).
Here is an article about Puppy Linux and an inexpensive PC in 2006:Puppy Linux is a Linux distribution I have already praised for its compact size and speed. What amazes me about Puppy Linux is how ready it is for prime time given its small size. I have worked with compact Linux distributions that use primitive editors and very basic and non-compatible spreadsheets. Puppy Linux installs a fully functional Microsoft Word workalike called Abiword and a Microsoft Excel workalike called Gnumeric. Both of these applications are very functional and compatible. It is possible to add OpenOffice to Puppy Linux.
...
We install Puppy Linux on our least expensive devices that we sell to customers, and we use it to revive computers that would otherwise be worthless. We can use an old screen, a USB thumb drive, and Puppy Linux to create a guest computer for visitors or roaming employees to get online to use our web based mail or other web tools.
Hopefully the reviewer isn't going to slink back, erase his review, and then accuse me of quoting him out of context.....Puppy has a free memory applet on the taskbar and even with several programs running it showed that I was only using 200 megs of memory. This is even more impressive when you realize that Puppy loads the entire operating system into RAM.
....
In the event your system gets compromised you can start a fresh copy of Puppy by booting the CD with the puppy pfix=ram option. This will ignore your compromised pup_save.2fs file and you can start saving your changes to a new one. For more on why Puppy is always root and it’s security implications you can check out this Puppy forum topic on the subject.
This is a review I can recommend. But only for the appended readers' comments about Puppy's security issues - a subject that is strangely absent from this forum.metre9dmt wrote: To begin with, click this link
http://www.linuxinsider.com/rsstory/64074.html
It's a review of Puppy Linux 4.0 by Jack Germain. ...
I hope that if you have views about security, you would post under those threads or start a new one.I'm going to get a bit philosophical here. There's a big difference between something that could plausibly happen in certain circumstances, and what actually does happen (or has happened) in the real world. I notice that a lot of people get the two confused.
As I see it, Puppy has been around long enough for there to be a body of real-world experience on the safety/danger of running as root.
I figure that, if running as root were as hazardous as we've been told, Puppy forums would be full of messages about compromised systems - far more than on, say, Ubuntu forums. And as far as I can tell, that's not happening.
So I'm quite comfortable to go on running as root.
raffy wrote:That is a subject usually dealt with in the debate "running as root", so you will tend to miss it when you check only "security". Here is a quote from an example section on that subject: ...
Hope away! I'm getting tired of having my threads savaged at birth and then erased.raffy wrote:I hope that if you have views about security, you would post under those threads or start a new one.
For further improvement of your security you should store a checksum (a fingerprint) for all files. At regular intervals, but in any case before a backup, you examine the checksums of your files. If the checksums do not agree, the file was changed or deleted.
)
Hello,