So I just finished finally setting up everything at home right. I've got the Web Service up, Mail Server UP, DNS Server up(the thing that converts URLs to IPs), and I've got my own personal DHCP. The fucking thing is this. I can't set up my DNS on Fedora Core(a linux distro). I don't know how to set up my DHCP on Fedora either. And my freaking mail server cannot be accessed from a remote computer to do admin work. It works fine otherwise though.

Right now, everything that doesn't work is being run on Windows Server 2003, and that just doesn't sit well with me. If you don't already know, I went for a Certified Ethical Hacker Course and am going to take the test pretty soon, and my tots of how flawed Microsoft Windows is, became further compounded by the seemingly endless vulnerabilities it exhibited. You'd think those guys from Redmond, having so much "experience" in the field would've learnt to make their stuff better. Nevertheless, that aside, the thing that's unacceptable to me is the sheer "slack-i-ness" they show.

When the buffer overflow exploit appeared a while back(it affected many systems, including Linux, and your everyday routers), a patch for linux came out in 2 hours, though some would argue that it came out in 1 hour. Windows, on the other hand, took oh-so-long to come up with crap basically, the blocked the exploit in that version of windows, but subsequent versions of Windoze are still left unpatched till this day. Yes, even your Windows XP is still vulnerable. All the Redmond guys did after that was disable the tool that can execute the exploit(a tool provided with windows). Meaning to say, all i have to do is create my own program and i can cause your computer to crash. It's like taking out the bullet from a gun and handing it to me. They may think it's safe but all i have to do is get my own, loaded gun. It's that simple.

The only solution it would seem, is to have a firewall, or to run a *nix machine(Linux, Unix, BSD, Solaris, etc....)

I'm not saying that Linux isn't vulnerable. Some would say that it's because it's the least used so it's not that targeted. The fact is, that's complete bullshit. Linux is indeed still more secure that Windoze. Granted it may appear untouchable at the moment. THAT is because it's not targeted. But coming up with crap like IT WILL BE VULNERABLE SOONER OR LATER is complete Bull.

Recently, Firefox had some flaws discovered and there was a big hoo haa. So to those detractors of Open Source software, I say: Fuck you! Look at how long they took. Or rather how fast they were in coming up with a patch?

There was a vulnerability in Internet Explorer that i found out about a year back. You know how long Microsoft took to fix it? 1 fucking year!!! That exploit was some serious shit. I can get you to go to any website i want and i can make you see watever URL I want you to see in your address bar. Now the guy who discovered this exploit said he sent an email to Microsoft to detail the problem. To the best of my knowledge, they didn't even reply. The fucking this is, i wonder if anyone else had discovered that exploit before him. That would make it even longer for the time Microsawft took to make a fucking patch. This exploit is applicable from Win98 till WinXP SP1. It's fixed in SP2. To think of the possibilities, i can make it look like hotmail.com, URL and all, and you won't be able to tell the fucking difference.

People forget just how many problems internet explorer gives them. And it's all because some wisecrack up at Redmond decided to slap the words Windoze Explorer and IE.

I actually wanted to talk about my day today but i decided to write this instead because i got pissed when i heard some rumours that Microsawft may be buying over Red Hat Linux. In my opinion, it's a conflict of interest really. They have always been a monopoly, and they still are. And while it probably is just a rumour, it just about wants to make me break my $999 Windoze Installation CD, which costs 20cents to physically make.