Slashdot Mirror


FBI on the Windows Source Code Theft

Chris Gondek writes "There are various articles about the Stolen Windows Source Code, but today it is confirmed that an FBI task force hunted for a cyber-criminal who posted on the internet source code for Windows which says 'I can confirm that the Northwest Cybercrime Task Force was investigating, FBI spokeswoman Robbie Burroughs said. The posted program is part of the source codes, or blueprints, for Windows 2000 and Windows NT 4.0, according to the company.' "

53 of 504 comments (clear)

  1. Simple question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can they track torrents? Not that I'm afraid of the Fumbling Bumbling Idiots or anything...

    1. Re:Simple question by NeoThermic · · Score: 4, Informative

      >> Can they track torrents?

      Only the source torrent, people who download from it are only anonymous if there are no logs kept, and even then, due to the way that it works, I doubt that it could be possible.

      Correct me if I'm wrong there...

      NeoThermic

      --
      Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
    2. Re:Simple question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They're more interested in finding the people who originally copied/published/distributed it. They're not stupid - they probably realize that it's out in the wild now, and chasing each individual downloader isn't going to stop these files being passed around.

      Although, they seemed to clamp down pretty hard on the DOS 6 distributors a few years ago - a few people still have the source to that, but you can't seem to find it out there any more!

    3. Re:Simple question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      File: windows_2000_source_code.zip
      Key: CHK@JANQuMJMYGNWPVWyfwBwyXPsgBwPAwI,LeWue01uUKoEMG Kv54~o6A
      Bytes: 213748207

      CHK@JANQuMJMYGNWPVWyfwBwyXPsgBwPAwI,LeWue01uUKoE MG Kv54~o6A/windows_2000_source_code.zip

      Of course if you don't have Freenet yet (wtf are you waiting for?) you'd do good to visit http://www.freenetproject.org.

    4. Re:Simple question by westlake · · Score: 5, Funny
      Not that I'm afraid of the Fumbling Bumbling Idiots or anything...

      so why do you post as an Anonymous Coward?

  2. Scapegoat by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There will be a scapegoat regardless if they find the real criminal or not. After all, Microsoft wants to ease the minds of consumers and investors.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Scapegoat by AlaskanUnderachiever · · Score: 4, Interesting
      That's true, I've noticed an increasing trend in heavy media coverage of computer related crime as far as the chase, catching the "criminal" and the beginning of the trial. . . HOWEVER I've seen precious little followup on sentencing, etc. I've really begun to wonder if a goodly percentage of those publicized as caught end up innocent (at least of the charges brought against them) and walk away. Eeh, it's probably just my paranoid mind at work. . .

      --
      Find out about my new childrens book: SS Death Camp Criminal Batallion Go To Monte Carlo For The Massacre
    2. Re:Scapegoat by Knight55 · · Score: 5, Funny
      I think they could catch you if sheffif taylor is outside and knows who you are, but if you're smart enough you wouldn't be so obvious.

      Buy a laptop for cash at wal-mart

      configure netstumbler

      upload source code on random insecure wi-fi miles away from your house in a metropolotin area

      Throw said laptop in fire

      Drive home and watch a re-run of friends.

      thats it.

      --
      1888 Franklin St.
    3. Re:Scapegoat by espo812 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      HOWEVER I've seen precious little followup on sentencing, etc.
      I don't think this applies only to computer crimes. I constantly read about all kinds of crazy crimes involving real world and number world (say fraud or idenity theft, etc). Strange thing is, I never hear if the murderer was sentenced (unless he's given the death penalty) or if the fraudster was convicted (even though the media claims he stole $8 Million worth of widgets), etc.

      In summary, the media reports the catch and the outlandish - without bothering to follow through with what actually happens. The problem is solved from their end (to paraphrase office space).
      --

      espo
    4. Re:Scapegoat by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 4, Informative

      Whoa. There is no proof that it was stolen/leaked from a Linux box at all. The file is question may have been assembled on a Linux box, and then copied to a Windows machine, and then stolen/leaked from there. Just because there is a core file from a Linux machine does not mean it was stolen/leaked from that same machine.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
  3. Good to hear it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The FBI really needs to crack down on this whole Internet thing before the terrorists get their hands on that source code. Good to see they're doing something about it.

