Linux malware evades detection for upwards of 3 years, not sure how

ManofGod said:
Yes, bloat is subjective but hey, whatever dude, it is what it is. Oh, and the software I run is faster and more responsive that it was 15 years ago but hey, to each their own.

Edit: Or more specifically, you throw around the word bloat at everything so, it really has lost it's meaning.
Click to expand...

No, I use it where appropriate - in this instance applied to software since _shock_ I actually develop/optimize (FL)OSS including the Linux kernel. Modern software is drunk on "faster hardware every year so who cares about performance/optimization". Programs did more with less in the past. Nowadays we are doing less with more (hw) - instead of using the tremendous capabilities of a modern CPU for actual cool/useful features we get ads embedded in the terminal in Ubuntu and one electron "app" consuming more RAM itself than several WinXP machines combined. BLOAT.

ManofGod said:
Edit 2: Oh, and it is not being enamored, it is simply rejecting BS out of hand.
Click to expand...

You are enamored with whatever OS you use - I remember you shilling Windows 10 pretty hard in the past.

ManofGod said:
They must have used machines and devices to determine this then, because there is no way the human eye is going to notice the difference. In fact, I recall that back in the day, text based OSes where quite slow on older hardware but then again, that is what upgrading is all about. :)
Click to expand...

Read the blog posts I linked. The only specialized tool needed is a wallclock.
 
Last edited:
schoolslave said:
No, I use it where appropriate - in this instance applied to software since _shock_ I actually develop/optimize (FL)OSS including the Linux kernel. Modern software is drunk on "faster hardware every year so who cares about performance/optimization". Programs did more with less in the past. Nowadays we are doing less with more (hw) - instead of using the tremendous capabilities of a modern CPU for actual cool/useful features we get ads embedded in the terminal in Ubuntu. BLOAT.



You are enamored with whatever OS you use - I remember you shilling Windows 10 pretty hard in the past.



Read the blog posts I linked. The only specialized tool needed is a wallclock.
Click to expand...

So, I am shilling g because I think you are wrong. That pretty much explains everything needed to know, thanks.

Edit: oh, and I have been using computer since the 80's so I do know what was and what is now.
 
ManofGod said:
So, I am shilling g because I think you are wrong. That pretty much explains everything needed to know, thanks.
Click to expand...
You can think whatever you want - but when you start throwing "objectivity" and "subjectivity" around willy-nilly to suit your opinions it crosses a line. Even more so when you clearly have no clue what you're actually talking about by constantly moving goalposts/the discussion to again suit your limited/superficial knowledge of things.
In any case, I am done here. I am glad Ubuntu is working for you :)
 
ManofGod said:
I have a 3600 and 2 3700x's. Is there a specific reason why you use the calcule one? Also, I just use Mesa 21, is the Kodak version better or needed?
Click to expand...
From what I'm told it's better performance for multi-core CPU's. I'm not sure entirely but I've seen no harm in using it. Mesa 21 is fine but bleeding edge drivers can give you better performance and compatibility. They can also break things too.

About CacULE Scheduler

Each CPU has its own runqueue.
NORMAL runqueue is a linked list of sched_entities (instead of RB-Tree).
RT and other runqueues are just the same as the CFS's.
Wake up tasks preempt currently running tasks if its interactivity score value is higher.

 
travm said:
Except it doesn't, work.

Have you tried to do this? Clearly not.
Click to expand...

You use the older versions on the older hardware and operating systems, they will work. (Not updated but, will work.) The only exceptions would be if it is a piece of software that needs activation but can no longer be activated.
 
ManofGod said:
You use the older versions on the older hardware and operating systems, they will work. (Not updated but, will work.) The only exceptions would be if it is a piece of software that needs activation but can no longer be activated.
Click to expand...
Agreed, this should generally work on Linux - I can run a mainline Linux kernel on a relatively ancient Powerbook G3 and most things just work.
There may be small issues here and there with bleeding-edge versions of old software, but usually I either fix it myself or file a bug and a maintainer takes care of it.
 
ManofGod said:
You use the older versions on the older hardware and operating systems, they will work. (Not updated but, will work.) The only exceptions would be if it is a piece of software that needs activation but can no longer be activated.
Click to expand...
These things are poorly maintained.
 
auntjemima said:
Oh my god! I thought I was going crazy. I was sure that was him!
Click to expand...

I do not become enamored with anything but, I enjoy all OSes. Nor do a shill but hey, it is what it is. In the meantime, with everything going on, if you know what I mean, I objectively switched my personal computers so that I now use Ubuntu 20.04.2 as my daily driver, for objective local privacy and security. I then use, on my personal computers, Windows 10 only for gaming and applied the Christ Titus Tech debloat scripts to my Windows 10 install.

