| [Forum] Amiga websites being hacked?? | Link |
| Posted on 16-Feb-2005 12:24 GMT by A. Guest | 58 comments (43k)
View flat (1, 2)
View list
Add comment | | Both amiga.org and amigaworld.net are down; the former is unreachable, and the latter generates a big dump of xoops failures.
Both amiga.org and amigaworld.net are down; the former is unreachable, and the latter generates a big dump of xoops failures.
Coincidence? Hack attack? The curse of the Amiga striking back?? |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 51 of 58 | Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis (Registered user) on 19-Feb-2005 03:22:56 | In Reply to Comment 50 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
Reading further... Yes, you are... Now, I shall ask you a simple question. It's a libOS, the TCP/IP stack is essentially a shared library, cloned in all tasks. Now, say that all tasks use the TCP/IP stack and thus use a physical ethernet connection to a network. One of them can modify the TCP/IP task in its context and kill all network connections. No matter what the system does in the next task switch, bringing everything back to normal, the connections will need renegotiation.
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 52 of 58 | Posted by EyeAm (68.59.54.5) on 19-Feb-2005 04:34:26 | In Reply to Comment 50 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
Any given app is only going to have so much overhead to begin with. This is nothing new compared to what we already have, in that respect. When multitasking, you run with a certain probability of more than one application using the same library; so what? Again, the focus was on utilizing Linux drivers. You *could* do this with the existing Amiga OS, but you'd have a harder time than if you changed the kernel.
But while we're on the topic of many programs accessing--and even changing, to suit their needs--existing libraries:
-->Let applications manipulate cloned resources any way they want. Surely they could do so without affecting the original.<--
Leave it to the programs to remember anything, in whatever state it was, in the case of a crash--but keep in mind that it would be more likely a program crashed than the entire computer. A computer OS whould be written in such a way that if one program goes down, it does not bring down the entire OS; and another iteration of the crashed program can be started, with the ability to resume from the last safe state of work. RTOS.
--EyeAm
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 53 of 58 | Posted by EyeAm (68.59.54.5) on 19-Feb-2005 04:50:49 | In Reply to Comment 51 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
"Reading further... Yes, you are..."
Personal insults do not make any kind of point. I mean, really, big deal that you think that--it offers nothing.
"Now, I shall ask you a simple question. It's a libOS, the TCP/IP stack is essentially a shared library, cloned in all tasks. Now, say that all tasks use the TCP/IP stack and thus use a physical ethernet connection to a network. One of them can modify the TCP/IP task in its context and kill all network connections."
*For its own context*, not for the other programs. There is Security, and there are Task Managers to handle the unprivelaged and privelaged programs--with the programs handling their own tasks.
I think an OS should be able to auto-sense what physical hardware is present, and secure it for the applications capable of using it. They can only use the ethernet, to use your example, so many finite ways. If a program is trying to use the hardware in a way it isn't meant to be used, the program just isn't going to be able to do it. That program alone will be faulty--or written by a stupid programmer. Well, both. :)
"No matter what the system does in the next task switch, bringing everything back to normal, the connections will need renegotiation."
Security will keep the sheep from the wolves.
You can think of program as buildings in a city, and their shared resources as electricity, plumbing, etc. Every building may have electricity and plumbing, just as the programs may access the same libraries of the OS--or, if they need to alter them, the cloned libraries. I don't see a problem with it. If you liken the Security to the kind of redundancy in a city where one building's electrical problems won't affect the one next door, I think the idea is pretty clear, regarding how things act in an exokernel-based OS.
--EyeAm
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 54 of 58 | Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis (Registered user) on 19-Feb-2005 05:33:03 | In Reply to Comment 53 (EyeAm):
> *For its own context*, not for the other programs. There is Security, and there are Task Managers to > handle the unprivelaged and privelaged programs--with the programs handling their own tasks.
If the program kills the network connections in its own context, they are dead in all... Period. No matter how much protection the OS offers, it will need renegotiation with the remote machines.
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 55 of 58 | Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis (Registered user) on 19-Feb-2005 05:40:14 | In Reply to Comment 54 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
Moreover, today there are things like programmable GPUs... Do you even imagine how much time a context switch will take to finish if it has to: save the state of *ALL* hardware, including GPU programs and stuff? The system will be *INCREDIBLY* inefficient. Also, reverting to a certain hardware state isn't always possible. These are facts, not a Software Engineer's pipedream of a dissertation.
