It is with much regret that I must part ways with my vision for integrating Linux into the desktop and non-web server environment at work. A man much wiser than me explained that there are 3 factors to consider when making technology investments (it actually works in a much broader sense as well). The Powers That Be are going to be looking to get things done 1) quickly, 2) cheaply, and 3) right. Now, as the IT Director I’m only allowed to pick two elements from the list and toss the 3rd aside. Play with it in your head – it’s fun.
Assuming that we all want to get our security overhaul done right, I’m left with the choices of either doing it quickly at a high price, or cheaply with a longer rollout. In the case of the project I’m faced with for PCI compliance, time is of the utmost importance. As such, I can either succumb to the pressure and use Windows servers for easy domain authentication and VPN tunneling, or go with my preferred route of Linux and the equivalents. My basic assessment of Windows is that while it’s fairly intuitive to setup and configure, it can be a real bear to maintain. Linux, on the other hand, takes more time to get running (especially when working in unfamiliar waters) but is relatively stable when compared to Redmond’s offering.
Unfortunately, because I don’t have that time to work with, I’m building my budget around Microsoft. Now, the possibility that our company scoffs at the cost is likely, which is why I’m also building its equal with Linux but with a much longer lead time.
So, it is with great disdain, that I temporarily bid Linux adieu.
So Norton has released a version of their flagship product for the Mac? Please tell me this isn’t so!
All that I can say here is that I hope Mac users have paid attention to Windows users with Symantec’s products — specifically Norton Antivirus. I’ll admit that on my personal Linux machines I don’t run anything at all and ** knock on wood ** I’ve never had an issue with a virus. I do however use router and OS firewalls as well as the usual I-don’t-trust-anything-you-send-or-link-to-me mentality.
If I felt so inclined though there is always ClamAV and it apparently runs on a Mac as well as Windows and Linux! Imagine that?
[tags]clamav, mac, norton[/tags]
After all these years of avoiding the gritty language of C, my last class forced me to get into just that. Honestly, other than being much more detailed in data-types, I found the logic control to be very comfortable given my experience with PHP.
So, now that I’ve been getting familiar with the syntax I realized that I have a new software repository syncing application that has been dying to be written. C is of course a terrible choice given the plethora of modern OOP languages that can do the trick much more easily. Problem: The new remote platform that is supposed to save me from PCI DSS hell runs the SMALL scripting language. Never heard of it? Er. It’s called PAWN now. Still never heard of it.
Thankfully, some guides that I’ve seen claim that C, C++, and HTML experience will make coding in Pawn a breeze. Cheers.
[tags]scripting language, pawn[/tags]
Having been a longtime supporter of the ClamAV project, I was interested to see the headline, Open Source Antivirus: ClamAV project sold to Sourcefire. ClamWin is actually the product that I’ve used extensively in the past. Our new self-service kiosk project at work is running this and doing beautifully through the test period.
The group was spawned by the creator of Snort, which is yet another security product that I’ll be utilizing for some new compliance testing that we have to undergo.
This shift of ownership really shows that open source software has value; whether it is freely available or not. In my opinion, ClamAV knocks the socks off of any commercially available anti-virus product. Yes, it lacks a few features, but when combined with other security techniques, it has served us very well in the corporate world.
[tags]clamwin, clamav, open source[/tags]
I read a very interesting article published by a member of the Tokyo Linux Users Group titled, Windows Is Free. Basically, the author is saying that because Microsoft Windows can be pirated, it can be compared to Linux at the same price level. Since most Linux distributions are free, as in free beer, and Windows can be stolen at no cost, the two should be compared as equally valuable.
In respect to the entire article, which goes into much length, I will highlight two points:
- Windows doesn’t appear to have been pirated on the magnitude needed to sustain this argument. Look at the breakdown in this chart from a ZDNet article. You can see that they are showing about 32% of Windows installations as either not reporting, invalid, or other. Even if there wasn’t a single false-positive in the mix, if you take 32% off the top of the retail of Microsoft Windows they still don’t come off as giving their software away.
- Don’t assume that we like Linux more simply because it is free. For me, it’s just a bonus. I prefer Open-Source software because I can trust it. It has just as many quirks and bugs as For-Profit software does, but I can rest assured that it’s only doing what I expect under the hood of my computer.
In other words, having the ability to get something for free doesn’t equate to the product as actually being free.
[tags]linux, open-source, windows, free software[/tags]