    1. Re:Good to hear it by Pierre · · Score: 4, Funny

      I know what you mean. I've seen source code all over the internet and they never seem to do anything about it. The folks at debian ought to call the FBI - they're being robbed blind!

  4. "In jeopardy is Microsoft's near-monopoly" by zegebbers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In any case, Microsoft's code allows the company to keep its near-monopoly on computer operating systems, for the same reason Coca-Cola guards its secret formula.
    Yes, It's very lucky that there is absolutely no way to obtain any MS source code!

  5. well... by G27+Radio · · Score: 5, Informative

    Anyone that's a peer in the torrent has your IP address. All they have to do is connect to the torrent and start collecting IP addresses of any peer that sends a piece of the file.

    1. Re:well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah there is, I was at some of the sites recommended by all those e-mails I get every day and a window appeared and told me that I was surfing insecurley ( and that Adult content had been spotted on my hard drive ) so I downloaded there utilities at once and so now I'm totally protected.

  6. Illegal to download? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article says FBI spokesperson said 'It's illegal to download it.'. How can that be? Is it really so? What if your girlfriend downloads a file called 'cookingrecipes.zip' and it happens to contain stuff she did not know - such as Windows source code? Does that mean innocent downloaders can be put in jail?

    1. Re:Illegal to download? by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ignorance rarely is a valid defence in the eyes of the law. If you're speeding at 70mph in an area where the speed limit is 50 mph then you not knowing that you were above the speed limit is not a valid defence.

      Similarly, if you hold a barbeque and your kids sneak off with some beers, get drunk and do something stupid then you're still liable for any laws that you may have unknowingly broken (providing alcohol to a minor, etc).

      Just because you didn't know you were breaking the law that doesn't excuse you from any possible punishment. Look at what happened to the grandfather who got hit with a hammer by RIAA because his grandkids used his PC to download copyrighted material over P2P networks without his knowledge. He had no clue what the kids were up to but he was still held liable for their actions.

      If your theoretical "cookingrecipes.zip" defence was held up in court I'd be surprised. It would be carte blanche for copyright infringers, paedophiles and anyone else intent on evading the law to disguise their activity by giving the files they were swapping innocent file names and then claiming that they "didn't know" what the files really contained.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    2. Re:Illegal to download? by Rostin · · Score: 5, Informative

      For some reason every limiting, nonsensical case is modded insightful. There is such a thing as culpability under the law. I think it's pretty obvious that if she really did intend to download something else (legally) and instead got the source code, she isn't guilty of anything, and could show that she really was tricked - say if she is none too computer saavy, has a demonstrable interest in cooking, etc. Notice that this is different than knowingly downloading the Windows source code and claiming that "I didn't know it was against the law." That is the genuine "ignorance of the law" for which there is no excuse. In the first case, something is happening to you that is really beyond your control. In the second, you are willingly and knowingly doing something that happens to be illegal.

    3. Re:Illegal to download? by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Informative

      It doesn't matter what I personally believe is right or wrong, the original poster wasn't talking about personal ethics, it matters what the law and the courts decide is right or wrong.

      If ever someone busts your ass for anything, whether it's an overdue library book or murder, feel free to knock on my door asking what I feel is right or wrong but don't expect the law to agree with everything I say.

      Rightly or wrongly, as I said before, ignorance is often no defence at all in the eyes of the law. If that offends you, well, I don't know what to suggest because that's pretty much standard practice everywhere on the planet.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    4. Re:Illegal to download? by zod1025 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or instead of little red flags, you should have a little light bulb light up that says "What a deal!".

      Downloading from the net is not illegal. Putting stuff on the net you don't have rights to is - but the downloaders aren't doing that. They are just accessing publicly available information.

