having trouble with A+ Cert 'cause linux is way too awesome

[commanderwill]

I'm taking a comptia a+ certification course and I'm having a way hard time focusing on windows problems and their solutions because my universal solution to any windows problem is to just install Ubuntu or some other distro. Unfortunately Comptia doesn't think that's the answer though. Has anyone else had this problem?

[cgroza]

Sometimes you have do it their way even though your way is superior just to please them and try to get the maximum grade :D.

[CharlesA]

When I took the A+, it was 90% customer service questions and 10% other. I don't recall having any windows specific questions on it.

[donkyhotay]

Never took A+ certification but I had similar issues in college, I primarily focused on linux courses when I could but there were a few mandatory classes I needed, specifically sysadmin windows server editions. It was interesting and I understand what it was a required course but I was glad when I was done with them. I do sometimes get this when using other peoples computers. I really miss the repos (and shudder when I see people downloading .exe files from the internet) and often wish I could use bash in it. The GUI is useful for some things but the CLI is hard to beat for others and I miss being able to quickly jump between both at a moments notice depending on what kind of action I want to take.

[stderr]

I had a MS-oriented role at work for half a year. Sure, it wasn't what I liked doing - initially VS2010 felt much like trying to erect a piece of flatpack furniture with a sledgehammer. After a short period of banging, you step back and admire the monumental mess you've made of the room (let alone what's left of the flatpack furniture). The solution must be to go out and compliment your toolset with a jackhammer drill and blowtorch, coupled with an even larger piece of flatpack furniture. After burning down the house and destroying the foundations, you tape it all off with "hazardous area" tape and use the smouldering remains of your cooker as the table you were originally trying to build.

However, with time you learn that it's not such a black-or-white, "one or the other" situation... each has its merits. After a while of MS exposure, I had a lot to take away which was positive, some of which we in the *nix would may do well to take on board.

Restricting yourself too rigidly to one or the other is actually more of a detriment than a benefit, as you're not experiencing a full range of ideas and possiblities. Even if, like me, you choose (very firmly :)) to live in the *nix world, having an appreciation of another way of doing things can only be beneficial. To give but one example; we all love our shells - zsh, csh, bash, you name it - M$ Powershell is an incredibly powerful alternative for our fellows on the other side of the OS divide. Granted; coming from a BASH background I'm not remotely interested in learning that gargantuan latecoming Linux-copying behemoth just so I can feel more at home in an OS I dislike. But, if you came from a Windows background, you can imagine coupling that with Cygwin, and you'd have an incredibly powerful set of CLI environments right there...

Mind you, rather you than me with the A+ course ;)

[haqking]

Cant say i have ever had a problem following a syllabus for an exam i chose to take.

If you have a problem with it then dont do A+ and do Linux+ instead

[TekMaster]

That is quite funny, I can relate. I completed my 701 and 702 about 3 months ago. The whole time I struggled with the exact same issues. "Why not just save money in the long run and have a more reliable and secure system?" lol. But I would suggest looking into Linux+ after your A+, don't ditch your A+ exams, they are beneficial; your A+ is your entry into a whole new world. For me, now, it's on to network+ and security+, then Linux+

The way I look at it, your trying to get A+ certified because you want to be a PC technician (or continue your path to higher subjects such as Cisco). As a PC Tech you will see WAY more machines running windows than Linux... After all, windows has all the problems in the first place

@ CharlesA (http://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=923868) - Now days with the newer 09' objectives covering the essentials 701 exam, OS's and software (windows) is 20% of the coverage. OS's (windows) is 34% of the covereage on the practical applications (702) exam. Windows and DOS are going to play a rather big role in todays tests

The new 2012 objectives will be effect mid next year

Oh and P.S. - CompTIA barely thinks the correct answer is the right answer unless you know how and why, just a bit of advice

Cheers

[haqking]

more reliable and secure system?

