in the older pc with less than 32 mb ram the just choice is delilinux.
puppy is most complete os but is more weight.
i like if puppy and damn small linux creating a project to create a together distro,to make the security of damn with the beauty and praticity of puppy.
compare to delilinux and damn small linux
-
tux_italian
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu 20 Jul 2006, 09:21
hi
hi,damn small linux is more secure because puppy have only root account.
dsl have a restricted user "dsl" with possibilty add new account easy.
with restricted user does not possible the computer damaged by my sister....or a virus
in puppy,if you add new user,the display not start...
dsl have a restricted user "dsl" with possibilty add new account easy.
with restricted user does not possible the computer damaged by my sister....or a virus
in puppy,if you add new user,the display not start...
OK, I am aware of this difference. I have read the threads about it, and personally am not convinced we need anything other than a root user (which is how I always ran all of my computers anyway) - although one can reasonably come down on the other side of the question, too.
I just wondered if there was anything else.
I just wondered if there was anything else.
-
Nathan F
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Wed 08 Jun 2005, 14:45
- Location: Wadsworth, OH (occasionally home)
- Contact:
This is in my opinion the only security related issue comparing Puppy to DSL, but frankly it's a big one on a desktop system. It's fine with me to run as root on a personal laptop, for instance, because I'm the only user (ever). But on the desktop at home it always bothers me still, because I want my kids to use the computer a lot.
Here's my feelings in a nutshell. An awful lot of people really prefer running as root, and I see nothing wrong with defaulting to that. But I still don't see a good reason to take the ability of having user accounts away for those who want or need them. So my plan longterm is to provide the option in any Puppy varients I offer, but only as an option. They will still default to root. However I have a lot more work to do before it's all workable the way I like it.
Nathan
Here's my feelings in a nutshell. An awful lot of people really prefer running as root, and I see nothing wrong with defaulting to that. But I still don't see a good reason to take the ability of having user accounts away for those who want or need them. So my plan longterm is to provide the option in any Puppy varients I offer, but only as an option. They will still default to root. However I have a lot more work to do before it's all workable the way I like it.
Nathan
Bring on the locusts ...
I see that, it makes sense. One way you could do something similar would be for each user to have his own multisession Puppy, or his own USB flash. But it is probably not as convenient.
On the other hand it allows the flexibility to move from one computer to another, so it has some advantages. With Puppy, "everyone has a laptop": that CD they can move around, rather than the computer itself. One of the really cool things about it.
But I'm sure some folks will love to see your contribution to the project.
On the other hand it allows the flexibility to move from one computer to another, so it has some advantages. With Puppy, "everyone has a laptop": that CD they can move around, rather than the computer itself. One of the really cool things about it.
But I'm sure some folks will love to see your contribution to the project.
The main reason I prefer Puppy over DSL, and I use both, is the ability to work completely off a CD with the multisession feature.
The CD effectively becomes the hard drive; no other hard disc, flash disc or USB stick is needed. All the work is saved back to the liveCD. When it's full, burn a new iso with the latest version & keep the original as an instant backup.
The software selection on Puppy is better than DSL for me. I think DSL's self imposed 50Mb limit is a little too strict. But this is minor when you consider both are easily extendable via MyDSL & getpup/dotpup.
DSL is slightly more memory efficient. I have to use DSL when upgrading Puppy as I have insufficient memory to download & burn a new iso in Puppy, but no problem in DSL.
I find Puppy works better out of the box. This is obviously hardware dependent, but CD booting & video particularly seem better. DSL needs the syslinux variant on my machine, Puppy just works. Xorg is much better that Xvesa which is a severe limitation in DSL if Xvesa doesn't work.
Wireless - serious room for improvement in both distributions! DSL is hopeless, I've never got it to work with any wireless card on any machine. Puppy is slightly better in that there is at least a wizard to help the process. But I've given up - I use an external wireless access point with a DHCP ethernet connection. Works with anything!
