Slashdot Mirror
Cringely: MS To Hurt Linux Via USB Enhancements
frogspit writes "In this article, Cringely suggests that MS's proposed enhancements to USB to address security issues have the added benefit (for them) of hurting Linux."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Oh, you'll be able to upgrade your 2004 or 2005 PC to Longhorn, but it will never work quite as well as a new 2006 PC actually designed to run the OS. This is called marketing, folks, and it is what keeps us buying new PCs and other electronic devices over and over again.
Nah, they are going to make it move from marketing hype to marketing reality. They want to DRM the OS, the BIOS, and the peripherals so that they can lock out whoever and whatever they want.
They have already made the deals w/Phoenix to make a MSFT certified BIOS that will enable them to not boot "insecure" OSs. They are in talks to get the RIAA to support a format to make CDs unreadable in machines other than those running Windows (I presume this would include insecure versions of Windows as well). They are working to get the MPAA to agree to allow them to distribute movie materials via WMP which will likely lead to DVDs "protected" with MSFT products.
So they aren't just going to have use buying PCs over and over again to keep up with their protection schemes... They are going to have us buying everything over and over again.
1st Post ? Is it i womder? hu huh hu
Someone is suggesting Microsoft is doing something to further their existence and bring their competition down, sound the alarms!
Universal Serial Bashing?
This has got to be the most inane paranoid rambling I've read since I flipped thourgh an X-Files novel. How do people who think like this even function? I would be suprised that they could even make it to the store to buy food without having a fit because everyone was out to get them.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
An "enhancement" could always be included in a service pack to allow DRM CDs on 95,98,etc.
What about legacy auto/component players?
Here's to hoping the OpenBIOS project can workaroud some of this junk.
Don't pick up the pho*(@)$*@&@!@ NO CARRIER
As a gentooer, I'm not too concerned. This sounds like a replay of the sender-ID thing. I somehow doubt that manufacturers will gladly adopt this standard. Also, this doesn't make older USB devices stop working. I doubt it will be the end of Linux as we know it. Windows can support or not support whatever they want, it's not going to change Linux.
To me, this sounds more like Cringely being Cringely.
Hi there
They have already made the deals w/Phoenix to make a MSFT certified BIOS that will enable them to not boot "insecure" OSs.
I think you will be able to boot whatever you want, but MS products won't interface with "non-trusted" platforms (ie no email or file sharing).
Maybe some networks would take this step, but I doubt it.
I predict this will go the way of passport -- only hotmail will support it.
BAH - Microsoft would never get away with such blatantly anti-competitive, monopolist tactics. I predict the DOJ would be able to stop such activity by 2020 or so...
By which time of course USB will be a distant memory.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Now, before this becomes flooded with people screaming against the latest evilness from MS, I'd like to say that, while I haven't actually seen the lisence, I highly doubt it prohibits someone making an alternative driver for the USB port. Certainly, some bright coders will be working on this. I'm just not seeing this as a major problem for linux, though I do agree that MS does dominate hardware standards.
Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
3NHANCE YOUR O$ WITH HERB41 USB REMEDIES!!!111
Ho ho ho, I can't resist.
Click here for a free picture of an iPod!
Maybe firewire or something like it should be the alternative. If there is a royalty penalty for each USB port or device there may be a point where some motherboard manufacturers offer usb as an option.
If enhancements were to be made to USB, information on the specs would have to be provided as well, and hopefully not just to those who fork up the dough for it. In this case, saying it would hurt Linux would be saying that the development for an enhanced USB interface would take a really long time. I doubt it would be true if support was important enough. Was supporting USB 1.1 and 2.0 in Linux really a pain at all when it came out?
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
There IS a new USB standard in the works and it is at the heart of Microsoft's sudden interest in USB security. Co-developed with Intel, the new USB standard specifically excludes Linux and probably OS X devices as well. I'm told the Intel folks are quite embarrassed about this, but feel powerless to do anything about it.
Links? Can you back this up with any actual facts?
Show me the new published standard that "specifically excludes linux and probably OS/X".
And if he's so sure it specifically excludes Linux, why is he doubtful about OS/X?
I call bullshit and flamebait on this entire article.
MSFT isn't scared of linux on the desktop, they have absolutely no reason to be.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Is it bad that after reading this article, my sole reaction was to run through our building yelling "USB belt buckles!!" like some sort of geek version of Paul Revere...
I'm so embarrassed....
--
Was it the sheep climbing onto the altar, or the cattle lowing to be slain,
or the Son of God hanging dead and bloodied on a cross that told me this was a world condemned, but loved and bought with blood.
Cringely and his sources seem to believe that Longhorn's USB device restrictions will be based on the concept of "trusted devices", that the hardware itself will have to know whether or not to let the USB host access it.
I don't see it that way. The implementation I envision is a "trusted user" approach, in which it is access rules defined in the computer's operating system that determine how USB devices can be used.
A flag in the Registry for each user. When a USB device is connected, depending on its value, the OS will give the user either full read/write access, read-only access, or no access, and will mount the USB volume accordingly.
Perhaps there are real advantages to the method Cringely believes MS will implement, but I don't see them.
https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/home
In stores near you!! Soon!!
> Some companies disable the USB connectors on their PCs, plugging them with five minute epoxy or even with solder.
Solder to plug a USB connector? Damn...
> We'll change the BIOS and the OS so that older, non-serialized, devices can be used but just for read-only applications.
So how can commands be sent to the older devices?
As big as Microsoft is, they can't simply make useless all usb drives out there with a flick of a switch, as the artical sugests.
More likly, Longhorn will by default allow standard behavior from usb devices.
If and only if the administrator of the OS flips a switch will the usb port be (Disabled / Read only / {Custom USB Writeable})
So while they may require a Longhorn only usb drive, in certain scenario's, regular ones should still work in most situations.
This is of course only conjecture, only time will tell for sure what will happen.
...he's the one actually spreading FUD.
Given Microsoft's already tenuous relationship with the Department of Justice's anti-trust division, sure you don't think they would attempt to lock out Linux and OSX do you? They would get the hell sued out of them.
Second, what's to stop Apple or another hardware company from coming up with a different solution to the problem that works with Windows and therefore does not suffer from diminished market application?
Third, and here's where I get crazy, I believe that at some point in the next five years, Microsoft is going to produce Linux software (for crazy reasons that I'll keep to myself until they begin to sound less crazy.)
Loading...
How are they making the open standard somehow Windows-only? Doesn't the fact that it is an open standard mean that someone can just put the support for the new standard into Linux and be done with it? Or does the new standard actually rely on some propriatary software from MS?