I also use a standard user account and then type my admin password in when needed, under Windows. That is the cool thing about Linux, you cannot use it without a password and you cannot share a file or folder with everyone, full control, either, unlike Windows. Since I am a Windows IT and Mac expert, at least on the desktop, I figured using Linux on a daily basis will give me more experience there, since I have been using it since 1996, with Slackware.

Edit: Or would you rather I sit here and whine about how bad Arch is and how easy it is to break? (Yeah, Arch is fun to use with things like Endeavour and Manjaro but, it has it's issues that my Ubuntu install has not.)
 
ManofGod said:
They must have used machines and devices to determine this then, because there is no way the human eye is going to notice the difference. In fact, I recall that back in the day, text based OSes where quite slow on older hardware but then again, that is what upgrading is all about. :)
Click to expand...
I like your sense of humor.
 
LightningCrash said:
I like your sense of humor.
Click to expand...

I was serious but I noticed that it seems I contradicted myself. However, the first part, I was referring to what the other were talking about. In the second part, I remember seeing text based OSes being slow in the beginning and you could see it, which is why cpu upgrades helped a lot.
 
Shit man. My Amigas had full blown multi-tasking gui based OS, layered desktop publishing, multimedia work, and more besides in a meg and a half of ram and like 6Mhz or some shit. Could 'browse' Compuserve to some extent.

There's not a huge improvement to show for 10,000x the resource usage. I mean I guess the edges of my apps can be translucent now, which is cool. About the same time to boot though.
 
idiomatic said:
Shit man. My Amigas had full blown multi-tasking gui based OS, layered desktop publishing, multimedia work, and more besides in a meg and a half of ram and like 6Mhz or some shit. Could 'browse' Compuserve to some extent.

There's not a huge improvement to show for 10,000x the resource usage. I mean I guess the edges of my apps can be translucent now, which is cool. About the same time to boot though.
Click to expand...

Let's not have rose colored glasses on and have nostalgia blind us to what was. I loved my Amiga 500 with the 7Mhz 68000 Microprocessor with 512MB of ram and the 512MB expansion card. However, it was not perfect and that Guru Meditation crash screen was memorable. :) However, upgrading to a 68030 processor, Amiga OS 2.04, a 50MB SCSI HDD and 4MB of ram made the machine fly.
 
ManofGod said:
Let's not have rose colored glasses on and have nostalgia blind us to what was. I loved my Amiga 500 with the 7Mhz 68000 Microprocessor with 512MB of ram and the 512MB expansion card. However, it was not perfect and that Guru Meditation crash screen was memorable. :) However, upgrading to a 68030 processor, Amiga OS 2.04, a 50MB SCSI HDD and 4MB of ram made the machine fly.
Click to expand...
MB or KB?
 
idiomatic said:
Shit man. My Amigas had full blown multi-tasking gui based OS, layered desktop publishing, multimedia work, and more besides in a meg and a half of ram and like 6Mhz or some shit. Could 'browse' Compuserve to some extent.

There's not a huge improvement to show for 10,000x the resource usage. I mean I guess the edges of my apps can be translucent now, which is cool. About the same time to boot though.
Click to expand...
In high school our math dept had a pile of apple II's. Basically instant on, load spreadsheet program, do advanced math.... Granted there were some limitations, but lets fast forward to 1.2ghz single core x86 cpus and what just worked 20 years ago. It just doesnt work anymore because shitty software.
 
almalino said:
How is that Linux problem when user is running with root credentials? Probably even without passwords I guess :)
Click to expand...
it comes up because some people claim things like, "you cannot run linux without passwords", and "its more secure than {insert OS here}"
Its really not a real "problem". Its just no different than any other OS.
 
travm said:
it comes up because some people claim things like, "you cannot run linux without passwords", and "its more secure than {insert OS here}"
Its really not a real "problem". Its just no different than any other OS.
Click to expand...

Show me evidence that you can run Linux without a login password then, I am waiting. Also, I am not talking about automatic logon, which is not the same and even then, you still require a password for anything root accessible.
 
ManofGod said:
Show me evidence that you can run Linux without a login password then, I am waiting. Also, I am not talking about automatic logon, which is not the same and even then, you still require a password for anything root accessible.
Click to expand...
I can install Mint without a password...

I can also set myself to login as root on boot. I haven't done it, but I know it can be done. I can't comment on whether or not that would fly when running things requiring authentication.
 
auntjemima said:
I can install Mint without a password...

I can also set myself to login as root on boot. I haven't done it, but I know it can be done. I can't comment on whether or not that would fly when running things requiring authentication.
Click to expand...

