martouf

danleff: s'ok .. step right in.. 'rpmbuild' just builds the rpm package from the sources which can then in turn be installed with 'rpm -ip'.. 0. I think you'll find a freshly built madwifi rpm file in /usr/src/redhat/RPMS nicevision, sorry, but you're confused. :x 1. try 'rpm -qa | grep madwi' to see if you already have the madwifi package installed. In some distros, the madwifi drivers are just rolled into the kernel package so for those you must check the kernel modules for 'ath_hal' and 'ath_pci'. -> "find /lib/modules -name \*ath\*" (you'll need the backslashes) 2. you need to check "/var/log/messages" or 'dmesg' for an indication the madwifi drivers appropriate for your wireless card are loading. -> "grep ath /var/log/messages" or "dmesg | grep ath" -> "grep wlan /var/log/messages" or "dmesg | grep wlan" 3. if the drivers are loaded, then you should find an "ath0" interface listed with 'iwconfig'. if they aren't loaded, you may need to 'modprobe ath_pci' and go back to Step 2.

I once fixed an interoperability problem by setting the linux host to be the domain master browser and increasing the 'os level' so the linux host would be certain to win all master browser elections.

Hmm, let's see... your Netgear WG311 is a PCI-connected atheros chipset device. If you've successfully built and installed the latest madwifi drivers and have restarted your system, then you should now see in /var/log/messages (or via 'dmesg') the "ath_hal", "wlan" and "ath_pci" drivers have loaded. After a restart, does 'iwconfig' show an interface named "ath0" ?

Quote: As martouf noted, the WUSB54G is not supported at all, even with the Linuxant software using Win XP drivers. ndiswrapper -does- support a USB-connected wlan device using a WinXP driver. I just recently gave it a go (using ndiswrapper-0.12 and a Buffalo WLI2-USB2-G54). Linuxant says DriverLoader also supports a USB device (as of August 2004).

that's a great (well written, concise) resource, danleff! Tjvelcro: since your question is an assignment and it's not in my nature to simply give the answer to a student (this you must do yourself, grasshopper), I'll reword your example. Hope that will bring enlightenment. remember: the problem is an assignment. it's a forced circumstance. you must find a solution fitting only this situation, using only the coarse tool of the permissions bits. reworded example - The Executive user needs the permissions rwx for directory exec-secure and the Management group needs only read permission, while all other users and groups should have no permissions. that do it for you?

If I read the proposed new policy correctly, people with any Windows product (legit or not) will be able to obtain 'patches' (security updates and the like). Only people with legit Windows products will be able to obtain 'updates' (new versions of Media Player, IE and the like..) If true, then it may indicate the Redmond folks heard the cries of the multitudes when they proposed early last year cutting off everyone without a totally legit copy.

there's more than one "flavor" of Conexant modem, and they don't all have drivers available in Linux. can you provide more information about the modem which was auto-detected? there's a chance you need only a bit of configuration help.. if that first modem which was auto-detected can't be made to work, there are alternatives. There's an inexpensive modem (click me) which does have drivers available in Linux. But first, it's probably worth the effort and experience gained to try to resolve the trouble with the auto-detected modem.

"amature" -- are you saying you're an armature or an amateur? 8) Your chances for success will be greater if you can provide the good people here a detailed list of the parts in your computational relic. if I could suggest a different approach to gaining experience in configuring and using Linux you may find more productive and less frustrating ? Start off with a "LiveCD" distribution. My opinion is the SuSE LiveCD is 'good', Knoppix is 'excellent', and SimplyMEPIS is 'damn near perfect' (especially for the newbie). If you're not already familar with burning disc images, then save yourself the trouble... Find a friend to burn you a copy or buy a prepared disc. Have a look at linuxiso.org and mepis.org for how to burn/buy/download info. "Quando omni flunkus moritati" -- Possum Lodge motto Loose translation: "When all else fails, play dead."

the WUSB54G uses the PrismGT chipset. The prism54 driver doesn't yet support USB. (see prism54.org) Until then, your best bet is to use DriverLoader or ndiswrapper.

jarves, be very careful as you read through BSchindler's post: where you see "CYNICAL" please substitute "CRYPT". I realize you may get a bit confused if you don't apprehend BSchindler's got the names you've chosen mixed up. workgroup/domain name = cynical netbiosname = crypt server string = this is the linux host you can also check the basic functionality from the linux host itself before trying to set up the WinXP host. try "smbclient -L 127.0.0.1 -U validusername" - if the linux host can't list its own shared resources, then the linux box isn't set up right..

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by "a group command". Is the NetBIOS name service (nmbd) running on the linux host? If it isn't, then that would explain why the WinXP host can't turn the name "crypt" into a network address. Does "net view \\192.168.104.1" from the WinXP host and "smbclient -L 192.168.104.2 -U validusername" from the linux host at least indicate the one host can attempt to list shared resources of the other? If you're just trying to have the two hosts share files, then you don't need to have the linux host be a domain controller. Peer to Peer sharing will do the job.

it seems SuSE 9.2 ships with ipw2200-0.8 (16-Sep-2004).. five days ago, ipw2200-0.21 (17-Jan-2005) was released. IPW2200 Downloads are you at all familiar with building kernel modules?