After all, windows has all the problems in the first place




The first statement is not true, both Windows and Linux are on equal footing when it comes to Security, it is down to the user to make it more secure based on their own requirements and reliability is down again primarily to user configuration and understanding

As for the second point highlighted, A windows issue is not a hardware issue which is IMO why you would take a A+ exam, to be qualified to fix a windows software issue then better off taking a MCP based exam, MSDST,MCITP etc the entry level Windows based exams from MS.

Cheers

[TekMaster]

Clean install both Ubuntu on one system and Windows 7 on another system, now tell me which is more secure and which is more susceptible...

Now, on the second point: The A+ examination is designed to qualify you to be fully competent in the Computer Technician field. CompTIA A+ exams are both industry-wide and vendor-neutral. Here is the coverage of both exams :

701
Domain............................................ ...Percentage
1.0 Hardware........................................27 %
2.0 Troubleshooting, Repair and Maintenance.....20%
3.0 Operating Systems and Software.................20%
4.0 Networking........................................ .........15%
5.0 Security.......................................... ............8%
6.0 Operational Procedures...............................10%



702
Domain.............................Percentage
1.0 Hardware......................38%
2.0 Operating Systems.......34%
3.0 Networking...................15%
4.0 Security.......................13%


Hardware is the main coverage in the A+... That is why it is an "entry level" exam...
You may think one thing but statistical analysis and fact points to another. OS's actually have less coverage than hardware, that is the main reason you take the A+. The exam makes sure you are competent to fix ANY issue involving PC's that is running A microsoft OS, hardware and all.

cheers

[haqking]

Clean install both Ubuntu on one system then Windows 7 on another system, and tell me which is more secure and which is more susceptible...

Now, on the second point: The A+ examination is designed to qualify you to be fully competent in the Computer Technician field. CompTIA A+ exams are both industry-wide and vendor-neutral. Here is the coverage of both exams :

701
Domain............................................ ...Percentage
1.0 Hardware........................................27 %
2.0 Troubleshooting, Repair and Maintenance.....20%
3.0 Operating Systems and Software.................20%
4.0 Networking........................................ .........15%
5.0 Security.......................................... ............8%
6.0 Operational Procedures...............................10%



702
Domain.............................Percentage
1.0 Hardware......................38%
2.0 Operating Systems.......34%
3.0 Networking...................15%
4.0 Security.......................13%


Hardware is the main coverage in the A+... That is why is is an "entry level" exam...
You may think one thing but statistical analysis and fact points to another. OS's actually have less coverage than hardware, that is the main reason you take the A+.

cheers

I know i used to teach it.

Linux and Windows have an equal security classification of around EAL 4. They both have flaws security wise, neither is more secure than another.

It is about ease of use and functionality for the target market. The rest is down to the user or admin.

NEITHER IS MORE SECURE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They both have multiple vectors of attack (and i mean multiple) some of which are not OS dependant and therefore negate the whole which is more secure argument.

It is a common misunderstanding. One area might be deemed an enhancement of security over the other but then works the other way also

As for hardware, yes. You said windows has most problems, not true.

And the A+ is more targeted at hardware issues and configurations and not OS issues. Which was my point as you said windows problems, and A+ is not as geared towards OS issues as it is hardware specific

[TekMaster]

you are right. I agree with you when it comes to security im just looking at it from a bare beginner point of view. You are more likely to pick up a virus browsing with windows. And I know viruses are hardly the topic when it comes to security but that is mainly what the average user will encounter and have to deal with. I'm just looking at it from the average point of view. You know what your talking about, I see that. I was being hypothetical when I said windows has most problems only because more people use windows. Owning my own repair business for 5 years I have stumbled across one machine running something other than windows. You are right about the hardware configuration and failure as well.

I would have to say you need to know hardware before you learn linux, am I wrong?

