OSDev.org

Ninjarider wrote:from somthing i read a long time ago. this was back in like 2002 or 2003 that the hardest firewall to get throu was blackice. as far as getting through the firewall all you have to do is wait for them to download and executable, or send them an email with a link to a sppofed website that they could not resist.

I used to use Sygate personal firewall, but they got taken over by some other company when I switched to Linux for my main computers. Now I use iptables and have been doing so for a few years now. Haven't found any problem at all, toughest part is the configuration. If you get the configuration of most programs right, they're all great. I used to configure one and test it at a random website based firewall tester. The only ones that didn't say they weren't sure I existed were those that didn't allow me to enter rules.

I have never actually hacked a computer before other than (this works alot) simply logging in as user(administrator or get the username using cgi and a web site) and no password (even then it was my lil bro or friends and I did no harm).

But anyways, if they have a software firewall and you spam attack their computer by massively sending traffic (try opening sending lots of data and closing sessions tcp and udp in many threads at once) eventually their firewall will become overwhelmed and crash (disable your firewall or else you will crash first, duh...lol).
Once the firewall is down you still need something running on their pc that you can attack, you cant get in if there isnt a service listening for you or something trying to connect out.

If the client opens a connection out the firewall would be powerless to do anything, firewalls only stop connections coming in- unless the port is set to block both ways, but many are open out so you can surf the net etc. This is why there is spyware, its much easier to get a dumb user to download your attack and run it than it is to get through a firewall, once your in you can send out as long as you use common ports (such as port 80). If the firewall requires approval for your app to send out just name it after iexplorer.exe and only connect out while they run the real iexplorer.exe so the user wont know any better. Once a session has been initiated by the client then anything coming from the outside that even appears to be from the server will be received (even if its from a phony).

The attack listed above would work regardless if they have a firewall or not since the session has been opened by the client and the "man-in-the-middle" looks just like the correct server. Man-in-the-middle is not something any firewall can prevent.

i dont know why anybody would waste their time in the presence of an Apple.
why buy an apple? truly, why would you want to buy a multimedia-freak machine, which can run less programs than windows can? at least Microsoft doesn't go around putting an 'i' in front of all its products. i see no reason whatsoever in getting my own freak computer.

com1 wrote:why buy an apple? truly, why would you want to buy a multimedia-freak machine, which can run less programs than windows can?

because the programs it does run are by far better?

at least Microsoft doesn't go around putting an 'i' in front of all its products.

Microsoft just puts "microsoft" in front of all their products. Technically speaking that's more bloat than just an "i"

IMO Apple is the best type of computer one can buy. It can run OS X, Linux, and Windows.

i respect your opinion.

combuster,

'the programs that are run on it are much better", which you said, is an opinion, NOT a fact. and i agree with you on the Microsoft before all microsoft's products but guess what? Microsoft is the company's name, dont you think it makes sense to put your company's name in front of your company's product. you dont call your product something without telling who actually made it

com1 wrote:at least Microsoft doesn't go around putting an 'i' in front of all its products.

Hmmm... are you sure you wouldn't want one of these?

com1 wrote:i respect your opinion.

combuster,

'the programs that are run on it are much better", which you said, is an opinion, NOT a fact. and i agree with you on the Microsoft before all microsoft's products but guess what? Microsoft is the company's name, dont you think it makes sense to put your company's name in front of your company's product. you dont call your product something without telling who actually made it

Are you actually saying that you don't like Apple because they put 'i' in front of everything? IMO, Apple is awesome at creating user interfaces, more so than Microsoft or Linux. (Linux isn't a company, but just go with it.) Moreover, their products are nice. Even the packaging is pretty. I should say that if I weren't with Linux, I would probably go with a Mac. (And if they weren't so bloody expensive. )

I don't really understand why you would dislike a company just because of their naming scheme....

Alboin wrote:IMO, Apple is awesome at creating user interfaces, more so than Microsoft or Linux.

I have to agree, but remember that an operating system isn't just pretty visuals (otherwise Vista would be worth buying). I'd be happy with just a command line, as long as I know the commands I can use

pcmattman wrote:remember that an operating system isn't just pretty visuals (otherwise Vista would be worth buying).

You're assuming that the only thing great about the OS X GUI is its pretty visuals. Unlike Vista, there is actually a great deal of thought and psychology behind it.

Mac OSX is neat, Apples greatest accomplishment...

They used Mach/BSD and created an OS that was "friendly" for novice users..

I simply don't use a Mac myself because the hardware is kinda expensive.. but I use a functional equivalent.. BSD on a "PC"

most people buy an OS for the Shell, since most people are more accomodated with Windows, theyll do anything to buy the sickets prettiest shell they can find. i agree that mac shells are better than windows, but i dont buy an OS just for the shell


colonel kernel,

that movie was the funniest movie ive seen all year

thanks!

Dude osx is a unix based kernel and posix compatible, almost every software title and more and more recent games are being released for macs.

If you can write a windows app in c you can port it to mac by recoding your message pump (if you avoid taking microsofts api's- research Embrace, extend and extinguish).
Its microsofts habit of taking industry standards and flooding them with proprietary extensions to wash out competitors that inhibits many developers from porting to other os's.

You can search the mac store for a partial list of compatible software titles.
(In case if you havent noticed, there has been a rise in popularity for cross platform software such as firefox, adobe, most of the more competitive productivity publishers, and some of the game publishers).

Even if you don't use non-microsoft software, you do benefit from what little competition microsoft hasn't squashed yet- if it wasn't for open source and original software titles there would be no free microsoft products, microsoft would have no incentive to not charge for internet explorer, media player, virtual pc, visual studio, etc. When you win the monopoly game consumers have no choice but to pay what ever you charge if they wish to use that particular software. If you don't beleive me just check out a gas station in any rural community, you can expect to pay as much as 2 dollars for a 20oz cola and 50 cents more on gas- if you live there you have no alternative.

after all ive seen here, if anyone can provide me of a list of facts of why a Mac has better benefits then Windows, i will consider changing my views.

com1 wrote:after all ive seen here, if anyone can provide me of a list of facts of why a Mac has better benefits then Windows, i will consider changing my views.

You can't say one is better than the other. It's a combination of personal opinion and need.
Personally, the reasons I find Apple to be better than Windows are:

• UNIX type base
• Elegant design (GUI and other.)
• Sticks more to open standards. (OpenGL, etc.)
• Not Microsoft

That's just my list, you see. It really is all about what you prefer and like. The only thing is that saying you don't like a company based on their naming scheme is somewhat mislead. Kind of the 'You shouldn't judge a book based on its cover' story.

For example, from what I've heard, Apple is very often used in graphics and imaging design areas. In those areas people would want a Mac for that reason. Your area just requires what it requires.

Toodles