Comment by AdieuToLogic

Comment by AdieuToLogic 5 hours ago

>>Windows still let you root a machine by 1 line in powershell? What the @$$%&%&#$?

> We can do whatever we want with the computer we own and use.

There is a difference between what an owner of a computer can and should be able to do, verses what an arbitrary actor can do to a computer they do not own through subterfuge. It is the responsibility of an Operating System to facilitate the former and guard against the latter.

MS Windows has a poor history of being able to do either.

Dalewyn 5 hours ago

Remember the old saying: With great power comes great responsibility.

Windows just lets us do anything and everything, and it's up to us how we want to secure it if at all.

Every other operating system family tries to realize security by straight up locking the user, the administrator, out of his own computer. They still get compromised, by the way.

Windows has absolutely succeeded and continues to succeed in enabling the user, including security if he so desires. This is the reason Windows became the dominant desktop OS. The others? Nope on both counts. The Linux world in particular always screams about user freedom, yet ironically it's Windows and its community that actually makes that freedom a reality.

Once more: I hope to god this never changes.

Reply View 5 replies

nativeit 4 hours ago

This is a wild take. Would you mind expanding a bit on the oppressive, locked down ecosystem that’s choking the free expression of Linux users?

Reply View | 2 replies
- Dalewyn 4 hours ago
  
  For starters it's security theater, given everyone and their dog prefixes sudo to all commands without much thinking. There are also some who just smash in sudo -i as the first thing they ever do upon boot (guilty as charged) because they suffer RSI from typing sudo a trillion times.
  There's also this impression that the operating system is just secure and you as the user are just protected like it's a law of physics. Spoiler alert, you are not and it's not a law of physics either. It's still your responsibility to secure the computer if you so desire and otherwise not do dumb shit like copypasta'ing commands from the internet.
  I'm not even going to get into the politics that are package managers and repos, that's just straight bullshit that has more to do with human nature than computer science.
  Speaking of politics, most of the FOSS community at large hates users using and administrators administering computers how they want. You must subscribe to the One Libre Way(tm) or you are a heathen doing it wrong. So much for freedom. The Windows community meanwhile is mostly composed of jaded engineers who are just happy to see others get stuff done and get through another day in one piece.
  Windows from the start places the user at the controls with mostly no child safety locks in place (and you can remove what is there easily, eg: UAC), and with that power you have to accept that if you end up hosing the system the problem is you because Windows doesn't even pretend to really protect you.
  Having the sheer power to hose Windows with a single Powershell line is what freedom is. Freedom is both delightful and horrifying.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  AdieuToLogic 2 hours ago
  
  What I am writing below I mean genuinely, without malice, and in the hope it helps dispel some of the conclusions you have expressed above, if not for Linux itself (which I do not normally use) then for other Unix operating systems such as FreeBSD[0].
  > For starters it's security theater, given everyone and their dog prefixes sudo to all commands without much thinking.
  Setting aside the hyperbole, such as "everyone and their dog prefixes sudo to all commands" and "most of the FOSS community at large hates users", user/group/other permissions are one part of security in depth. Excessive use of sudo is indicative of an improperly configured system or use of software which lacks understanding of the OS which runs it. Both are causes for concern.
  > Windows from the start places the user at the controls with mostly no child safety locks in place ...
  To continue your analogy, child safety locks exist to minimize avoidable catastrophic situations for those unable to do same.
  > ... with that power you have to accept that if you end up hosing the system the problem is you because Windows doesn't even pretend to really protect you.
  At first glance, this has a "victim blaming" flavour to it along the lines of "you should have known better." A more concerning implication is that this perspective does not take into consideration what happens when a blackhat attack is perpetrated.
  What benefit is "the sheer power to hose Windows with a single Powershell line" when it is not you whom executes it?
  0 - https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/introduction/
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
[removed] 4 hours ago

[deleted]

Reply View | 0 replies
[removed] 4 hours ago

[deleted]

Reply View | 0 replies