[haqking]

you are right. I agree with you when it comes to security im just looking at it from a bare beginner point of view. You are more likely to pick up a virus browsing with windows. And I know viruses are hardly the topic when it comes to security but that is mainly what the average user will encounter and have to deal with. I'm just looking at it from the average point of view. You know what your talking about, I see that. I was being hypothetical when I said windows has most problems only because more people use windows. Owning my own repair business for 5 years I have stumbled across one machine running something other than windows. You are right about the hardware configuration and failure as well.

I would have to say you need to know hardware before you learn linux, am I wrong?

No worries.

The whole which is more secure debate comes up over and over and the Linux being more secure is flawed for many reasons so i always try to point it out when i see that statement.

You see more windows problems because more people use windows, check this forum out, there are more than a few people with Linux issues ;)

If Linux had the desktop OS share that MS does no one would have a working computer anywhere or there certainly wouldnt be enough people around to fix them.

I dont think you need to learn hardware before Linux, it can help, but then Linux is also a great way to learn hardware.

I understand the beginners point, however security is about education, i believe fully in that so doing away with the false senses of secuity from the beginning is a good thing.

Viruses are such a small percentage of attack vectors as far as system security is concerned, infact most of of them are nuisance payloads and not necessarily provide security compromises

Cheers

[TekMaster]

Touché, that goes deep friend.

cheers

[Thewhistlingwind]

If Linux had the desktop OS share that MS does no one would have a working computer anywhere or there certainly wouldnt be enough people around to fix them.



The difficulty of Linux is way overrated.

I went through the whole install waiting for the painful part.

When my wireless driver didn't work it was quite painful.

Besides that, I was more interested in getting Internet to work in Ubuntu than I was reinstalling windows by the end of that week.

The DEFAULT was that impressive compared to the craptacular XP I was using.

[Bodsda]

The difficulty of Linux is way overrated.


Try again, properly
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/


The A+ is overrated, and in no way vendor-neutral. Having said that, I do remember seeing a slide on LILO, but the trainer knew nothing when I asked why he didn't mention GRUB.

Unfortunately I don't trust CompTIA enough to take their Linux+ exam, I took one look at the practice questions that said that Xfree86 is the standard X server, and closed the webpage. They even claim to be 'powered by LPI', but with 10 year old material is it even worth taking the exam.

Saying that Linux is more secure than windows is incorrect, as haqking says, but I think the statement is slightly wrong, it should have been "Most Linux distributions out of the box are more secure than a fresh Win 7 install."

Bodsda

[haqking]

The difficulty of Linux is way overrated.

I went through the whole install waiting for the painful part.

When my wireless driver didn't work it was quite painful.

Besides that, I was more interested in getting Internet to work in Ubuntu than I was reinstalling windows by the end of that week.

The DEFAULT was that impressive compared to the craptacular XP I was using.

I dont think it is difficult at all, but i think the majority of people find it so even with IT experience, but it is Distro dependant of course.

It is a lot easier to install and configure Ubuntu or Mint for a newbie than it is Slackware or Arch.

@ bodsda and in general. On the security thing. As i said before the majority of Linux Distros are certified under Common Criteria at around EAL 4. see here http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/

To be specific:

Windows 7 = EAL 4+
Ubuntu Server LTS = EAL4+
Redhat Various = EAL 3 - 4+
Windows Vista = EAL 1 - 4
RHEL AS Version 3 = EAL 3+
RHEL AS, Version 4 = EAL 3+

So my point is depending on the particular version and if they sought CC classification they are all roughly the same so the Linux is more secure than windows (even out of the box) argument does not stand up i am afraid.

Out of the box, can they both be compromised ? Yes
Is one easier than the other to achieve or less work ? depends on the attack vector of choice

Is one more secure than the other ? NO

They are equally certified for a given assurance level, which would never go above EAL 4+ for the target market as the ease of use or functionality would dissapear, does it go above EAL 4+ ? yes it does but that is not the intended market for the OS.