      --

      -ZOD-
  7. heh... by mrscorpio · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why would the FBI care unless the source code had all the secret gov't backdoors plainly visible? :)

    Chris

  8. Not so much fuss about Debian or SF break ins by DrSkwid · · Score: 5, Interesting


    You'd think the FBI had some sort of pro-corporate bias!

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:Not so much fuss about Debian or SF break ins by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As I posted earlier in this discussion, the MS security officer is Scott Charney, formerly of the FBI Cybercrime division. So yes, there certainly are connections.

  9. Re:maybe now... by holizz · · Score: 5, Funny

    It was only about 5% of the source that got released so we'll only see about 20 backdoors.

  10. Help your local law enforcement team by Linker3000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    REWARD

    Have you seen this code:

    MOV AH,09h

    Believed to be part of a larger gang of code, this fragment is guilty of initialising a register for potentially illegal or disruptive purposes, notably the dissemination of disturbing messages or misinformation. Older intelligence indicates that the code was often seen accompanied by its partner:

    INT 21h

    But now believed to be part of a larger organisation.

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
  11. Re:Not normally pro Microsoft by bhima · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The source for Linux is available.

    I haven't had many problems with it.

    Maybe you are over reacting.

    Not that I condone this

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  12. Re:Blueprints? by lseltzer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a perfect metaphor. Computers don't run C code, just as we don't live in drawings of houses. Both are human-readable representations that we can use to build the implementation.

  13. MSHTML was in the .tar and Winsock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting


    MSHTML.dll for those that don't know is the heart of Internet Explorer , (iexplore.exe is just a wrapper for mshtml) prepare for some exciting browser exploits , Winsock should ensure there is plenty of fun to be had with windows networking sockets

    and don't forget MSPaint was in the source tree so Adobe had better watch out :))

  14. What is there to investigate? by valentyn · · Score: 5, Funny

    What went wrong with the US law system? Microsoft is finally in compliance with their anti-trust regulations, opening up API's and stuff, and now the FBI is investigating that? ;-)

    --
    my other sig is a 500 page novel
  15. Pure Public Relations by rueger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After reading the article, I can only say it's pure PR speak, factually error prone, and more than a bit slanted. Perhaps this paragraph explains the timing:

    "The announcement of the leak came on the same day Microsoft pushed in Washington for tougher anti-counterfeit legislation in the United States and worldwide, saying pervasive pirating of computer software was hurting the industry."

    Given that any number of companies and computer professionals have access to Windows source for various reasons, it's not unreasonable to think that occasionally chunks of it appear in the wild.

    And certainly a lack of source code hasn't slowed down the virus and worm industry.

    Consequently I have to assume that this story is just a way for Microsoft to build support for even more draconian anti-piracy and DRM laws.

    As a post-script - the original post and magazine link should be modded +5 funny at best. It's really quite pathetic.

  16. Download it on Freenet...Anonymously! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Among other things, the zip contains the source code to Notepad (you always wanted that!) along with an intriguing bugcodes.txt file that explains a lot of bluescreen/stop errors in more detail than you'll find anywhere else.

    File: windows_2000_source_code.zip
    Key: CHK@JANQuMJMYGNWPVWyfwBwyXPsgBwPAwI,LeWue01uUKoEMG Kv54~o6A
    Bytes: 213748207

    CHK@JANQuMJMYGNWPVWyfwBwyXPsgBwPAwI,LeWue01uUKoE MG Kv54~o6A/windows_2000_source_code.zip

    Of course if you don't have Freenet yet (what are you waiting for?) you'd do good to visit http://www.freenetproject.org.

  17. Re:Blueprints? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Hmm, maybe I should have quoted more of the article.

    What and ruin another pedantic rant with facts? Never.

  18. The article is complete crap by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Counterfeiters have been trying to get their hands on Windows source code for years. So have computer activists who say that programs could be made to work better with Windows if the source code were public.

    Counterfeiters don't want the source code, they just copy the binaries and maybe a hack to circumvent registration.
    "Computer activists" even less so -- copying Windows code would poison any GPL project.

