interest to spammers and D-DoSers, because they haven't the bandwidth.
But now that millions of Linux boxes are hooked to the net, and their
owners are all thirsting for broadband access, that's going to change.

Linux (ELF) viruses have already been written.  There have been Linux
exploits in the past, there will be more in the future, especially
with the kernel code churning as it has recently and the incredible
pace of Internet-aware application development.  So we're going to see
that segment of society that produces those neat tricks turn their
attention to hacking GUI-based Linux systems ... and it's going to be
not much harder, and much more "profitable," than hacking Windows.
"Baz" has noted some black hats knocking on his door, and he's an
intermittent dial-up.  What happens when people who _don't_ install
port sentries start getting cable and DSL?

I see little evidence that the GUI writers acknowledge these issues;
it's uncommon enough in the general distro community, which prefers to
respond to proven threats rather than try to write new code securely
and audit old code on a preventive basis.  In fact, as I've argued,
the GUI writers go in the other direction, trying to provide power to
users without commensurate responsibility.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________  _________________  _________________  _________________
What are those straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.