Instant desktop search

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by aigle, Dec 23, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Is there an instant search for Ubuntu/ Linux, just like the one in Vista and Win 7 or something like google desktop search?

    Thanks
     
  2. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    There are several. I am pretty sure Ubuntu comes with a desktop search enabled by default. I use Kubuntu and with it, you simply hit "Alt-F2" which opens a window where you enter search terms. Ubuntu uses a different backend, but Alt-F2 might do the same thing.

    If that doesn't work, then Beagle is popular. You can also use google desktop search as well. (sudo apt-get install google-desktop-linux)
     
  3. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Thanks. I will tryt it.
     
  4. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    Mint has an excellent instant search function. I'm gonna become a shameless Mint promoter troll :D
     
  5. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Ok, what,s better in Mint than Ubuntu in ur opinion?

    BTW Beagle seems not so instantaneous.
     
  6. iceni60

    iceni60 ( ^o^)

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    5,116
    you can try catfish, it's a frontend for several search programs. if you use it with locate it should be instant. it's what that windows program locate 32 is based on. you can just use locate from a terminal though and learning how to use find and grep isn't too difficult.

    edit: this is it -
    http://software.twotoasts.de/index.php?/categories/4-Catfish

    it's a bit old, and there are probably newer search programs now. but it's easy to use and you can tell it which directories to search and you can add it to your file manager right-click option (but you can probably do that with others too)
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2009
  7. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    Sorry, didn't mean to suggest Mint is better, only that's what i use and find it speedy, though I'm sure Ubuntu is probably equally as good, because Mint is based on it.
     
  8. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    No, I really want to know. Ubuntu is fine but I hate the fact that it,s slow. I tried PCLOS Gnome and that was way faster than Ubuntu. Hope they can look on this issue.
     
  9. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Thanks. BTW I want something just working out of the box. I am tired of tweaks n tweaks. :D
     
  10. SpikeyB

    SpikeyB Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Posts:
    478
    How about a right click on the panel then add to panel>deskbar

    It might not be good enough for your requirements but it's so quick and easy for you to try out if you don't want to tweak (it wont take you more than 60 seconds to try it). Click the icon not the arrow (you can click that later).

    Here's a page explaining it: http://projects.gnome.org/deskbar-applet/
     
  11. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Thanks. Sure I will try this. System hard disk crashed just now.
     
  12. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    aigle, your signature needs addressing.

    First of all, why do you want a "pop-up HIPS" for Ubuntu? What is your definition of a "HIPS?"

    Secondly, there are already "sandboxes" for Linux. Indeed, your Ubuntu machine has one installed by default -- it's called AppArmor and it can sandbox individual applications. Moreover, since all Ubuntu users, by default, run in a limited account, this works as a semi-sandbox itself. And if you need something more, you can run a virtual machine.

    Third, you don't need a key scrambler since keyloggers cannot be installed without root access to your machine. Unless you are surfing the web as root or installing questionable software, you have nothing to worry about where keyloggers are concerned.
     
  13. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    1- A pop up HIPS means, I need a software that can intercept all new execuatables, whether benign or malware. I will be sure that nothing malicious running in background and I am blind to that.

    2- AppArmor doesn,t see easy to use. I need something easier like Sandbxoie, SW or GW, basically to cover browser exploits.

    3- I think it,s likely that a malware can run in linux without root access. It might not exist now but can come any time in the wild and who knows such malware are still there. It,s just a matter a time, if Linux gets a significant share in desktop market, I believe we will see all type of malware for linux too.

    May be I am wrong though.
     
  14. Ocky

    Ocky Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    George, S.Africa
    You already have several AppArmor profiles running in enforced mode 'out of the box'.
    To see what they are run: sudo apparmor_status

    The Firefox profile is optional, but it is there and can be enabled as follows:-

    $ sudo aa-enforce /etc/apparmor.d/usr.bin.firefox-3.5

    To disable it again:-

    $ sudo apparmor_parser -R /etc/apparmor.d/usr.bin.firefox-3.5
    $ sudo ln -s /etc/apparmor.d/usr.bin.firefox-3.5 /etc/apparmor.d/disable/usr.bin.firefox-3.5

    I have tried the FF profile - nice test is to go to a page with java like http://www.java.com/en/download/help/testvm.xml
    - it prevents the applet from loading. Was a nuisance for me as I often need java for monitoring/analysing
    stock market graphs - so I disabled it. Feel safe enough with NoScript and don't download crap, let alone
    execute crap.