    In any case, Microsoft's code allows the company to keep its near-monopoly on computer operating systems, for the same reason Coca-Cola guards its secret formula.

    True; but the reason Coke and MS have near monopolies is because of marketing, not innate superiority of their products (Pepsi wins most blind taste tests; Macs win all usability tests).

    In parts of Asia and the former Soviet Union piracy rates approach 90 per cent, they said. As a result, the US software industry loses $US13 billion ($A16.52 billion) a year for counterfeiting and other forms of software piracy.

    Debatable; but irrelevant anyway.

    The US Congress is considering legislation designed to close a number of legal loopholes often allowing counterfeiters to get away with their activities, specifically prohibiting trafficking in genuine authentication components.

    Again, the idea that this will make piracy more prevalent -- it will have no affect at all on MS warez.

  19. Microsoft doesn't know how the source was released by hillct · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I love this:
    Microsoft said that its own security had not been breached by whomever did the posting, nor was it released by a series of companies and governments with whom it shares the source code for the purpose of building software to work with Windows.
    Aparently Microsoft has no idea how the source code was relased. This doesn't speak well for their security. If they can't protect their own code repositories - their single most valuable asset - how can we expect them to provide a secure or even non-trojaned product?

    --CTH
    --

    --Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
  20. Piracy != lost profit by inf0mike · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As a result, the US software industry loses $US13 billion ($A16.52 billion) a year for counterfeiting and other forms of software piracy.

    It amazes me just how much emphasis is placed on financial losses due to piracy. Just because people are using pirated versions of software does not mean they would have bought it anyway! The figure qouted is a "best case scenario" projection of what could have been new sales, but the companies are not actually losing that amount from money they have already earned.

    1. Re:Piracy != lost profit by thales · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Piracy of Windows hurts Linux more than Microsoft because most of the piracy occurs in areas where the majority of the people can't afford the high cost of a Windows OS. If it were impossible to pirate a copy of MS Windows, then most of these people would be using more affordable Linux distros, rather than buying Windows and Windows software.

      --
      Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est
  21. Re:Interesting note... by DustMagnet · · Score: 5, Informative
    From http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/02 /sp_technews_charney091702.htm:
    Los Angeles, Calif.: Did you ever work for the FBI?

    Scott Charney: No, I worked for the Dept. of Justice as a prosecutor in the Criminal Division. The FBI is a different part of Justice.

    --
    'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
  22. Re:Not normally pro Microsoft by diersing · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I am a Windows Administrator, I'm not anti-MS.

    The leak of the code scares the shit out of me. We've had some rather nasty security bits on the net lately and this is not a reassuring development.

    will increase the time I have to spend securing my system. although true, my main target in such a suit would MS itself for (1) not securing the code properly (2) recent stories (and past ones) of them sitting on security patches for months on end.

    If someone broke into my house and I followed my handbook and best practice about securing my house and it was STILL penetrated I want to go after the security document, not the intruder (the intruder would be handled by the criminal courts, my case is civil and monetary in nature since everytime some BS exploit is released and MS hasn't a patch my company is spending money to monitor and sort things out.

    Vary rarely will you see a class-action suit against an individual (I can't recall one, just ones against companies when their neglegence is going to lead to a large cash settlement..... I wonder how the MS lobbyest have protected them from such action)

  23. shoulda been posted on microsoft.com by savuporo · · Score: 4, Funny

    If MS corporate net was really compromised, like BBC reported, the leaker should have posted it on download.microsoft.com.
    If it were posted there ( like in DirectX9.1.zip or somesuch ), would they still have legal grounds to hassle the users who downloaded it ?

    --
    http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
  24. Re:Blueprints? by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Technically, you could call source code blueprints."

    Technically, only if you printed it. In blue.

  25. The Immaculate Transmission by grouse · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Here's what Microsoft's press release on the inadvertent release says:
    [I]nvestigation has shown this was not the result of any breach of Microsoft's corporate network or internal security, nor is it related to Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative or its Government Security Program...

