yellowdog-general digest, Vol 1 #1153 - Message 1

[Derick Centeno]

>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:15:44 -0700
>From: Troy Vitullo <tvitullo@terrasoftsolutions.com>
>To: yellowdog-general@lists.terrasoftsolutions.com
>Subject: Re: YDL and security settngs
>Reply-To: yellowdog-general@lists.terrasoftsolutions.com
>
>On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:26:56 -0500
>Derick Centeno wrote:
>
>>  I've come across something which appears a bit odd and I'm wondering if
>>  anyone has a solution to it.
>>  I've come to notice that whenever I check the security parameters of YDL
>>  3.0; it is always set to the Highest priority although I had selected
>>  other settings with options during the installation process.  In turn
>>  this also means that any downloads or calls to yum or even access to the
>>  net is curtailed by the rules set up by the firewall.  Also no matter
>>  how I access the application to change security settings when I check
>>  again, those setttings remain unchanged at the highest level as though I
>>  made no changes or set no options.  Saving settings before a reboot is
>>  of no help.  Accessing the web via Linux has become a chore rather than
>>  a joy, and I'm wondering what happened.  I have even tried fresh
>>  re-installations of YDL 3.0 and I seem to come to the same point and
>>  problem every time.
>>
>>  Any Ideas??? :-(
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  yellowdog-general mailing list
>>  yellowdog-general@lists.terrasoftsolutions.com
>>  http://lists.terrasoftsolutions.com/mailman/listinfo/yellowdog-general
>
>Derick,
>
>That is a funny bug with the redhat-config-security (or whatever 
>it's called) app. It seems that the only way for YDL users 
>*currently* to configure security is to learn ipchains and iptables. 
>Not the preferred way to go.
>
>However, new RPMs will come out that solve this problem. No time frame though.
>
>Notably, the same thing seems to happen with the time zone app if 
>you try to put your system clock on UTC.
>
>Troy
>
>--__--__--

Troy, Thanks for that sensible answer.  I have a reference text which 
covers ipchains and so forth.  At least I know that's the direction I 
have to go.  And someone was trying to convince me that Linux is user 
"friendly" -- Ha!!  It is the OS I prefer to use though, but not for 
"ease of use" reasons.  I didn't come to Linux for that.  Check out 
the comments of Bill Joy of Sun who explains his vision of Linux's 
place as compared to the MacOS X.


http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/11/20/joy/

One could twist his comment to reflect that MacOS X, is for over the 
hill programmers within a few years of retirement.  But I cannot hold 
that view either as I REALLY want a G5 laptop or tablet.  In any 
event, I agree with Mr. Joy that Linux is for people with the energy 
to rewrite or rehack significant parts of code.  This is one more 
example where important parts remain undone, unexplored and 
unfinished... Linux is not an environment for the feint of heart or 
weak of mind or shoddy programming skills.  Unless of course, you 
don't mind becoming the butt of everybody's jokes just as -- what is 
that company which gave out core code for free and then is trying to 
sue people for using it, surpass it and if the reports are correct 
the Open Source community has already excised the code from nearly 
everything having to do with Open Source, because it is bad and 
archaic programming?  Oh Yeah, SOC, no COS, wrong again... SCO, yeah 
SCO....

Well, back to ipchain rules I go...
-- 
Light flashing against Sky and Earth.
Thoughts/Swords.
Life's spark reborn. 

Carpe Diem

Be well.

Got Chi?