On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 09:34:42 +0100, Invisible wrote:

>> So then what's the problem?  You're complaining that they're not
>> tutorials, but they're not intended to be tutorials.
> 
> No, I'm complaining that tutorials don't exist. Only reference manuals.

Tutorials exist, they're not included with the OS.  Do I really need to 
say (again) "GIYF"?

>>> Since I'm guessing the answer is probably "yes", then I don't need to
>>> explain to you how hard it is...
>>
>> Yes, and I usually end up googling instead.  I'm sure I could figure it
>> out, but I don't need it that often.
> 
> Let's just hope you're not trying to look up how to configure Internet
> access...

I've managed to do that enough times that it generally isn't something I 
need to look up these days.  But if I did, a quick trip to my public 
library to use one of their computers to do the search will in fact solve 
that problem.

Or I could use my phone.

Or I could use another of my systems here.

>> It might be easier now, yes.  Honestly, I've never even looked for a
>> CHAP- based authentication mechanism for ssh.
> 
> No, I mean, I might be remembering this wrong.

That's certainly possible.

>>>> A sample size of 3 isn't exactly data supporting "commonly used".
>>>
>>> It's infinity times larger than a sample size of zero. ;-)
>>
>> Sure, but not mathematically significant.
> 
> Not /statistically/ significant, if you want to be picky.

Statistics is a branch of mathematics. :P

>>> Imagine it: Going to all the trouble of setting up a secure system,
>>> and not even knowing how to secure it properly...
>>
>> I don't have to - I see it fairly regularly.
> 
> This is the real WTF...

People who work in IT have not had to learn as much these days as they 
did 20 years ago.  That means they set up systems and often don't have 
the knowledge or skills to properly secure a system.

And the first thing to get cut from IT budgets is funding for training, 
usually.  Training that could actually resolve some of those security 
issues by having competent staff.

Jim

Post a reply to this message