    Interesting. From this, one must conclude that either (a) Microsoft legitimately releases the code to others outside these two programs, but we don't know about it; (b) Microsoft has absolutely no idea how the source was released but is lying through its teeth claiming there was no security breach nor an unauthorized release from its shared source programs; (c) Microsoft leaked the code itself for nefarious purposes (e.g. destroying ReactOS).

    We report, you decide.

  26. Re:Not normally pro Microsoft by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're quite right - but there is a difference...

    Let's use the home metaphor - you live in a house in a neighbourhood built by "MS Homes". They are nice, comfortable homes, but the security system involves closing your front door with a plastic latch. Because the latch doesn't LOOK like plastic, everyone feels secure. Burglars, however, suspect there is an easy way in to the homes.

    Now, if none of the good guys examine the security and say, "Hey, maybe these latches should be steel", then eventually a bad guy will figure it out and your home is open for business.

    In such an event, if a good guy opened *a* front door on a *single* MS home, then posted a note in the local newpaper that maybe latches should be upgraded, I'd sleep with a shotgun until my latch was replaced. In the end, I'd have a safer home and know it. Without the good guy, I don't have a safe home, AND I'm unaware until a break in.

  27. Yep any p2p can track. by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless you use something like Freenet to download.

    But even there they can see your IP. There just is no way to prove it was you that did the request, or was just 'forwarding' the request thru your node....

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  28. Re:Not normally pro Microsoft by __past__ · · Score: 5, Insightful
    But the source for Linux is available both for attackers and for white hats to find and fix bugs. If anyone would find a security problem in the leaked Windows code, they cannot simply send a patch to Microsoft - they would admit to have illegally obtained the code doing so.

    Open Source code is available for everyone. Only criminals can use the Windows code.

  29. Re:I don't know if this is true by Daniel+Boisvert · · Score: 5, Interesting

    cough... cough... FUD...

    I spoke with a gent on the same network reporting the same experience (could be the same guy :) and read the email they sent him. The email was sent from Microsoft, not from the FBI or any law enforcement entity.

    It's not FUD. The gent in question also mentioned that his torrent download jumped from about 100K/s to 600K/s at some point through the download, which would lead me to believe that somebody with fat pipes *cough*Microsoft*cough* jumped into the swarm, likely in order to start tracing IP addresses.

    I do wonder a bit about that, however, because if Microsoft jumps into the torrent to start nabbing IP's, haven't they also contributed to the dissemination of the source code by participating in its distribution? I'd imagine that it's no more of a problem for them legally than it is to undercover police selling drugs in sting operations. I do wonder if it should be, however...especially considering that they're *not* a law enforcement agency.

    Dan

  30. According to BetaNews, Mainsoft is to blame.... by telstar · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to BetaNews, a company called Mainsoft is to blame. They allege that Mainsoft had access to the code in order to develop their Visual MainWin tool giving developers the ability to write Linux and Unix apps from within Visual Studio.

    1. Re:According to BetaNews, Mainsoft is to blame.... by telstar · · Score: 4, Informative
      Mainsoft had the following to say:

      • "Mainsoft has been a Microsoft partner since 1994, when we first entered a source code licensing agreement with Microsoft. Mainsoft takes Microsoft's and all our customers' security matters seriously, and we recognize the gravity of the situation.


      • We will cooperate fully with Microsoft and all authorities in their investigation.

        We are unable to issue any further statement or answer questions until we have more information.

        From Mike Gullard, Chairman of the Board, Mainsoft Corporation"
  31. Re:I don't know if this is true by HeghmoH · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's no need to seed or download a torrent to get IPs from the tracker, it's totally separate. A normal BT client will get IPs from the tracker, and provide its own IP, then use that information to make connections and start downloading and uploading. It is trivial to connect to the tracker and ask it for the IP of everybody currently on that torrent, along with their status (seeding, downloading, how much progress). This is why using BT for illegal activity is extremely boneheaded. I doubt if the speed jump was related to MS's tracking, unless they were being stupid.