Why would one need a new USB standard to deny the use of USB-storage devices?
How about makeing "usbstor.sys" optional? I wouldn't even be too surprised, if one could actually removed it with some extra work manually.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
I just don't get why USB hard drives are such a security risk. Any employee who wanted to steal a bunch of data is not going to be stopped by this. All he would have to do is open up his computer and borrow the HD for a weekend.
Heck, he could just email the data to himself at home!
And let's be serious, how many employees really have access to valuable and confidential information?!
When I first heard about this alleged security problem I immediately thought, what's Microsoft's real purpose? Cringely might be on the right track.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
PC companies build what Microsoft tells them to because doing otherwise risks having their hardware go uncertified, or even worse, simply not function with Windows. - I wonder what processors would MS software run if not Intel's, I don't completely understand how MS came into position to dictate its terms to the hardware manufacturer. I wonder how much time will it take MS to come up with their own processor and the rest of it (sort of like Apple but without IBM) maybe they MS will can even cooperate with Sun on this front.
In any case USB is definetely an important piece of hardware and ubiquitous at that. I don't believe that the home users will care about the security of their USB devices more than they care about security of their browsers and email clients. If the new standard is released it maybe picked up by very security minded folks, like the security services, but MS will have tough time convincing most companies to switch to yet another hardware platform (at least within the next 5 years.)
You can't handle the truth.
No. Someone is pointing out that a convicted monolopist is using their position to change a standard in such a way as to be able to exclude all competition who don't pay a license to Microsoft to implement it.
Since it will probably have a bunch of patent/license encumberance that will have the effect of saying "Microsoft gets to decide who is in the industry" and everyone else can go home.
It will have the rather un-nerving effect that Microsoft can effectively lock out any open source projects from ever speaking to hardware ever again. Wanna reverse engineer the USB to allow for interoperability? Well, if it's encumbered technology reverse engineering would be illegal.
Oh, sorry. Can't afford a new USB device? Bought yours on sale? Well, we have decided that Microsoft gets to be the sole arbiter of what people can do with their devices. Which means you could eventually find scenarios where you don't own your data -- you have a license from Microsoft to give them your data which becomes their property and they get to assign DRM/usage rules to it.
The fact the government isn't really leary about the fact that Microsoft is in effect saying "all your base are belong to us" with how the industry handles hardware.
If Microsoft wants to go to a totally closed shop mentality as far as every single piece of hardware is concerned, they will probably quickly find Apple overtaking them.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I expect USB ports to disappear about as fast as 3.5" floppy drives....
Start buying Firewire peripherals. My Mac supports them already, an extra PCI card is all my PC will need....
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
This is not a technical, it's a legislative, legal issue. The US government should be stepping in.
It will also be interesting to see that how governments of other nations (including China) who flirt with OpenSource will react to this.
If Microsoft does have the muscle to push this as a standard (which hopefully will fail) -- I'd imagine most motherboard companies will have the 2 "onboard" USB slots the Microsoft way, but also include a USB header with their motherboards that work the same ole-fashioned way. Think about it -- a lot of these MoBo places are Taiwan shops that absolutely adore Linux -- they would be shooting themselves in the foot too if they went down the Microsoft road.
One such abuse that I came away with was using your monopoly status to influence other industries. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but it seems to kind of fit as I'm sure other people are writing at this very moment.
I can almost see this initiative getting spat upon basically because one of the brilliant and golden features of USB was the ability to use the device "universally" not only between like computers, but also unlike computers such as Macintosh. If Apple had any say in the development of USB standards, they should be gearing up their legal engines right about now because this "Universal Serial Bus"s claim to fame is now being threatened.
As far as making it also as a "Linux hurter/killer" I'm not quite so sure about that. It seems to me that we can use Windows drivers WITHOUT worrying about patent infringement issues. It is being done with various Wireless cards and stuff, so why not enhance what's already been done and link-n-load the Windows drivers for the new hardware right into our systems? I think this approach barely presents a hiccup for the next few years unless MS rewrites the kernels of every OS they are currently supporting and rumos has it Win98 will be extended due to popular demand AGAIN.
I think a lot can be prevented with protest and also with clear and active development in the area of using Wine and Windows drivers with Linux. They'll see how futile their effort really is and it makes me wonder if they really think this stuff through....
This is esentially the same thing as yesterdays story.
It seems that M$ is starting to focus on a strategy, one which should be familiar to most people: Use the monopoly under the guise of improving security/fighting piracy to crush the competition.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
I can't fathom why this idea even exists. All these USB devices show up as USB Mass Storage Devices, right? So why not just add a feature to the OS to allow USB Mass Storage Devices to be installed by administrators only, or not at all, that can be set via a Group Policy template? There's no problem here that requires a hardware solution.
See. Firewire might yet be popular for things besides camcorders!
This is all well and good, but it isn't going to happen any time soon. But, it is very likely to happen, given today's reality.
See, XP wasn't as big a success as Microsoft anticipated. Right now, about half the PCs out there are still running older versions of Windows. The majority of those are running Windows 98 (!). The rest of running some form of XP. Yes, half the PCs sounds like a big success, but it doesn't ensure hegemony. No one is going to ship an XP only piece of hardware, today. Tomorrow, possibly.
Keep in mind, also, that this is about three years since XP appeared. Longhorn isn't going to install on any current machines, most likely.
Now, given this statistic, how long is it going to take for Longhorn to get to 50%? You'd best believe that product is going to be shipped, during the Longhorn period, that works on the last two version of Windows, - Win2k and XP. USB device producers aren't going to come up with new models of anything that won't work with the majority of computers out there. Well, maybe Microsoft will.
I'm guessing that it will take at least until 2010 before the majority of PCs have are Longhorn enabled. When that happens, it'll be a the beginning of a problem. Possibly longer if corps go kicking and screaming, which they will.
Non-MS computer enthusiasts/anti-DRM advocates have at least 6 years to get enough alternative desktops out there to prevent this. I hope that the commercial Linux distro makers and Apple are listening. They need market penetration _now_ to prevent eradication later. Or we'll see the end of personal computing as we know it next decade.
I agree that MS has dominated the hardware industry and this totally isn't a good thing -- however I don't think MSFT is as scared as everyone thinks they are. A lot of us use linux, do you HONESTLY believe it can replace windows for those non-savvy users? I've been using linux for years and there are still plenty of issues that I run into, leading me to dig around msg boards and newsgroups to find the answer or a patch. Do you honestly think your grandmother or boss is going to be able to do that?