Either system can be compromised out of the box and after updates or patches so neither is more secure.

Can either be totally secure ? yes if you dont use it for its intended purpose and never connect it online or use shared files with it.

So to summarise neither is more secure (that is a fact and not opinion) and to use that argument you need to be very specific about versions and attack vectors (linux vs windows on viruses and linux wins but viruses as far as a attack vector payload is minimum)

If you think your OS is secure, you may be forgetting your other OS that being the browser (almost an OS in itself these days) which is where most people spend their time these days and where a large portion of vulnerabilities exist.

For more information on vulnerabilities (possible attack vectors)

Go here http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search?execution=e2s1

And do a standard search for Windows 7 and then one for Ubuntu

It will give you an idea (not all vulnerabilities are applicable in all situations of course)

[Bodsda]

I have little love for large organisations defining security scores. They are not the people writing the attacks and they are not the people who are most likely to be affected by the attacks.

For one thing, they specify Win XP as EAL4+ and Win XP SP2 as EAL4+ - So SP1 and 2 didn't have any security updates I assume....

All I know for fact is that I have a much higher success rate of remotely and locally gaining unauthorized access to Windows machines then I do to Linux machines. Sometimes this is due to user competency, you find that Linux users are much more savvy about security then windows users. But most of the time it is due to known published exploits that are not patched quick enough. Microsoft's turn around for security patches is weeks>months wheras Linux vulnerabilities are usually patched hours>days

On top of that is whether the user installs the patches, most people on windows machines select auto update and never look at it again, fine but when .NET1.1 failed to install, they didn't notice that it stopped just about every other patch from installing. 6 months down the line there are 50 published remote access and remote execution vulnerabilities and your getting hammered. Whereas the chances of a single update failing causing large numbers of other patches on Linux to fail is rather low, but could still happen, but you do find that Linux users are much more dedicated when it comes to reviewing and installing security updates.

Bodsda

[KiwiNZ]

I'm taking a comptia a+ certification course and I'm having a way hard time focusing on windows problems and their solutions because my universal solution to any windows problem is to just install Ubuntu or some other distro. Unfortunately Comptia doesn't think that's the answer though. Has anyone else had this problem?

With respect if you are wanting a role in tech support you will need to change your thinking and attitude.
I would fire you if you pushed that process. You are there to serve your customers and employer not push your own beliefs.

[Lars Noodén]

Migrating to Ubuntu happens to be a good solution and prevents many future problems. There are very few legitimate use cases to retain Windows anymore.

[CharlesA]

With respect if you are wanting a role in tech support you will need to change your thinking and attitude.
I would fire you if you pushed that process. You are there to serve your customers and employer not push your own beliefs.

Indeed. Someone might not believe in Windows, but they may still have to support it.


Migrating to Ubuntu happens to be a good solution and prevents many future problems. There are very few legitimate use cases to retain Windows anymore.

That might be the case for a person, but that more then likely is not the case for businesses.

[haqking]

Migrating to Ubuntu happens to be a good solution and prevents many future problems. There are very few legitimate use cases to retain Windows anymore.

For the end user maybe, for corporate use it is not so straight forward, user training, skills in the IT dept, security for compliance such as SOX and PCI-DSS, document handling etc etc

Infact there is far more reason to use MS in the majority of environments still.

[Dangertux]

For the end user maybe, for corporate use it is not so straight forward, user training, skills in the IT dept, security for compliance such as SOX and PCI-DSS, document handling etc etc

Infact there is far more reason to use MS in the majority of environments still.

Though I've been avoiding this thread. I agree with haqking 1000% on this one.

Switching to Ubuntu for a corporation with even as few as 100 employees is a giant expense, it's not as simple as just popping in a few live CD's and going at it. The amount of time spent installing the necessary software on the systems adds up to astronomical costs. That's not including retraining personnel redesigning security policies, network assets, and infrastructure as necessary