Instaling without CD-Rom?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 2077
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 2077

Guest
I'm going to try and install FreeBSD 7.2 Stable on an Atom server.

Thing is, has no CD-Rom.

Has USB-CD-Rom; but from the archives I searched it seems this isn't supported?

Can I book from USB Flash drive? I only have XP though, so can't use another FreeBSD system to make it.

Thoughts?

Once it's booted I can do a net/ftp install. It has a hard drive and network.
 
Take a closer look to

Code: 
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/amd64/ISO-IMAGES/8.0/

or

Code: 
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/ISO-IMAGES/8.0/

You will see a memstick image like

Code: 
8.0-RC3-i386-memstick.img

Put this image on your USB drive an boot Freebsd :)
 
Do you have a second FreeBSD or Linux machine available? If so, you could set it up as a netboot server and do the installation that way. I recently did exactly this to install 8.0-RC2 with a zfs root filesystem on a machine with no CD-ROM or FDD.
 
You do realize that this is a thread from 2009, right? At this point, typical install is done by dd-ing the install image to a USB stick and using the USB to install. (I've also overlooked things like date of a thread to which I was replying).
 
I've installed FreeBSD 7.2 on my old I5 cpu PC. I didn't remember that at the time on the config panel there was PPP instead of the detection of a network interface. So,now I'm stuck. I should read how to configure PPP. For sure it can't detect my network interface. It is too new for it. Will be hard to provide a connection to internet to such kind of old version of FreeBSD,I imagine. Furthermore,I hoped to find some kind of reaction when I wrote "kqemu",but nothing. It is not there.
 
I once spent a summer chasing a GeeXboX image I know I saw work.... I could never find it again...

The mind is a powerful thing once convinced it can be done.
 
Old Versions of Software and OS.
Should they even be available?
They do contribute to the sense that it can be done. I can resurrect that.
When in reality they are only for archival-historical use.
 
Phishfry said:
Old Versions of Software and OS.
Should they even be available?
They do contribute to the sense that it can be done. I can resurrect that.
When in reality they are only for archival-historical use.
Click to expand...

I think old FreeBSD versions can resurrect,yes,but they need a LOT of time to find for the right "shortcuts". For example,If I remember well,the PPP protocol was good for establish a network connecton with the old modem. So,I think that I should buy an old modem to be connected. No recent ethernet card will be detected or maybe an old usb stick with the sim card inserted.

Do you think that such old version of FreeBSD does not have some advantages ? I mean : the intruders today don't look if there are new bugs to gain the priviledges ? If the OS is new for them its easier to find or create an hole to insert their malicious code. But if they find an unknown OS (for sure they should not understand that the user is using a specific os version,or the so called surprise effect will go away). Every tries the bot makes to gain the access to the machine will fail because the old bugs still present on a such old version of the os simply aren't scanned. Unless the bot can search for all bugs that have been in a system for at least 15 years now. It's possible ? The majority of the devices that are there today weren't there 10/15 years ago, therefore the os can't even use the software that manages them and with it there aren't even the bugs. Who can think that there is someone in the world crazy enough to think that he can defend his own machine connected on the net using a very old OS version ?. Maybe I'm just talking bullshit, I'm not so experienced, however, I have learnt over my skin that counter-intuitive thinking is very powerful.
 
ziomario said:
Every tries the bot makes to gain the access to the machine will fail because the old bugs still present on a such old version of the os simply aren't scanned.
Click to expand...
If I were going to build a malicious bot the first thing I would have it search for is known vulnerabilities.
That is pretty much how every bot works from my understanding.
Find the weakest links bind them together for a coordinated attack bot.
An army of zombie machines that shouldn't be on the internets....
 
Phishfry said:
If I were going to build a malicious bot the first thing I would have it search for is known vulnerabilities.
That is pretty much how every bot works from my understanding.
Find the weakest links bind them together for a coordinated attack bot.
An army of zombie machines that shouldn't be on the internets....
Click to expand...

But you should or not narrow down the field of the possible bugs ?
 
Its like driving a junky car with bad brakes.

You turn off unneeded stuff in the car but that doesn't make it safer.
You just have to drive slower and hope nobody pulls out in front of you.
 
Phishfry said:
Its like driving a junky car with bad brakes.

You turn off unneeded stuff in the car but that doesn't make it safer.
You just have to drive slower and hope nobody pulls out in front of you.
Click to expand...

If you were the intruder : should you or not narrow down the field of the possible bugs ?
 
ziomario said:
If you were the intruder : should you or not narrow down the field of the possible bugs ?
Click to expand...
No, I use whatever I have at my disposal to attack the server. Also it depends if I'm going to pull LPE (already have access to a server) or RCE (attacking remote service).
Simple bot doesn't care about anything - it will try all it knows and reports back success.
 
scottro said:
You do realize that this is a thread from 2009, right? At this point, typical install is done by dd-ing the install image to a USB stick and using the USB to install. (I've also overlooked things like date of a thread to which I was replying).
Click to expand...
You could also make buildworld....maybe not something a non-programmer would feel comfortable trying but I'd recommend it as a useful way to learn the ropes.
 
_martin said:
it will try all it knows and reports back success.
Click to expand...

that's the point "all it knows" ; I think that it does not care about 15 years old bugs because behind it there is someone that thinks that no one can be so crazy to use such old version of the OS. My logic tells that to scan bugs of 20 years ago it means wasting of time and energy because it will be an huge amount of data to keep in "memory".
 
Well then, i'm annoyed by this really pointless necroposting now ... but I'll still take the time to explain.

Dropping "old stuff" from scan and/or attack bots wouldn't make any sense at all, because these ancient systems exist. Finding one of them is "jackpot" for the attacker. It's very likely an "easy own", plus the fact it's running such a museum piece of software is a strong hint about the expectable quality of maintenance and monitoring: non-existent. Which means, you'll probably KEEP owning that machine for quite a while.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top