Why wasn't this an issue years ago (when data were small) with floppy drives? Couldn't people also burn sensitive data to CDs and take that home? Most PCs and Macs come with CD burning capabilities as a matter of course. Want to get the data offsite? Drop the CD/floppy into the mail and send it.
Then again, maybe USB storage is just that convenient and hard to detect. Still, it seems as though if someone has access to the data and wants to get it offsite, they'll find a way. Maybe USB devices will be the next "microfilm" of future spy/thriller movies.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
I see a lot of problem here...
No, more then a lot...
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
Noticed how many Linux-excluding or "anti-piracy" things Microsoft proposes seem to disappear? This one will too. Ask the Justice Department for more details.
for strange Japanese USB devices, I doubt this will happen.
1. I won't buy any hardware that hash such encumbrances, as an end-user. ... obviously GWB&cia can come here and "liberate" us from our democratic constitution or protect the rainforest or other gibberish like that, but somehow I hope not.
2. In my country DMCA-style laws won't pass because (a) they would be inconstitutional (b) we would not like them
3. I won't buy any such hardware as a sysadmin because of vendor lock-in and associated costs. I can graft a spreadsheet proving it as a bad business move in 5 minutes. I did it before.
4. People in the USofA may buy stuff again and again but in other, not-so-rich parts of the world, we tend to make our stuff last a little bit more. My government-owned day-work computer is 4 years old and I'll have to cope with it for 2-3 more years. If USB ports were a problem here, they would be disabled in the BIOS and/or soldered.
I probably had more to say, but I'm not feeling very well today.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Look, we can all sit around all day and come up with conspiracy theories about how MS is trying to kill this competitor or that competitor... And some of the time those theories are even going to prove correct because, well, MS *is* exceptionally savy to the point of being bullies and even worse many times... But this article is nothing but FUD from someone on the OSS side of the fence. He might be right in the long-run, but for now it's just a glorified conspiracy theory.
The FUD flows both ways folks, let's not forget that. You think MS is the only one using dirty tricks? The OSS side has a massive contingent of zealots to go along with the truly gifted, intelligent, talented and insightful members of the community, and they many times have a much louder voice than the good ones. MS has plenty of legitimate flaws, but so too does the OSS community. The sooner we all come to that realization, the sooner we might be able to change the world.
This article isn't a good example of fulfilling that goal, indeed it's a good example of what we should be trying to avoid!
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
Granted, I understand that M$ probably does do this. They almost need to in order to survive. but cringley's "dramatic reinactment" of MS employees was a little over-the-top. It sounds like a plot from a cheesy two-bit conspiracy movie. It's pretty hard to take these threats seriously when we're using this kind of hyperbole. I appreciate the content, but lament the delivery method....
Lagito ergo expectabo
Every TV, 13" or larger, sold in the USA, has a v-chip. It's an FCC regulation and mandate. The vendors don't have a choice about it.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I vote: not so crazy. I am of the opinion (and have been for a couple of years now) that they have a top-secret lab in an underground bunker where they are secretly working on a Windows desktop environment running on a Linux kernel, as well as Linux versions of Office and all their main applications.
Why?
That's what I'd be doing if I were them. They can afford to hedge their bets on this one if they are really as scared as everyone says they are. One of the serious advantages of FOSS platforms is because the up-front costs are so low, you can start development before you decide if you have a product or not.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
This story is ripe with bias. Microsoft isn't stupid or powerful enough to force everyone to abandon all of their USB devices.
That's why neither this nor NGSCP (Palladium) are of any concern.
Everyone wants to FUD about how Microsoft is going to make a BIOS that "locks out linux", or a USB standard that locks out old devices. It's not going to happen. 5 years from now, you're still going to be able to run Linux on your computer, and you're still going to be able to access your USB devices in Longhorn and Linux.
Now, certain devices - music players, primarily, will probably be "secure" (DRM encumbered). But you'll probably still be able to use them in Linux, so long as someone writes the drivers. The new Microsoft USB-spec is just a way for media players to confirm to the OS (and DRM framework) that they will obey the DRM restrictions.
It's pointless to debate this anyway. It hasn't happened yet. Remember back in 2001 when Slashdot was spreading FUD about Palladium? As it turns out, we can still run Linux on our computers, and we will be able to do so for the immediate future.
Wouldn't a floppy disk have posed the same problem years ago? Especially since data was a lot smaller back then and you could really fit all your customer data on a 360K double-sided double-density 5.25" floppy?
So basically Microsoft is just realizing a problem that is 30 years old? It's so easy to "hide" a floppy inside a notebook or calendar. The only solution back then was diskless workstations (which is something only Novell did back then, at least for x86).
Personally I have no use for some Windows machine that won't support USB 1.1 and 2.0. From the article it looks like MS is wildly considering not having USB support in Longhorn. And instead substituting something that isn't USB and defining it to be the "new" USB, even though it's not completely backwardly or forewardly compatible with "old" USB. Plain old Linux, MacOS X and Solaris will continue to support USB.
I don't really care if I will no longer be able to get some flakey $3 USB device, I'm fine with paying $30 for an equivalent device of higher quality. It's not like the super cheap commoditized USB devices work in anything but Windows. (and only older versions of windows, since the two-bit asian company isn't updating their buggy drivers)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Yeah, like:
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
D...M..C.A...
And copyrights...
Watch, MS will copyright some key element that allows the OS to interface with the USB devices - prohibiting anyone from making compatible software.
On top of that, if you simply bypass their key element - it's copyright circumvention because it bypasses that security check or whatever that MS implemented.
I'm not saying that's the way it's going to be - but it's a possibility.
In the end, though, it doesn't matter what MS tries to do - they're not going to cripple FOSS. The nastier they get, the less people care for their company and products. That means more people to FOSS and other competition - and less political influence for Microsoft to continue out it's battle. (Not that I want to see MS gone, but perhaps when they're not the biggest kid on the playground they'll have to behave themselves a bit more.)
$9.99* **
*After $90.00 Mail in Rebate.
** USB to Firewire adapter optional.
If you think
So, im confused, even if MS do stop you using the built-in USB-"X" ports (and im not commenting on the idea, methodology or practicality of that) then whats to stop you buying a PCI card with USB ports on it, and just using them for all you legacy USB 1.0 to 2.0 devices under Linux etc?
IMHO, i think that manufacturers will just package generic USB drivers with there devices.
I don't think Longhorn will be shipped by 2020.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
.. if they keep this stupid moves coming.