    See also here https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AppArmor

    I am not sure whether the 2 example commands for cups below are still applicable in Karmic 9.10,
    or whether one needs to enter the path to the executable to change cups say from enforce
    to complain mode and vice versa. (?)
    Eg.
    sudo aa-complain cupsd (to disable)
    sudo aa-enforce cupsd (to enable)
     
  15. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    I will play with when I have some time. It needs a lot of time. I use Opera so FF profile is not so useful for me.
     
  16. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    I think the default firefox profile is pretty good -- it covers a lot of bases. However, as you said, there are a few corner cases that it doesn't cover. Your link does not work for me either. However, when I try other online java browser tests, they do work. I have scanned my logs and don't see any error messages when I try to run that Java applet. So, I am not sure what is being blocked or why.

    At any rate, if you find something is blocked, you can merely run "sudo aa-logprof" and go through the logs.
     
  17. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    This is not necessary on Linux because Linux doesn't work the same way Windows does. Linux does not rely on file extensions to determine if a file can execute. File extensions mean *nothing* on Unix/Linux. All that matters are file permissions. Moreover, Linux does not allow any newly downloaded or created file execute permissions unless you, the user, explicitly make it executable. This is called a umask, and all distros usually set it to 022 (google "umask" for more info). Therefore, there is no way (short of an application exploit) that something can execute without your knowledge to begin with. And if you want to stop application exploits, you can use AppArmor.

    I've never used Sandboxie or any other Windows HIPS or sandbox, so I can't comment. However, I can sat that AppArmor is pretty easy to use once you learn the basics of it.

    Malware can run without root, sure. But you would have to explicitly execute it on purpose. Therefore, the only malware Linux is prone to are things like trojans (which trick the user into doing something he shouldn't).
     
  18. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,699
    Malware is overrated on Windows, twice so on Linux.
    Don't execute crap - nothing happens. The end. Enjoy the good stuff.
    Mrk
     
  19. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Problem are the the exploits. Windows also doesn,t execute anything unless user does so or there is an exploit.
     
  20. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    I am not familiar with the way Windows does everything nowadays, but several years back I know it was common for Outlook to automatically execute e-mail attachments. Linux mail clients have never done things this stupid by default.
     
  21. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    You have said this before and it's simply not true. Have you never heard of drive-by downloads? This is where web pages automatically execute things in your browser and cause a compromise of the machine. Now, one might say "only surf to safe sites." Yeah, that would work if it weren't for the fact that 1 in 10 websites on the Internet are now compromised, with many of them being completely innocent websites.
     
  22. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,699
    Compromised sites are overrated, too. Besides, that's part of the execution too.

    If you're running a patched browser, patched OS, the drive-bys are nothing more than a nuisance, if that. Web browsers "could" execute and "could" cause compromise to machines, but those two big coulds do not translate into can or will.

    I don't even want to mention "heavy" stuff like limited user or noscript, which really make all this stuff boring.

    The sheer emphasis on panic in public media - you just go to a site and get infected - is erroneous on so many levels that I have a small bout of berserking rage every time I read it, written by pseudo-journalists looking for traffic by means of fear mongering.

    Getting infected by computer malware is no more than getting infected with an STD. You simply don't have to.

    Mrk
     
  23. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    Patched software does not exclude the possibility of 0-days.

    Sure those things work, but doing that is not what you said originally. You said "don't execute crap and you'll be fine." It's not as simple as "safe surfing habits" and "not executing crap." Unless one turns off all scripts in the browser, not executing crap is impossible.
    Are you denying that drive-by downloads are a problem?

    I agree it doesn't have to be this way. I think more people should use *nix, but that doesn't mean they will. The fact is, those on Windows (especially those still using XP) are at a great risk of infection simply by surfing the web. Most people do not run XP in a LUA and do not know about NoScript. therefore your advice to "not execute crap" does not work for them.
     
  24. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,786
    I kinda have to agree with Mrk to some extent. I've been "surfing the web" now for close to 15 years and have never ever even once been hit with any kind of drive-by or malware or anything. And that using every browser imaginable, including all version of IE. If I were "at a great risk of infection", one would think I'd have been hit many times by now. To be honest, it's just something I don't worry about, based on my experience.
     
  25. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    Then you must have good security practices. I guarantee if you were running your box as admin, using IE with scripting allowed, you would not have been malware free all of this time. Actually, I must ask: how can you be sure you have never been infected?

    Hijacked websites are found all the time -- as I said, it is estimated that 1 in 10 sites on the Internet are infected. Here is an example found recently (Fox Sports Net).

    here is a quote from the article:
    This means if a person is surfing the web as admin (90% of Windows users) and allows Flash applets to run (95% of people) and they visit a legitimate site like Fox Sports Net, they become part of a botnet instantly.

    Do you guys still care to deny that drive-by's are real?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.