    --
    Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  32. there is no half of globalization by axxackall · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Oh, that's easy: have your friend in Russia to give you stunnel address and enjoy how FBI is weak attempting to figure out anything about IP address in Russia. Or China. Well, actually in many countries.

    I said it before and I'll say it again: the globalization MUST be improved. If they want investigations across the borders - they have to remove the borders. That include the freedom to trade across the borders, the freedom to hire across the borders, the freedom to ELECT across the borders, the freedom to immigrate across the borders.

    You don't wanna give that freedom to people? Enjoy your useless attempts to sue DVD hackers in Norvey and find IP addresses in Russia.

    Remember: there is no such thing as "half of globalization". It either exists givig equal opportunities and freedoms to everyone, or it doesn't exist at all.

    --

    Less is more !
  33. DMCA in full effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    you may receive a letter like the one below if you pull the file off of edonkey (Windows.source.code.w2k...). this is kind of ironic, because the file downloadeed was a fake.

    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > J.K. Weston
    > Microsoft Corporation
    > One Microsoft Way
    > Redmond, WA 98052
    > jkweston@microsoft.com
    > Tel: (425) 703-5529
    >
    >
    >
    > URGENT/IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUIRED
    > VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
    >
    > Re: NOTICE OF POTENTIAL UNLAWFUL DISTRIBUTION OF MICROSOFT SOURCE CODE AT:
    > xx.xx.xx.xx
    > Date of Infringement: Detail below.
    >
    > Dear xxxxxxxxxx:
    >
    > We have received information that one of your users as identified above by
    > the SITE/URL xxxxxxxxx may have engaged in the unlawful distribution
    > of Microsoft's source code for Windows 2000, and/or Windows NT4, by
    > distributing and offering for download these source code files via a
    > peer-to-peer network.
    >
    > Since you own this IP address, we request that you take appropriate action
    > against the account holder under your Abuse Policy/Terms of Service
    > Agreement.
    >
    > We also kindly request that you forward this notice promptly to the user
    > of the IP address listed above at the time and date stated.
    >
    >
    >
    > To the user at xx.xx.xx.xx:
    >
    > The unauthorized copying and distribution of Microsoft's protected source
    > code is a violation of both civil and criminal copyright and trade secret
    > laws. If you have downloaded and are making the source code available for
    > downloading by others, you are violating Microsoft's rights, and could be
    > subject to severe civil and criminal penalties.
    >
    > Microsoft demands that you immediately (1) cease making Microsoft's source
    > code available or otherwise distributing it, (2) destroy any and all
    > copies you may have in your possession, and (3) provide us any and all
    > information about how you came into possession of this code.
    >
    > Microsoft takes these issues very seriously, and will pursue legal action
    > against individuals who take part in the proliferation of it source code.
    > We look forward to your prompt cooperation. Should you need to contact
    > me, I can be reached at the address above or at jkweston@microsoft.com.
    >
    > Very truly yours,
    > By
    > J.K. Weston

  34. Speaks volumes about our society by Aslan72 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I hope this doesn't sound too conspiracy-theory oriented, but I find it interesting the amount of pull MS has in our society now. We're talking about a product that, for all purposes, is still a product and yet the verbage that I've seen on it makes it sound like someone just gave out a key national secret.

    Granted, we have so much riding on Windows that it being compromised is akin to loosing a national secret, but who is to blame here? If we lean so much on MS's code being secure, why are people storing data on there that could be a probem if the system was hacked?

    --pete

  35. Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. by Threni · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yeah, but you can over analyze the media. Usually it's less than worthless.

    Check this out:

    http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speech es _quote03.html

    Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)

    Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward--reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

    In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

    That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.

  36. Would somebody please tell me by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    why it takes less than six days for M$ to be hot-n-heavy on the trail of the source of the leak while it takes M$ six months to patch a serious security vulnerability in their source code?

    --
    Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10