That is just stupid and people praise Mint as the end all be all? That is not a Linux issue but a Mint issue that should be banned. Oh, and that is not Linux behavior so they must have modded it to enable that dumb function.

Edit: Looks like you have to setup a password at install, just tried it myself.
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
That is just stupid and people praise Mint as the end all be all? That is not a Linux issue but a Mint issue that should be banned. Oh, and that is not Linux behavior so they must have modded it to enable that dumb function.
Click to expand...
I'm almost 100% sure that I can do the same during a Ubuntu install.

Edit: I am referring to the no password during install. The root thing is done via terminal and config files, I believe.
 
auntjemima said:
I'm almost 100% sure that I can do the same during a Ubuntu install.

Edit: I am referring to the no password during install. The root thing is done via terminal and config files, I believe.
Click to expand...

No, under Ubuntu, you must set a password during install. I have done a few installs recently with 20.04 lots and I had to set the password.

Edit: Also, I do not know what version of Mint you were installing but, with Cinnamon 20.10, it requires a password to be set during setup. However, you can then set it to login automatically but, you still must have a password.
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
Show me evidence that you can run Linux without a login password then, I am waiting. Also, I am not talking about automatic logon, which is not the same and even then, you still require a password for anything root accessible.
Click to expand...
Sorry but this is just wrong - you can essentially do whatever you want in Linux. This depends entirely on the first thing the kernel executes after boot (ie. the 'init' program/script).
You are correct that pretty much no distro installation will let you proceed without setting up a non-root user w/ password.

That's the nice thing about Linux - the user can choose to do whatever they want.
 
The whole OS with Gui should fit and run in the L1 cache of a single core. But its not worth it to anyone to code that tightly. Programmers time is worth way more than computer resources.

Which means the attack surface and lines of code to be screened are billions across thousands of ancient libraries.
 
schoolslave said:
Sorry but this is just wrong - you can essentially do whatever you want in Linux. This depends entirely on the first thing the kernel executes after boot (ie. the 'init' program/script).
You are correct that pretty much no distro installation will let you proceed without setting up a non-root user w/ password.

That's the nice thing about Linux - the user can choose to do whatever they want.
Click to expand...

You could probably smash a pam config together to fit any auth scenario you want. You could use nullok or just skip straight to pam_permit.so lol (Don't ever do that)
 
nilepez said:
8 GB? Fucking bloated BS. Anything that can't run on a 40MB HD with 640k of ram (if not less) is bloated shitware. There hasn't been a decent OS since Dos 3. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Correct, except for that last bit. Haiku-OS is pretty decent. :p
 
travm said:
The things that did should still.
Your telling me word processors and spreadsheet applications suddenly need 16 cores and gigabytes of ram?
Click to expand...

16 cores? Maybe, depends what you're doing.... I've seen some insane Excel workbooks that did benefit from high core counts and RAM...
 
pillagenburn said:
16 cores? Maybe, depends what you're doing.... I've seen some insane Excel workbooks that did benefit from high core counts and RAM...
Click to expand...
Yeah, some people use excel as a database, and have huge formulae to boot. Excel is one case where the huge resource demand can be understandable.
 
I don't think any 2GB access database has ever been refered to as 'massive'

But I agree though, when Steve from accounting decides he can program and starts writing excellent VBA code that touches 96 other workbooks, vlookups up the ass for every cell, on a 1.2million row worksheet, you'll see usage get crazy sometimes

I've never written a book before, but I assume writing something like a reference textbook in word can put some stress on a machine couldn't it? Gotta be some Word benches out there
 
blackmomba said:
I don't think any 2GB access database has ever been refered to as 'massive'

But I agree though, when Steve from accounting decides he can program and starts writing excellent VBA code that touches 96 other workbooks, vlookups up the ass for every cell, on a 1.2million row worksheet, you'll see usage get crazy sometimes

I've never written a book before, but I assume writing something like a reference textbook in word can put some stress on a machine couldn't it? Gotta be some Word benches out there
Click to expand...
Mostly memory intensive, iirc. Although if you start embedding lots of stuff, that can be a bit of a resource hog.
 
Nobu said:
Are the ten numbers a result of some extravagant formula spread across several worksheets and a couple different spreadsheets, and also imported from a massive Access database?
Click to expand...
The point was the software doesn't even run. Or is so slow it's unusable.

The 16 core bit was hyperbole.
 
travm said:
The point was the software doesn't even run. Or is so slow it's unusable.

The 16 core bit was hyperbole.
Click to expand...
Ah, well I haven't had a compy with less than 4 cores in a while. But there are still apps capable of running on that hardware thankfully, just not MS Office (or the like).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top