having been a civil servant responsible for NT, VMS, and Unix systems for a science and engineering agency (not a research agency), too much faith is sometimes put in outside consultants. the food for thought is supposed to generate discussion and analysis, not a simple dismissal. assuming for the moment the person quoted is a competent professional working for a competent government agency (in this case: not the Department of Interior), then upon what basis might this person say what is quoted? Departmental configuration guidelines? Required use of SELinux policies? The number of configuration elements and the number of methods needed to adjust the configuration?

if you don't have an actual MS Domain Controller or haven't set up Samba to behave like a Domain Controller (you don't have to do this), then you don't have a domain to join. Just a workgroup. your basic network setup looks ok. on the WinXP host: Control Panel (app) -> System (app) -> Computer Name (tab) -> Change (button) -> Workgroup (radio button) -> type in "cynical" (without the quotes) reboot if necessary. then try both "net view" and "net view /domain:cynical" again. you can also try "net view \\crypt" (two backslashes before the smb hostname) from the WinXP host and "smbclient -L alpha -U validusername" (and provide the account pwd) from the linux host. report back with your results...

smb "domain" and DNS "domain name" are not equivalent. It's easy to confuse, so let's help you past that... if you use the command "net view" or "net view /domain:cynical" in a command shell on your WinXP host, what do you see? you should see a list of hosts in your "cynical" smb domain. can you share a bit more information about your network: 1. the hostnames of the WinXP host and the linux host 2. IP addresses of the WinXP host and the linux host

can you cut-n-paste the most relevant bits of your compilation sessions so others can see what you're seeing as you try to build it?

more food for thought? Business - BusinessWeek Online BusinessWeek Online "Linux Inc." By Steve Hamm full text of the article... ..and the paragraph which caught my eye: Quote: These collaborations are turning Linux into an all-purpose operating system. It's secure enough that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory loads it not only on desktop and server computers but also on supercomputers it uses to simulate the aging of nuclear materials. "Linux is definitely more secure than Windows," says Mark Seager, the lab's assistant department head for advanced technology. "There aren't as many ways to break the system." With the latest improvements, Linux now works on servers with more than 128 processors and can run the largest databases. The newest versions also have features, such as power management, that make them more suitable for laptop PCs.

I suppose you might be able to mess with the 'pam' configuration to cause ssh to refer to some other authentication source (like LDAP) instead of usual/normal authentication data... but _why_ would you want to do this? you can generate and make use of crypto keys so you don't have to use a password at all with ssh... that's one of the ways it's _supposed_ to be used.

the issue of relative vulnerability is interesting for reasons both personal and corporate. No one has mentioned SELinux technology in this thread. No one has mentioned data collected from a honeyfarm. Have a look at this: Quote: IT: Linux Getting Harder To Crack Posted by timothy on Monday January 17, @09:55PM from the pride-goeth-before-a-fall dept. AlanS2002 points out today's article from Iain Thomson on vnu.net, which says that "Linux systems are getting tougher for hackers to crack, security experts have reported today," summarizing "A study conducted by the Honeynet Project has found that it takes about 3 months before a unpatched Linux machine will be owned, compared with about 72 hours in the past. According to a report on the study default installations are now more secure with less services enabled by default, added to this is newer versions of software such as OpenSSH being more secure. Interestingly Solaris 8 and 9 did not fare so well." Read More...

you may be in luck. the No. 1 resource for figuring out if a wireless card can be made to work is http://www.linux-wlan.org/docs/wlan_adapters.html.gz it indicates the Linksys WUSB54G uses the PrismGT chipset. you can confirm this by finding a file matching PRISM* among the Windows driver files. another source I found by googling said all newer Linksys USB cards use the Broadcom chipset. If so, then there is no linux driver but you can still use the card via ndiswrapper. you can confirm this by finding a file matching BCM* or BRCM* among the Windows driver files. " find /lib/modules -name \*prism\* " will help you to confirm your distro supplies the prism54 driver you may need.

ndiswrapper you get from ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net since it had changed quite a bit since the versions first included with many distros. that is, your best bet for ndiswrapper is to build the latest version from source, then use the WinXP driver files for your wlan card. OTOH, you don't necessarily need ndiswrapper unless you must have working WPA support. the prism54g does not now (but will soon) have WPA support, and the latest madwifi driver says it has WPA support. your distro probably includes a prism54 driver and a madwifi driver which supports WEP just fine. (Knoppix 3.6 has prism54 1.2 and madwifi 20040308) the prism54 project page is at prism54.org the madwifi project page is at madwifi.sourceforge.net (see also madwifi.net)

I use a Buffalo G54 (WLI-CB-G54A) via ndiswrapper 0.12 and the bcmwl5a.inf, 3Com Wireless 11g (3CRWE154G72) via prism54g driver, and 3Com Wireless 11/a/b/g (3CRWE154A72) via madwifi_ag atheros driver. Add the wpa_supplicant 0.2.6 and you're good to go. hope this helps.

what does "id -a" look like for users 'root' and 'khk' ?

when logged in to host A, "xhost + localhost" is very similar to doing "xhost + A" on host A. Note that you must specifically permit any user on your host to make requests of your user's X server. Otherwise, the default is to deny all except requests made by X clients initiated by you. when logged in to host B, and you want the X client on host B to create a window on host A, then you'll need to permit B to do so with "xhost + B" on host A. it's all a consequence of the new X server permission security-mindedness.

whoa! I thought the (quote)(/quote) tags included just the text, not the whole posting - buttons and all! strangeness ... don't think it's my browser.