Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft/Unisys Unix-bashing Site Runs FreeBSD
Several people sent in variations on this: "Kind of ironic to see that the the site, dubbed WeHaveTheWayOut from Microsoft and Unisys runs on an Apache Web server powered by FreeBSD. This could have made a great April Fools joke, unfortunately for Microsoft, you can verify it by using Netcraft." This is a follow-up to the original story a few days ago. Other readers noted that there's already a WeHaveTheWayIn site up. Wehavethewayout.com was returning Apache headers yesterday; today it's returning "Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0", so it appears they've dumped FreeBSD in a hurry, or maybe just changed the headers.
Of course they were running on unix themselves! They were locked in, they were unable to stop paying for the expensive so called unix 'experts'. They were *hoping* we could ALL find a way out TOGETER.
Liberty.
Okay then. First one to exploit the MSSQL stored procedure buffer overflow gets a cookie. :)
Seriously, though. Putting a site up on a hastily thrown-together, unpatched box is going to bring them even more pain than sucking it up and sticking with FreeBSD.
I can't wait to see what kind of press they get when their brand new W2K box gets owned.
1433/tcp open ms-sql-s
This has got to be fake, there is no way a company as big as Microsoft is Dumb enough to use Sql Server....Nope Nevermind, they are.
97.4% of slashdot users, the popular Microsoft bashing site, are using Internet Explorer.
Has anybody tried to enter his address? In order to get the free offer?
I'm running it in wine.
;-)
The old site is definitely faster than the new one! ;)
...and they can't afford a firewall.
On behalf of Unix Engineers everywhere: Thank you Unisys. Thank you, Microsoft.
Now, wouldn't it be a terrible thing if that site got hacked and then the story got onto Cnet and Yahoo news!
Wouldn't that be terrible PR for Microsoft! Poor them! I do hope that doesn't happen. Especially bearing in mind that there must be a lot of people reading Slashdot who know how to do such a thing, and might be tempted to do it, or to post information about the open ports to mailing lists that black-hat hackers read. I do hope that doesn't happen, for Microsoft's sake. Poor them.
Just something I found humorous.
Did anybody else notice that their way out is a window the size of a small pet door. Of course the malnutritioned (sp?) geeks can fit through that but they don't really want to. It's the managers that are supposed to want to get away from *nix and they'd never fit through that hole.
Maybe the managers are just supposed to shove as many IT guys out the window as they can and hope for the best.
Anyways, back to M$ bashing.
impto, suspected troll
5900/tcp open vnc
Good job they're not running XP then or they'd be violating their own license
As a Microsoft/Unisys PR manager, I would like to thank to everyone who made wehavethewayout popular.
Thanks to your obsessiveness about netcraft & pretty much useless arguments which web server you use to serve static web pages, we are actually able to make many CIO/CTO's register & have a look at what we have to offer in replacing big-irons hosting databases & directory servers(not web servers serving static web pages, in case you still havn't got it)
The best part was we never spent $1 on marketing this web-site, just released details to CNet.
Again, thanks to everyone, we never imagined we would get so many hits or people looking into it
5900/tcp open vnc
:)
;)
I hope they realise this is a breach of their EULA
now, where's that VNC brute-forcer...
-Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
Keeping in mind that the BSD box is a 386 with 4MB of RAM and the Windows box is a quad xeon with 4GB of RAM...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Did you notice that the Microsoft's web server is far more faster than the Free BSD?
......... 100% @ 117.44 KB/s
......... 100% @ 93.96 KB/s
Nope, not really.
$wget 198.63.57.204
--07:59:17-- http://198.63.57.204/
Connecting to 198.63.57.204:80... connected!
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 9,621 [text/html]
0K
07:59:18 (117.44 KB/s) - `index.html.1' saved [9621/9621]
$wget 198.63.57.204
--07:59:27-- http://198.63.57.204/
Connecting to 198.63.57.204:80... connected!
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 9,621 [text/html]
0K
07:59:28 (93.96 KB/s) - `index.html.2' saved [9621/9621]
I'm really pleased Slashdotters are just talking about hacking the site, rather than actually doing it. After all, I'm sure lots of people at Microsoft read Slashdot, so now they have been altered to the fact that their box is insecure and are probably making plans to secure it. I'm really pleased that people aren't hacking this as soon as possible, and causing Microsoft a terrible PR disaster. It's great that Microsoft is being given time to put a firewall in place. We wouldn't want embarassing PR for them, would we?
This Isn't News. And here's why. Their "Anti-UNIX" campaign is not an Anti-Unix campaign. It's an anti-OldSchoolMainFrameBigIron campaign. They where running the website on FreeBSD on x86 hardware. Plus, MS has always been frendly with BSD (.NET on BSD, BSD TCP/IP stack in WinNT, etc.).
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
% strings ls ... ] ... ]
FreeBSD
FreeBSD
Phht
C@Ph
C@Ph
[
$FreeBSD: src/lib/libc/i386/string/index.S,v 1.5 1999/08/27 23:59:30 peter Exp $
[
Bwahahaahahaaahaahaahahaah!! Earlier I commented that their using IIS-looking 404 pages was an indication they actually did switch over to IIS. Looks like I was wrong they actually did just try to hide their using Apache by setting custom ErrorDocuments.
Liberty in your lifetime
It's not about getting rid of dinky little web servers serving up one static page and a handful of PDFs. Sounds like a perfect job for a FreeBSD box
I agree; you're 100% right. It is a good job for FreeBSD. When they tried to switch to Windows 2000, look what happened: the site wasn't able to stay up. Hardly anybody understands the concept of using the right tool for the job.
Windows 2000 obviously isn't appropriate for a dinky job like serving static images. Obviously, its place is with doing less important and critical jobs than serving web pages. Perhaps it might be useful for a print server (a low-load queue for a daisy wheel printer, not laser printers). Or perhaps it can be used for playing games.
The idea of switching from ancient Unisys big iron to crappy Win2k 8cpu boxes (which can't even run a static web server) is ridiculous. Running a datacenter server on a Win2k box, is like running a web server on an Atari 800xl. It's a total misunderstanding of scale and capability. This is 2002, not 1981, and it's time people took advantage of modern technology. FreeBSD is ready, and Windows is not. Maybe next year, Microsoft will have a serious product for Unisys' customers. Until then, Unisys needs an OS appropriate for the kind of people that the wehaveawayout web site is targeting. I recommend any reasonable OS from the mid 1980s or later (they key word is reasonable, which rules out Windows). OS/2 or AmigaOS or BeOS can do the job. Linux and *BSD will likely be even better. Windows isn't in the same league yet: it reminds me of those hackers who run a web server on their Commodore 64.