The jury is out on Firefox (DSL) vs. SeaMonkey (Puppy). I have no need for the email client as I use GMail. I prefer the look of Firefox, but like the Composer facility in SeaMonkey as DSL has no HTML editor.
Puppy uses linux 2.6 vs. DSL on 2.4. But, as a user, do I really care as long as it all works? I don't think so.
The issue of operating as root or not doesn't affect me. If I screw something up, pressing the reset button takes me back to where I was before the last save. True on either DSL or Puppy. Appreciate it's different with an HD install.
On balance I prefer Puppy, but it's close - both are excellent distributions for light, simple machines.
Ian.
VIA EPIA 5000
256MB
CD-RW (for Puppy)
USB Memory (for DSL)
No Hard Drive
The CD effectively becomes the hard drive; no other hard disc, flash disc or USB stick is needed. All the work is saved back to the liveCD. When it's full, burn a new iso with the latest version & keep the original as an instant backup.
The software selection on Puppy is better than DSL for me. I think DSL's self imposed 50Mb limit is a little too strict. But this is minor when you consider both are easily extendable via MyDSL & getpup/dotpup.
DSL is slightly more memory efficient. I have to use DSL when upgrading Puppy as I have insufficient memory to download & burn a new iso in Puppy, but no problem in DSL.
I find Puppy works better out of the box. This is obviously hardware dependent, but CD booting & video particularly seem better. DSL needs the syslinux variant on my machine, Puppy just works. Xorg is much better that Xvesa which is a severe limitation in DSL if Xvesa doesn't work.
Wireless - serious room for improvement in both distributions! DSL is hopeless, I've never got it to work with any wireless card on any machine. Puppy is slightly better in that there is at least a wizard to help the process. But I've given up - I use an external wireless access point with a DHCP ethernet connection. Works with anything!
The jury is out on Firefox (DSL) vs. SeaMonkey (Puppy). I have no need for the email client as I use GMail. I prefer the look of Firefox, but like the Composer facility in SeaMonkey as DSL has no HTML editor.
Puppy uses linux 2.6 vs. DSL on 2.4. But, as a user, do I really care as long as it all works? I don't think so.
The issue of operating as root or not doesn't affect me. If I screw something up, pressing the reset button takes me back to where I was before the last save. True on either DSL or Puppy. Appreciate it's different with an HD install.
On balance I prefer Puppy, but it's close - both are excellent distributions for light, simple machines.
Ian.
VIA EPIA 5000
256MB
CD-RW (for Puppy)
USB Memory (for DSL)
No Hard Drive
The "root" access issue with Puppy is also a non-issue for me. I am the only one using Linux at my house and my primary Puppy computer is not used for Internet access.
I initially chose Puppy over Damn Small Linux because Puppy was easier to operate and manipulate for a Linux newbie. In addition, Puppy seemed better developed with applications and programs chosen based on function, ease of use and flexibility. In contrast, DSL felt like it was an experiment in trying to pack as many bare applications as possible into a small 50MB space. I have not tried the most recent versions of Damn Small Linux but I have no need to abandon Puppy right now.
I initially chose Puppy over Damn Small Linux because Puppy was easier to operate and manipulate for a Linux newbie. In addition, Puppy seemed better developed with applications and programs chosen based on function, ease of use and flexibility. In contrast, DSL felt like it was an experiment in trying to pack as many bare applications as possible into a small 50MB space. I have not tried the most recent versions of Damn Small Linux but I have no need to abandon Puppy right now.
So what are the real or percieved security issues in running X and browser as root?
Personally I am not so concerned about my system getting trashed as that can easily be fixed but more concerned about loosing sensitive data like passwords that may allow a hacker access to email or some secure account login, but I don't know how much safer you really are running as an unprivilleged user in this respect. I would imagine having a seperate firewall between the pc and the internet would greatly reduce the chances of getting hacked. I use a smoothwall box plus a linksys router so all traffic goes through a couple of layers of NAT.