An average (world wide) joe only cares about playing some games, seeing some pr0n, and little else on his pirated copy on Windows (of course). If MS stop them from continuing their daily routine they will have some serious pissed off users (that currently, allow MS to keep their monopoly). What if that users stop upgrading Windows or even move to Linux? Also if they are trully pissed off they will convert some closer friends too.
From now, every move seems a suicidal one.
The problem here is that Microsoft is acting on a legitimate and actual problem which gives people headaches in the real world.
d f.)
If they they attempt to implement a longhorn only solution, they will likely get so many people up in arms that it will never happen, and as a result another legitimate problem becomes taboo and remains unsolved.
We've seen this already more than once. Just think about harddisks with built in encryption.
I would LOVE for my bios to ask me for the password to my disk so that if somebody steals my laptop they don't get my data.
(Shameless plug: In particular I would love it if a sensible encryption was used, see http://phk.freebsd.dk/pubs/bsdcon-03.gbde.paper.p
Unfortunately, Microsoft tried to own the multimedia market by having harddisks with encryption where only _they_ had the keys.
Now nobody even dares discuss the idea and concept of encryption in the harddisk.
One taboo after the other...
Poul-Henning Kamp -- FreeBSD since before it was called that...
Tenuous? As in, MSFT can do whatever they want and will only get a pro-forma slap on the wrist?
MSFT has emasculated the Department of Justice's anti-trust division. MSFT has nothing to fear except maybe the European Union, who they're scrambling to subvert even now.
By the time this comes out, there could well be a user friendly linux distro as an alternative!
[waves bye bye to karma]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but since USB is just a bus, wouldn't it be possible to make a storage device that announced its presence as something else, like a NIC or a printer, and then a custom driver let you upload to it?
I just cannot see this approach working at all, without securing the entire driver layer and limiting application I/O to the authenticated drivers.
Of source, then the BIOS has to load only authenticated OSes, which means that the digital signatures in the BIOS become the target of a massive, distributed keysearch to crack them so that you can load Linux onto the new machines. And once you can do that, you can patch the Windows install to load non-secure drivers.
And then we're back to square one.
Intel recently tried that rambus and failed. Motherboard makers knew their market and went against the leader. MS has tried soundcards and failed. People stuck to creative labs (soundblaster).
MS has tried to flex it muscles often enough and yet it rarely works and seems to be working less and less. Name a big PC company that is not doing linux however small. Do you really think MS likes that Dell ships linux machines?
If MS really had as much muscle as this guy seems to think then we wouldn't have had a fraction of the linux stories that we have had.
So hardware makers have not bowed to MS before (well not always) so why should they with USB? His scenario just doesn't make sense. You see there is the tiny little problem of people not upgrading their OS. Oh I am not talking about the /. people and their like. I am talking about the millions still running windows 98, according to MS own figures.
Say I make a new device and make it a requirement that you first have to upgrade your OS? Oh yeah that would work. Companies don't even like to say "Windows 98 or later" to avoid scaring away the 95 crowd. Exactly how many products do you see that only work with windows XP SP2? Do you remember how long things like joysticks and mice came with both USB and either a PS/2 or a gameport cable?
Also MS can not exclude old devices. If they could they would have ditced ISA support ages ago. They haven't. If longhorn suddenly wouldn't work with your old MP3 player you wouldn't buy a new one, you simply wouldn't upgrade.
What they can do is create a win-usb. Like those win-modems and win-printers that exist. Are they a threath? Well only if you care about the "my crap piece of cheap tech that everybody told me was crap but it was such a deal and now it doesn't work with linux it sucks" people.
If MS really plans to do it they would fail as they have failed as they and others have failed before when trying to control the PC.
The PC is free and there are to many players who have everything to loose by MS or anyone else gaining control.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
For real. USB drives are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to security. There a hundred other ways that a motivated employee could steal valuable confidential data. And chances are that an employee high enough to have access to that kind of data in the first place is probably more interested in stealing the competition's data...
...then comes all the other ports and all forms of media...
It seems Gates is planning a world where Microsoft own and close the IBM-PC hardware spec.
Now is the time that us free-thinking individuals need to develop a GPL/opensource hardware platform as well as software.
He has completely ignored, if not actively schemed against, the government checks and balances to provide a truly free society and economy.
He'd like us all to believe that a totally unencumbered economy will lead to riches for everyone, but instead it only bolsters the rich 1% and takes us back down the road to feudalism.
From a geek's point of view (And there are many others) - get Bush out, or he'll take your Open Source software away soon.
I've never seen any reason for non-millionnaires to vote with the Republican party. They want to turn the USA into another Mexico - only extremely rich and extremely poor, no middle class at all.
Now that's the kind of crazy I can get onboard with! ;)
;)
I know what you mean, if I had 40 billion dollars lying around earning interest and my ass was hanging out in the breeze over Linux, I WOULD have my software running on Linux. (Actually, I'd have openly embraced it a long time ago, but that's probably why I'm inexplicably poor in comparison to Bill...)
Loading...
If there's a new USB standard by Microsoft that's back compatible with everything, one of two things will happen: it will be ignored (ergo, nothing will happen), or it will be adopted, ergo it will be reverse-engineered or otherwise documented, then redeveloped for Linux, then - guess what - included in the Linux USB modules, if not the base kernel itself, probably sprinkled with holy penguin pee within a few hours of the release if the intellect of the Linux dev people is any indication.
Gotta admit, though - Cringely has really outdone himself.
This sig no verb.
which is how it's usually handled in standards. Not a problem for commercial vendors who just tack the licensing fees onto their product cost. For FOSS, it's a problem.
It's sad that they publically plan on violating the antitrust lawsuit provisions. What's worse, they'll get away with it.
After this Wednesday's "critical" security update what scrambled the BIOS on my notebook, rendering it trash (according to Toshiba, it cannot be fixed, but replaced by buying a new notebook), I know Microsoft is in the business of fucking over everyone in the world. Yes, it took this long for me to figure it out.
I DO have a fix, though. Before I spell it out for you, I want you to know that I have been a Solaris user since the late '80s, been working with Linux since the mid '90s and have been using computers since Microsoft Xenix was sold by Tandy.
My personal solution: I'm sick of this shit. I am using my employer's computer (thanks for the use of the T3 line) to sell off my existing computers. Afterwards, I am cancelling my DSL subscription.
I've had it and Microsoft is the reason. Now, don't think I'm going to go live in a forest somewhere, roasting squirrels over an open fire, no. I'm just removing one source of stress in my life. No more email or spam. No more blue screens of death. No more "This dosen't work in Linux because Microsoft won't allow it to." All gone. This is also my last Slashdot post (sniff).
