Corporate Reactions to Linux (fwd)

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

ok, i was notified that this thread was going on.  this is a known issue
by microsoft for at least two years, and they have no intention of fixing
it.  all you need is a system that is capable of registering the NetBIOS
name DOMAIN_NAME<1b> and you can take down an NT Domain Network.  to do
this, you need one of the following:

- Windows NT Server

- Samba

- a really small program estimated approximately 4,000 lines total in
length that registers NetBIOS names.

- SCO Vision FS

- AT & T's port of NT to Unix, called Advanced Server for Unix (AS/U).

- SCO's port of AT & T's port of NT to Unix, called AFPS.

- Sun's port of an old port, by microsoft, of NT to BSD Unix, called
Cascade.

- any other type of NT-Domain-capable system not mentioned above (and
there are lots of them, and they're usually expensive).

of course, you can make it more sophisticated by actually answering other
traffic, such as Domain Logins and Network Neighbourhood browsing, but it
starts with the registration of the domain name in an unprotected, dynamic
database.

the point i really have to make here, therefore, is that the corporation
should have banned USERs from setting up unauthorised computers (or should
fire anyone that does so without consulting their network authorities).  
i mean, how stupid can you get.  setting up a network server without
reading up on the consequences of your actions.

the second point is that the decision to ban linux, if followed to its
logical conclusion by the unmentioned corporation, should result in all
systems (listed above) being banned as well.  yes, all of them.

luke (samba team).

<a href="mailto:lkcl at samba.org"   > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton    </a>
<a href="http://www.cb1.com/~lkcl"> Samba and Network Development   </a>
<a href="http://samba.org"        > Samba Web site                  </a>
<a href="http://www.iss.net"      > Internet Security Systems, Inc. </a>