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 57 of 58 | Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis (Registered user) on 19-Feb-2005 07:09:06 | In Reply to Comment 56 (EyeAm):
I don't care which page you're in, I care about the fact that what you think is not reality... Let's correct another mistake... Using Linux drivers? Sure... a linux driver uses various parts of the kernel, some times being tied to them at the source code level, various services, to use bubble-talk, to provide certain services, through the kernel itself most of the time... To use linux drivers in another system you would need a wrapper for everything a linux driver might use, which is a good chunk of the kernel, and wrappers from these "services" to the APIs of the underlying system. You practically need a moster of a wrapper. To add up to that... You want that per process and you also want to save the status of the driver, the monster-wrapper and the hardware on each task switch... Now... Tell me... Who is on the right page?
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
Amiga websites being hacked?? : Comment 58 of 58 | Posted by EyeAm (68.59.54.5) on 19-Feb-2005 19:47:46 | In Reply to Comment 57 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
"I don't care which page you're in, I care about the fact that what you think is not reality... Let's correct another mistake... Using Linux drivers? Sure... a linux driver uses various parts of the kernel, some times being tied to them at the source code level, various services, to use bubble-talk, to provide certain services, through the kernel itself most of the time..."
For monolithic kernels and microkernels, but not exokernels.
Exokernels remove a great deal of what would be normal talk in between kernel and apps. Because much of what is normally found in a monolithic or microkernel...is moved to user level.
The exokernel can make an OS wildly flexible. You can boot up with certain default modules (sitting in user level) that talk to your apps, and take the place of what would normally be in any other kind of kernel.
"To use linux drivers in another system you would need a wrapper for everything a linux driver might use, which is a good chunk of the kernel, and wrappers from these "services" to the APIs of the underlying system."
Gee, like Datatypes on an Amiga? Sitting in a drawer called Datatypes? Operating globally? Allowing for the recognition of something normally alien to the Amiga system? You know, I envision a drawer called Drivers, and inside it one for Linux (and inside that, the drivers for PPC Linux and x86 Linux, for various things like video cards and audio cards...) I mean, it's just another resource the Amiga OS can be made to draw upon and use... utilize... employ... implement... take advantage of.
"You practically need a moster of a wrapper. To add up to that... You want that per process and you also want to save the status of the driver, the monster-wrapper and the hardware on each task switch... Now... Tell me... Who is on the right page?"
If you read near the top of that page I posted the URL to, you would see that exokernels can be made that allow for things to run *unchanged* in an operating system. Not so much unlike someone inserting a PC disk into an Amiga via a PC drive it recognizes, and allowing files and file types that normally would be alien to the OS to be recognized, too, and moved around, and saved, written to, read from.
I think it goes without saying that yes, it is possible, that a new Amiga OS can do this. Easily. More easily on an exokernel--and that opens up a whole new can of possibilities that jumps quite beyond what Microsoft is doing with Windows.
If you read on at that same URL, you'll come to this:
"The principal goal of an exokernel--giving applications control--is orthogonal to the question of monolithic versus microkernel organization. If applications are restricted to inadequate interfaces, it makes little difference whether the implementations reside in the kernel or privileged user-level servers [20,18]; in both cases applications lack control. For example, it is difficult to change the buffer management policy of a shared file server. In many ways, servers can be viewed as fixed kernel subsystems that happen to run in user space. Whether monolithic or microkernel-based, the goal of an exokernel system remains for privileged software to provide interfaces that do not limit the ability of unprivileged applications to manage their own resources."
(gee, wasn't Fleecy once talking of 'orthogonal persistence'?) Heh.
There are other benefits of going this route...
*Cutting cross-talk between apps and kernel (i.e., reducing overhead)
*Speeding execution (i.e., the *little* that remains of the kernel can be mapped to memory and accessed safely--and of course providing global security)
Who can say it is better to write a driver specific to the Amiga OS, for each of the thousands of cards out there, versus writing an interface that all of the drivers out there can work with between them and the Amiga OS?
These are actually being explored by others now, though I cannot recall what title/name they were being referred to. I'm not the only one who has thought of this, I'm just thinking that it is high time Amiga make use of things that are out there.
Now, when it comes to Linux, those drivers are going to be driving specific hardware for specific OSes. Before you say anything, think of WINE. The drivers, etc., are for the most part also under GPL; but so what? They don't render the whole OS under GPL; in case anyone was thinking that.
Going this route will not turn Amiga OS into Linux, but would allow Amiga OS to run things Linux--even, quite possibly, Linux itself, on the Amiga desktop. I am not exactly proposing a hybrid, either; and definitely *not* dual-booting. Everything Amiga would still be there, plus everything that comes with a new Amiga OS, whatever that might entail. It would just have greater abilities.