I'm sure that the removal of so much stress in my life will allow my blood pressure to go down and for me to spend more time with my children. Wish me luck.
r.
---
IMHO, of course.
May the SOURCE be with you.
This is one of the worst articles I've every read. What a load of crap. The MS USB proposal will not hurt Linux in any way whatsoever.
If the Linux community is going to compete against MS, it should move away from the lunitic fringe and concentrate on what really matters: making Linux a robust, stable OS. Linux still has a long way to go in that regard.
Third, and here's where I get crazy, I believe that at some point in the next five years, Microsoft is going to produce Linux software (for crazy reasons that I'll keep to myself until they begin to sound less crazy.)
Why is that even a little crazy? Microsoft has been quietly writing Mac applications for a long time now, and will for the forseeable future. Granted, Windows won't run on Mac hardware, so it's not a direct comparision. However, if Linux does make a deep market penetration with Joe Homeuser or makes it to the desktop of MyCorporation LLC, why wouldn't MS want to offer it's Office suite and other products for those platforms? With Linspire PCs now being sold at Walmart, is it such a large extrapolation to see home users chosing to go down that road in ever growing numbers?
If that does happen, wouldn't it make financial sense for MS to start writing Office, Outlook, etc. for Linux?
My UID is the product of 2 primes.
even with the most suffisticated routers I can ferry the information to a server offsite, unless they block all access, bloody unlikely, any way yes you are correct the proper way to deal with this is not by a new standard but by not allowing writes to mounted USB, Floppy, or Optical drives. In fact all data should be stored on network storage that is secure and redundant. God lord can these people not learn how to administer a network. Why not just make the MS 3270 for windows to be certain that people are unable to do anything. Sensitive data, hell if I can see it I can take it out of there.
Probably not as crazy as you think. I keep telling friends and family that MS should use the Linux Kernel as the basis of their software and then build the user interface and create hooks for their office apps. Simplify their development of a new OS and effectively outsources the costs to everyone but them.
Panic now, beat the rush!
And let's be serious, how many employees really have access to valuable and confidential information?!
And people that have sensitive information are trusted Company employees anyway (or should be). This is a human problem, not a USB/stealing data problem.
I will get on to my HR Dept. It will give them something to do. Nick
How many digital cameras and MP3 players have been (and will be) manufactured which connect to a PC through USB before Longhorn comes out, and don't have any of this trusted bullshit built into it? How many of these devices cost $150, $200, or more? And how many people will feel like shelling out for new ones just so they can work with Longhorn?
I can see USB crippling as possibly being effective in the workplace, but if Microsoft does it in the home edition of Longhorn, nobody's even gonna pirate it (let alone pay for it). Add to that the number of tech support calls they would get from people who bougt it without knowing why their camera isn't working, and it starts to look like a disaster for Microsoft.
the coolest club on
The best standards are ones that are "standard" this means that they are interoperable. There is no point in calling it a standard unless it really is Standard.
However at the same time having open standards can also have a bad side. Being open means that joe cracker could in his many lonely nights without a girlfriend sit down and work out holes in the picture and possibly exploit them. Then the standard would have to change.. This is an example of the DVD standards...
Taking that standart to a programatic level often has issues with incompatibility as well. With certain providers always making thier own Tweaks to standards (in example ipsec).
that the USofA produced up to the present day. really. And IMHO it has produced a lot of crap lately. If my country tries to do something like the DMCA -- which it would have to amend the Constitution to -- I will surely produce a lot of noise. And I'll get out of the country if it passes. To another DMCA-free country and on and on utill everyone everywhere is slave to this USofAn crap.
Seriously. The DMCA is a legal aberration. I had to vent this.
Another one, from which we're similarly protected for a while, is software patenting.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
A fix is useless unless it's both effective AND usable.
For this USB hw fix to be usable, it's not sufficient that it prevents UNAUTHORIZED data-transfer:
the fix must also make it EASY for customers to start using the improved devices for AUTHORIZED transfer.
wrt tfa, "customers" = "corporations": they're the ones who worry about this security issue.
And corporations won't buy it.
Why?
Because it will be too hard to administer.
Even if the new device use new connectors, effective administration will require that PHBs and security-station personnel EXAMINE the devices to confirm that they're the new, safe variety, EVERY time they see someone using or entering with the device.
After years of working as a consultant in large corps, I can tell you that most will simply take the lazy path of banning ALL such devices.
With all the distros existing today, users leaving Windows will most likely get Microsoft's distro. It would be interesting to see such a distro.
"Two wrongs don't make a right. But three rights make a left!" - Cosmo, "The Fairly Odd Parents"
I suspect Microsoft got this idea from the HDMI standard (www.hdmi.org/what/what.asp) that HDTV sets are starting to implement in the place of the traditional DVI interface. HDMI is suppose to prevent rip offs of HD broadcasts.
Ok is it me or is just about every fuckin' industry (even remotely associated with computers, software or hardware - RIAA, MPAA, etc) working double time with some "selected" monopolies...companies (Microsoft, INTEL sorta) to ensure their own monopolies are protected with the next generation of hardware or whatever-ware.
I think we need to develop an IP threat meter system that companies could use to illustrate to hardware and software users when their activities are starting to be recognized as threatening behaviour!
Give me a fuckin' break and start breaking this souless monopolies NOW!
I my country...(******) fair use is still LEGAL!
I don't think MS has any fear of "getting the hell sued out of them." They can stall the procedings until their move has crushed the competition (see all previous disputes) and then offer a token "We're sorry, we won't crush Netscape again" apology.
Getting sued (and being found to be an illegal monopoly) has hardly slowed Microsoft's tactics.
--Coming up with something clever... please wait...
The DMCA is unconstitutional here in the USA, too, but that hasn't stood in its way. Don't get too smugly complacent. Watch out for the creep of DMCA laws in your own country, and support the development of tech that keeps us free from such laws and these marketing conspiracies.
--
make install -not war
This remnds me of a presentation I saw the otherday being presented by M$. It was the positioning of M$ in the industry of tomorrow.
On the slides they showed the complete secured model from USB to Bios and all the layers stacked on top, all the way to the virtual machine layer.
One of the occupants of the meeting joked about linux, which prompted our M$ shill to smile and shift us to the next slide.
That slide showed the complete layer, with Linux running in a VM on the future windows platform. Our presenter then spoke up and proudly announced that M$ supported linux as well as other insecure apps in a VM.
