1)

Install Leopard on your PC

Mac OSX Leopard was released officially by Apple and the hackers have managed to create a patched DVD that everyone like you and me can use to install Leopard on PC’s without having to buy a Mac. Please note the tutorial that I am going to post is still experimental and things might not work the right way simply because it is still early days in hacking Leopard to work on PC’s. Well if you don’t mind your PC getting screwed then go ahead and try out this tutorial.

Make sure you backup all important data before you proceed. Here are the things that you will need before Install Leopard on your PC…

• The Patched DVD Image
• The zip file containing the patch
• One pen drive or USB Flash Drive formatted as FAT32

Well once you have all these you can go ahead and Install Leopard..

Step 1. Getting things ready

2)

Networks are hard to defend
Seattle -- Communication technologies generally improve over time. Computers are faster and hold more data than ever before, cellphones that were once the size of bricks are now razor-thin, and new software features emerge seemingly every day. But computer security continues to get worse -- meaning there are more serious hacker attacks than ever -- argued Bruce Schneier, a computer-security expert and author of the popular blog Schneier on Security, at the closing keynote speech of the Educause 2007 conference on higher-education technology. The problem is complexity. All those new features are the indirect cause of security bugs. "As systems get more complex, they get less secure," Mr. Schneier said. "The Internet is the most complex machine mankind has ever built." "Things are getting worse not better," he argued. " Things are getting more complicated." Nontechnical issues are becoming more important than technical ones when it comes to security, he said. That means more regulation might be necessary to improve security in ways that no software patch can. It was a rather bleak parting message, though perhaps Mr. Schneier wrapped up on a more positive note -- like many attendees, this reporter had to leave early to catch a plane. --Jeffrey R. Young

3)

Immediate flaw alerts vs. Disclosing with patches
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/102607-arguments-disclose-vulnerabilities.html
What’s safer, knowing there’s a gaping hole that can be exploited in a
software product even when there is no patch for it, or being told about
the gaping hole once there is a patch?
That debate, heard since the dawn of software, pits the tell-all crowd
arguing for “full disclosure” against those who argue for “responsible
disclosure,” a philosophy favoring greater discretion about software
vulnerabilities in the hope that malicious hackers won’t benefit from
too much information.
But that assumes they don’t already know anyway. And if the hackers
know, then is it just the good folks who are in the dark? Such have been
the powerful arguments on both sides, which grew louder in the 1990s as
Microsoft Windows settled in for a long stay on the desktop and server,
giving “script kiddies” armed with automated attack tools the ability to
hit a lot with little effort over the Internet. It didn’t help that
Microsoft in the early days was in a blissful state of near-complete
denial about software holes.