SecurityFocus On MS Security "Hole"
friday2k writes "There is an interesting writeup at SecurityFocus that puts the latest security 'hole' in XP into perspective. It is a worthy read and should remind us all of the real issues out there." And it collects into one place much of the flak I caught after posting about the claimed security hole opened by the XP Recovery Console.
I mean, if I wanted to hork data off of a system I had full physical access to, I'd just grab the drive, stick it in my pocket, and walk out whistling "Jimmy Crack Corn and I Don't Care."
Now I can't get that song out of my head!
Anybody else stunned that Slashdot posted an article about MS that didn't involve an explanation as to how they're incompetant?
... who still thinks the Registry is a bad thing?
(comment to be taken lightly. Should irritation persist, chill.)
"Derp de derp."
Jornalistic integrity? Man which world do you live in?
does XP Recovery Console run on Linux?
If they reported _every_ M$ bug on Slashdot all the good articles would get pushed off the front page.
As opposed to now, when all the good stories getting pushed off the front page by reposts, you mean?
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
If they reported _every_ M$ bug on Slashdot all the good articles would get pushed off the front page.
Gotta leave room for all the articles about toasters modified to run linux and whatnot.
::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
The idea was to use a Win2K disk on a WinXP box and the Win2K thinks it is a "corrupt" install.
After seeing WinXP in action, I would tend to agree with the Win2k disk on its assessment...
Since when has accuracy been a concern to the editors at Slashdot?
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.