Although for the life of him, he couldn't figure why anyone would want to run Linux, when they could just eliminate that overhead and run a more guaranteed app instead.
Gator/Claria is Spyware.
Given past Microsoft behaviour, they'll aim for a license that locks out the GPL. The only real question is whether their control is enough to make it stick.
The main pushback that I see them getting is that a lot of the embedded devices that want to cooperate through USB are using Linux. From Microsoft's point of view, eliminating them is a bonus. But whether they have the push to do it is an open question.
If they do, then expect to see their lock on the desktop get much tighter.
I, for one, welcome our USB Overlords.
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
I doubt that this will work. The firmware that is in use on most devices is a Linux or BSD derived type of Unix. Making USB incompatible with Linux would exclude the firmware on a lot of devices.
Just because Microsoft's monopoly abuse is well known doesn't mean that new, worse schemes from Redmond aren't news (especially for Nerds). What would you rather read, more happy talk about "trusted computing" utopia?
--
make install -not war
China is supporting the development of a Chinese-centric version of Linux. Assuming it takes off, China carries enough weight in the market-place that there will always be a viable hardware alternative to MS-only devices. Any standard that doesn't support the marketplace in China will die a quiet, unmourned death.
"To make USB ports really secure we'll need a modified USB standard," says one of the geeks. "The USB device makers will love this because they can sell another billion devices. We'll change the BIOS and the OS so that older, non-serialized, devices can be used but just for read-only applications. So you can still hook-up your older digital camera and download pictures. But to upload any data you'll need a new-standard USB device. Not only will these devices be more secure, but we'll earn a royalty on every one."
... again
"And they won't work with Linux," pipes-in a genius from the second row.
Anybody remember those "WinModems" from back when? Don't remember if they are still around but Linux for some time didn't work with those either. Now it's not all that difficult to make one operate just fine. Microsoft can make whatever industry changes they want. DeMoCrAt's can't make it non-operable for long. It's ok to reverse engineer if you are trying to maintain compatibility. Exactly what's going to happen
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
This has to be aimed at companies who love 'bleeding edge'. It would not be a trivial thing to have 'copy control technology in the OS' as the article puts it. Too complicated, too much potential negative user experience, buy-in would take too long, and it's nowhere near bullet-proof. Most large-scale shops have a 3- to 5-year HW upgrade/replacement cycle, never mind the many more smaller shops (and home users) that do it on an ad-hoc and even less frequent basis. In other words, complete changeover will happen at a glacial pace. Putting some sort of 'hardware handshake' will have to take into account not only mobo chipsets, but all the add-on PCI cards out there. And how do they successfully handle hubs? I could easily see a hub that could be jerry-rigged to handle most simple hardware handshakes that MS could come up with. Another thing that's just bound to happen, with all the different microcontroller code out there: Older equipment that hangs when the OS sends the handshake. No, there are just too many ways for this to bite MS if this were turned on for everyone. It's gotta be for the places that want total lockdown.
No one is going to ship an XP only piece of hardware, today.
You mean like the ATI TV Wonder USB 2.0 that was just posted on the front page a couple of hours ago???
Most of the computer hardware is made in Asia. Asia is already leaning toward OpenSource. I think a stunt like this would make them jump all over it. It would prove their concerns that MS wants to dictate their economy and can't be trusted. As far as MB, hardware manufacturers go, we would find that hardware made for US may have this built in, but hardware made for Asia would not. So what happens, people start buying more hardware from Asian importers, much like some Asian movies(Hero).
Then what if an OpenSource standard is created and adopted in Asia, where all the hardware is made, which Asian manufacturers don't have to pay an extra fee to produce.
The OpenSource variant becomes cheaper or has a greater supply
So bring on your marketing bugles Intel and MS push/demand these security features be added, this could be the nail those overzealous linux fanatics were looking for.
Especially if someone is able to crack the MS variant.
I say "Bring it on".
Even if this is true, and by some poof of magic MS is able to convince the right people to implement this, couldn't an adapter be built to bypass this?
You could plug your legacy USB device into the adapter, and the adapter would be compliant with the new version, and, well you get the idea. Or maybe it'll be like DVD where each trusted manufacturer gets a key or something...hrm.
Don't people have anything better to do than putz around with this childish crap? We need to stop fussing and fighting over operating system dominance and start focusing on apps and solving problems -- not causing new ones by making needless greedy obstacles like DRM or this supposed USB design change.
What PC makers (and to a lesser extent device makers) risk with this is irrelevance.
If Microsoft locks in the next motherboard standard, people may stick to the current standard in droves. Maybe I lack imagination, but it seems to me that just about any PC on the market right now is Fast Enough for most everone's daily use. While special purposes (like gaming) need special hardware, there's little reason for the bulk of home or business users to do a performance upgrade on the desktop in the near future. Several companies already thrive on producing processors and machines a generation or two off the leading edge... why would this change?
Several big manufacturers may go along with this, since they need to generate a reason for consumers to upgrade. But not all will, and not all who do will throw out the current open standards.
Cringely's example of IBM and Compaq is a good one. IBM tried to lock in their PC standards while viable alternatives existed, and they got creamed in the marketplace every time. Apple did the same thing, and they got creamed too.
Why should it be different this time? Microsoft could maybe have pulled this off a few years ago, but now all the PC and USB device manufacturers know that viable alteratives to Microsoft Windows exist. (OSX, Linux, BSD.) It's too late.
Surely some manufacturers will place a bet on Microsoft's competitors and support dual or open standards. Those that do may struggle for a time, but they will reap the marketshare reward in the end.
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
Then this is more reason why microsoft should perish.
For them to do even ATTEMPT to do this should incite international furor and uproar. I am shocked that to this DAY so many companies continue to have cozy little relationships with microsoft (lower-casing/deprecation intentional/perpetual with me, at least)-- all in the name of money. Apps cost, but so does support. Charge more for support and services, and less or zero for apps. THEN your real fans will stand out and support you, rather than support you out of "hostagery".
Yet, it is increasingly heartening to see SOOO many nations, militaries, governments, businesses and individuals switching to Linux and F/LOSS. This obviously is the signal that microsoft's days are or SHOULD be numbered. (Let's not see WWIII precipitated because a USN or UK combat system based on windoze decides a looming threat became real, launches an overriding first strike, and blows some ship out of the water or plane out of the sky...It's bade ENOUGH that the USN and UK navies gave electrical subsystems control to windoze, and now, for the past few years windoze has been encroaching and infecting systems. Maybe when a ship FAILS to survive because windoze is a let down (and how many DOD projects have NOT been letdowns?) somebody will in due haste revisit F/LOSS (but locked down/encrypted) must become part of or return to command and control systems where ADA and older languages might be too old.)