Full backward compatability with *all* previous Amiga software, no matter how married to the previous classic hardware it was...is also possible. :) And it is also possible to have those things running faster; and all of it on the same desktop, within the same OS, seemingly *native* (and technically so).
It comes down some interesting questions, not the least of which is the question of "WHY?" Why is this not being pursued? AND...if it isn't being pursued (secretly), then what is the alternative that IS being pursued and how is it better than what is proposed here? Again with the 'why?': Why would someone choose a path that is less advantageous over one that has greater advantages?
Now, I've seen some in the so-called community have their ideas which seemed to be in stark contrast to others, and they went off to pursue those ideas, but the ideas failed. Maybe it just came down to EGO clashes and nothing more; completely without concern of what is really rational or innovative for Amiga OS. Perhaps it was nothing more than a greed for MONEY (while important, I don't think it was the only reason Jay Miner set out to do what he did).
You know, speaking of Jay Miner, "Father of The Amiga"...when I listened to the interview with him on the Amiga Forever disk, he spoke of the Amiga's expandability. Granted, he was talking about the hardware; but I don't believe he meant only the hardware. It seems that from the very beginning, the Amiga OS, too, had the idea built-in for continued expansion.
One can only go so far with something, sure. Something new invariably comes along. The 32-Bit OS days are over, in the sense of desktops. They are being replaced by 64-Bit OSes, more and more. Anything 32-Bit and below will surely wind up on PDA's and small satelliting devices. Whether they interact with the larger OS or not will be a matter of the degree of necessity.
These are some of the things the next Amiga OS should be, in my opinion:
*The next Amiga OS should be 64-Bit.
*The next Amiga OS should be built on an exokernel.
*The next Amiga OS should utilize Linux drivers (allowing for the running of Linux by option, and of course utilization of any hardware cards drivers have been writte for).
*The next Amiga OS should be--and can be--fully backward compatible with all previous versions of Amiga software and OSes.
*The next Amiga OS should support SATA, USB 2.o+, Firewire, and the latest in hardware standards.
*The next Amiga OS should be able to use PC disks as 'Amiga drives' and recognize classic Amiga disks in those drives; and be able to read/write to and from those in Amiga format. (see Catweasel)
*The next Amiga OS should be able to use PC disks as PC disks, too. (see CrossDOS)
These, at the very least.
Maybe you see where I'm heading now? :) An uber Amiga. A scary Amiga to competitors. Why, if Amiga could run WINE...you know, WITHOUT WINDOWS...all the more reason to tempt people back, and *with* programs they're used to, for the most part.
Those who don't see the beauty in this...and who are trying to provide some kind of alternative to Windows still...better provide something better than this, or explain why they are going to offer something less.
To turn something around on a dime here, let me trump things up from the flipside: 64-Bit SuSE Linux can utilize the 32-Bit WINE and also run either Amiga Forever and/or UAE. This means the full Amiga OS can be installed--unchanged, with all drivers, libs--as well as Amiga programs that expect to find what they need. They run fine.
Some will point out that not all Amiga programs can be installed, because some 'banged the hardware' of the Amiga classics. True. But not so true on an exokernel-based OS, when the appropriate filters/layers or interpreters are there.
In the end, if all of this were to be considered and carefully put in place, a new 64-Bit Amiga OS could wind up able to run applications from Windows and Linux--without those main OSes--in addition to all of the classic Amiga stuff, and of course the new Amiga stuff.
Of course, over on the flipside, which is the direction I'm still going for now, I'm going to be able to do that, anyway, eventually. :) I thought it might be nice to still point the apparently-lost in the right direction.
People in the business of all things Amiga will never get anywhere unless they work together and push the enevelope to the max--try out some very innovative and wild (but reasonable) ideas. But we'll see.
In the meantime, check out this (and yes, it relates to Amiga, if you wind up typing in 'Amiga', should you install it). Here is a neat little program I found some time back, but it is only for Windows-machines:
http://www.2near.com/edge/cabalistic/
But if you want to see something interesting, install it and type in 'Amiga', hehe. When I did it, I thought surely (at the time) that somebody must surely hate Amiga. But then I typed in my uncle's name and it included "murder attempt" in his description--and, of course, last March he was murdered. I had typed in his wife's name and hers showed "captivity followed by liberty"--and of course she had gone to jail once for murder, but was released.
Oh, what's in a name... ;-)
Care to prove it wrong, Amiga?
--EyeAm
Reply to this comment | Top |
|
[Previous 50] [Top] Add comments | - Links
- Support ANN
- ANN is hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link and I will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
|