Bill
Personally I am not so concerned about my system getting trashed as that can easily be fixed but more concerned about loosing sensitive data like passwords that may allow a hacker access to email or some secure account login, but I don't know how much safer you really are running as an unprivilleged user in this respect. I would imagine having a seperate firewall between the pc and the internet would greatly reduce the chances of getting hacked. I use a smoothwall box plus a linksys router so all traffic goes through a couple of layers of NAT.
Bill
BOEs, Trojans, and any thing you click on or view locally or online COULD erase your entire system and/or any drives attached mounted or not.Billcnz wrote:So what are the real or percieved security issues in running X and browser as root?Bill
I would guess that most people with that amount of knowledge would have better things to do with their time.
Try to think of it like someone that could pick a lock. If they do it to rob you, they are a criminal. If they do it to let you in, they are a hero.
I think it would just be a matter of changing the busybox links losetup and mount, under /boot/initrd-tree/bin (in unleashed), with their patched bash counter parts, adding a kernel mod and writing some initrd script changes for boot. Then adding a couple lines to shutdown.kirk wrote:["the"]... idea of having different pup_save files with encryption
I'll keep trying to figure it out.
Good report ian.
Ian,
I had almost exactly the same experience when comparing DSL and Puppy. At the Time Puppy was at release 1.0.6 and I was making the big plunge from Winsuck to Linux. I was determined to be microsft free. Initially I couldn't get either of my printers working on either distro, but initially DSL won out, even though I was much more impressed with the usability of Puppy and even Feather Linux. The sole reason DSL won out was (and his is where our experience differs) my Cisco Aironet 350 WiFi adapter worked out of the box with DSL. I So dissatisfied with the windows manager and lack up software in the basic DSL package that I kept checking back at the puppy web site for advancements in WiFi. The stock DSL package had little software that I found useful, and what was available at the time was a bunch of softwar that had been cutdown so small it lacked necessary functionality, or was extremely light apps such as Dillo that they tried to beef up with new features, but wasn't working for me. With the advent of puppy 107 my laser printer worked out of the box with puppy, soon after Tempestuous helped me get my WiFi working, then I was a happy camper everything was working I just added a few apps and worked with it. I didn't have to much time to play around with it. Now that Puppy2.0X is out I have more of time to tinker. The biggest reasons I chose Puppy over DSL was more things work out of the box, What doesn't work out of the box I was able to get ready answers off of the best forum on the net, and The software available and working with Puppy blast DSL to pieces (though I haven't even checked back with DSL in several months). Oh yeah I also like the root user
-Jason
I had almost exactly the same experience when comparing DSL and Puppy. At the Time Puppy was at release 1.0.6 and I was making the big plunge from Winsuck to Linux. I was determined to be microsft free. Initially I couldn't get either of my printers working on either distro, but initially DSL won out, even though I was much more impressed with the usability of Puppy and even Feather Linux. The sole reason DSL won out was (and his is where our experience differs) my Cisco Aironet 350 WiFi adapter worked out of the box with DSL. I So dissatisfied with the windows manager and lack up software in the basic DSL package that I kept checking back at the puppy web site for advancements in WiFi. The stock DSL package had little software that I found useful, and what was available at the time was a bunch of softwar that had been cutdown so small it lacked necessary functionality, or was extremely light apps such as Dillo that they tried to beef up with new features, but wasn't working for me. With the advent of puppy 107 my laser printer worked out of the box with puppy, soon after Tempestuous helped me get my WiFi working, then I was a happy camper everything was working I just added a few apps and worked with it. I didn't have to much time to play around with it. Now that Puppy2.0X is out I have more of time to tinker. The biggest reasons I chose Puppy over DSL was more things work out of the box, What doesn't work out of the box I was able to get ready answers off of the best forum on the net, and The software available and working with Puppy blast DSL to pieces (though I haven't even checked back with DSL in several months). Oh yeah I also like the root user
-Jason