If a PERSON were doing this kind of thing being done my microsoft, such a person might be called an 'asshole'. Well, companies are RUN by persons, and companies are accorded the status of person, so what does that make microsoft and the specific leaders of it or the key officers and some employees who don't quit that wretch of a company?
It would be a travesty if businesses, governments and individuals which/who just now embracing Linux for freedom, curiosity, or financial reasons (all of these reasons are rightfully obtainable) suddenly find that microsoft and its henchmen/women decree NOONE has the right to escape the microsoft tax and the microsoft ecosystem. With the cash of and increasing lobbying by microsoft, citizen's votes will be further meaningless. Hell, even San Francisco City Library doesn't appear to have free printer access so I was then not able to use my Linux laptop to print something I needed to give a state office. The library employee on the 4th floor told me I had to get a card, reserve a machine, and use microsoft word. I flatly told her I'll use OpenOffice.org, Star Office or Lotus WordPro from my laptop and send it to the printer, or worse, use windoze and right-click the file and print it without so much as seeing ms' word open up...) So much for taxpayer dollars going to proprietary solutions. Other libraries, I know, negligently or haplessly foist the same perils upon their citizens, too.
This is tantamount to declaring WAR, whether upon governments or upon people. What are we supposed to do? Keep legacy windoze boxes lying around, and then be forced to continue supporting gates and his bad business model?
Your business model is FLAWED, gates. Wake up and realize this and change your attitude, your intransigent, stalward, greed-based hegemony and be harmonious with the emerging ecosystem changes. If your company CAN NOT cope, then, as with so many other businesses, then it must DIE.
To paraphrase what someone posted here a day or two ago: Linux is the scratch response to an itch. Obviously, gates and the henchmen/henchwomen, you just don't get it: Your business model is FLAWED, and the suffering, poor, and hungry who DESERVE to ride the train of technology don't need your ficition, your encumberances, and your bad approach to dealing with the fact that you're a sore player. You hoodwinked IBM, you keelhauled non-conforming moms and pops, you practically EXTORTED manufacturers to accept ONLY your o/s, and untold BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars have been SPENT on your proprietary warez, and now, to paraphrase what we Nav
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
couldnt some hardware maker who supports linux enough, or maybe someone with enough resources, just make a usb device that is all serialized nicely but has a usb plugin on the back of it? that way, you plug your usb drive into it and it talks to microsoft, and microsoft thinks its valid
yap
I seem to recall that Microsoft (and Intel) pushed the original USB on the PC manufacturers years before Windows was ready to support it. Win95 certainly didn't. Win95B claimed to but not really worth a darn. I think Win95C might have, but that was about the time that Win98 came out. NT didn't support it until NT 5 (er, Win2K). This time around, PC manufacturers are going to wait.
;-)
(And don't even get me started on Firewire
-- Alastair
Galactic Serial Bus
I'm not, in any way, disagreeing with your assessment. But I think what will happen with the public at large is: If the financial burden is light enough, they'll go along with it. Microsoft just needs to find the threshhold of pain the public is willing to withstand and shoot just under it.
IMHO (and this jusy may be because I've got a good paying job) I have no problems paying DishNetwork for their protected access to AV content. How is THAT different from a Microsoft Cartel doing the same thing for the same (or less) money?
Sooner or later, you're going to want to jump over to that processor that's 5 times faster, and the drive that holds a TB or two, or your system will fail and you're stuck buying the stuff whether you want to or not.
It's _kind_ of like the Froenhofer(sp?) MP3 licensing...did you notice it when you bought your mp3 player? I'm fairly certain you DID pay for the priveledge of using mp3s.
As for buying stuff over and over, that's the primary tennet of 'planned obsolecense' economics.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Surely other businesses would rather Microsoft was not the all powerful monopolistic force that it currenty is? At some point businesses are going to either have to worry about their products being subsumed into Microsoft Research or alternately stand up to them before that happens (look at what MS did to Sega).
I think large organisations like Sony, IBM, Sun and others should be seriously thinking about cutting MS out of any markets that they possible can - perhaps creating a standard linux OS between them would be a helpful start. I'm suprised other businesses don't think like this and do it because Microsoft certain does and IS.
Boy. Talk about marketing! I wonder who paid him so much to hype this all up.
:-)
Lets think about this. Unless Redmond is planning to again consolidate and control the marketplace with respect to USB devices, this whole story is much ado about nothing.
Fact is that Microsoft and Intel MUST PUBLISH THE SPECIFICATIONS to the "new" USB standard. They have to, otherwise, the board and device manufacturers will never use it, and it will die much like many of the older so-called standards were. Like Microchannel!!!
Here's another tip of the berg too. If they only release the spec's to "some" vendors, and only with a non-disclose and/or non-compete clause, then they'd (Microsoft and possibly Intel too) be legally guilty of collusion. Ask your friendly lawyer to research that one!
Ahh Go on Microsoft. Threaten all you want! We'll make more!!!
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
That's where Mono comes in. By the time they're finished rewriting Office in .NET, Mono will be up to speed. Voila, MS Linux, and MS Office for Linux.
When there's enough traction, they'll fork it, break it, and everyone who want to run MS Office for Linux will need to run MS Linux.
We'll just go firewire...
"Talk minus action equals nothing" - Joey Shithead, D.O.A.
"Talk minus action equals
As long as Microsoft has >90% of the market, its natural that Windows will work with new hardware standards first and Linux developers have to beg manufacturers for documentation or reverse-engineer the interfaces. I don't think any specific explanation is required beyond market forces. Would the author prevent Microsoft from taking initiative in developing any new technology?
The good news is that IBM will probably want to sell Linux servers with working USB for external storage and contribute the drivers for the rest of us to leech. Also, Longhorn home users will not bother with security, so there will be some mode where no device signatures are enforced. Linux just needs to support that mode, which will not need any secret keys ala CSS to function.
By which time of course USB will be a distant memory.
Other changes by that time may prevent the MS-DOJ from taking any action against them.
Most of this has been said before in this thread, but this "solution" is bad for at least the following reasons:
1) Older USB printers will need to keep functioning, and if I can print, I can pretend to print to a memory stick.
2) Newer PCs will need to run with older OSes for companies that standardize on at-least-one-year-old OSes
3) the overall problem is solvable TODAY by system policies and/or device-driver enhancements, see below.
If I buy an expensive ink-jet printer in 2005, I'm NOT going to throw it away in 2006 just because "output is not allowed."
If my company buys me a new PC a month after Longhorn comes out, my IT people will probably want XP Pro not Longhorn on it, at least for a few months.
If system policies can't shut down access to the USB ports, a custom driver can. The most straighforward solution is just to have a policy configuration to allow rw, ro, or no access USB devices of various types or various models. For example, no access to disk-like devices that aren't on a "white list," r/o access to whitelisted devices such as popular digicams or mp3 devices, and rw access to printer devices. This will deter all but the most determined employees. Combine this with CMOS settings to prevent booting from USB and "problem 99% solved." Trusting your employees will take care of the other 1%.
I don't know if such policies are possible in today's MS-Windows, but if not this can be changed soley in software, either in MS-Windows only or with the help of modified device drivers.
Hmm, maybe someone in the Linux community can write this solution up and "beat Longhorn" to the market:
Attention Corporate America:
Are you tired of your employees stealing data through their USB wristwatches? Use ACME Linux, with built-in USB firewall with an easy to use interface. Featuring USB-block to stop unauthorized access in its tracks and USB-alarm to page you when someone tries. Also featuring USB-alert to e-mail managers of authorized USB use so they can flag unusual patterns....
Unlike other solutions to this problem, this works with your existing hardware investment, and with additional sofware from companies like vmware is works with your existing software investment too.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Speaking of Revere, this makes me lament that the world IS so economically intertwined at the computer level.
It would be NICE to see some strong, firey international backlash against microsoft, AND against any ms shills in congress who let ms cozily sail by on the USB "security enhancements".
If microsoft (lower-casing/deprecation intentional/perpetual) continues on this track, it will be tantamount to giving the US an upper hand on manufacturing and global security. It would be shameful if the overseas contract manufacturers knuckled under and caused the creation of umpteen billions of ms-only devices to the point that even THEIR own governments are further threatened by the very EXISTENCE of ms.
If someone put a gun to my head and said, "NAME us a big, juicy, media-worthy target in 5 seconds or we'll shoot that lady, that baby, and your leg...", well, there's only ONE company I'd name. And, I'd say, "Don't forget to get their bank account and backup tapes, too."
I wouldn't pull the PHYSICAL trigger, I'd just say make sure that sow is put out of its misery so the rest of us don't get mad-american-tech-cow disease.
The next global threat is not terrorists: it's:
-- an uncontrolled ms or ms-copy-cat
-- dangerous, reckless, bought-off, corrupt politicians, their lobbyists, all or most of whom who don't have any vision more than to grab MORE dollars and MORE power.
-- a portion of the indifferent rich
-- the rest of us SHEEP kept too busy to wake up
David Syes
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
...richie - It is a good day to code.
You made a mistake. The proper designation is "Department of Trust, Anti-Justice Division."
So maybe this is just a sysadmin feature to prevent copying data to removable devices. I can see where some admins would want that. And if that feature doesn't work under Linux, then I can see them disallowing Linux on their networks.
If it's based on some 'patented' command set, then it's unimplementable in Linux. The drive may work, but you can't turn on it read-only mode. Or some such thing.
If MS succeeds in getting all the USB manufacturers to build in some new feature that only Windows users can access, Cringley's point is still valid. Your hardware may work under Linux, but not all of its features.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Cringely walks a very thin line between troll and pundit. The only divider is that line at the top of your browser which says "pbs.org". Can we get a Cringely topic in the prefs? His columns appear here with some frequency.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.
Maybe, just maybe, the general population will start to realize how much better the OSS equilivants are.
# fuser -v
#
That is real scary!
After Edison invented the gramaphone - one needed to pay him (or the instrument company) once and the record company many times to buy new recordings. Well that has existed so long, until now.
Suddenly if someone says, you will have to play a song (on an updated disk called a CD), on a music system (all purchased legally) - but now you have to pay a yearly fee to enjoy this. What a thief! The others vendors are asking one time money for their products that are necessary - and here comes a crook telling me that just to listen to the things I bought, I would have to pay a weekly/annual amount to a third party?! It's the typical "mafia" mentality of the early 20th century!
To do business you need to pay a gang-lord some money. Why? There is no just cause, except that you just wanna continue to enjoy the freedom to do business. Out of fear, that no one can or is willing to protect your freedom? What happened to the anti-monopoly laws!
Well this is what is happening here. Our freedom to choose, to practice freely is being hampered by a third party called MS-Corp., who wants an yearly allowance (called lisence) just to let us do what "they" think is allow-able! Imagine an embeded OS in your fridge, washing machine, cell phone..
Oooh! that is unbearable! To do anything that runs on electron flow, you need to pay MS-Corp.? Anything that has even a semblance of a microprocessor can be taken over. Then to do the everyday things in life you need to pay, weekly/monthly/annually! It's not like Federal tax, or State tax that is taken from you to give you some necessary conviniences that cannot be provided otherwise - like roads/postal/police/fire dept etc. What will MS-corp give you in return? It is an un-necessary tax burden on you, just for the fact that you need to do something. You don't get back anything in return for the money. You can survive with a washing machine/phone/TV/CD-player/DVD-player - "without" using a OS-with a lisence!
Why does one need to pay for this crappy mafia OS just to have the freedom to live and work as we want to? In the end - the quality of that product is also in question! Crap! Pay for gathering garbage - are we out of our minds?
I built an crm-like app for a former employer that didn't trust *any* of its sales people, and we thought we had it locked down tight. Then we found out that before leaving the company, some of them had simply taken screenshots of each customer profile, pasted it into Word, and printed. Lots of paper, sure, but what did they care? D'oh! Needless to say, the next version was designed to capture the Print Screen keystroke and ignore it. But then what's to stop them from using a digital camera to take a picture of the screens?
But, it most likely would NOT be GNU/GPL/LGPL or even msGPL.
It is very unlikely that microshaft/microsoft (lower-casing/deprecation of ms' name intentional/perpetual) would EVER be that grand or giving. They would clench-fistedly pound the life from anyone who exposed ms' code as if it were GPL/et al. I would not be surprised if a veritable LOAD of GNU/BSD/LGPL/ and similar code pervades ms (albeit very tidy in appearance at points, but still dodgy/sketchy in others) warez.
Fully exposed, I surmise ms will be a naked wolf. A RICH, naked wolf, but at least defanged.
It's time to threaten or carry out attempts to legally and technologically defang, neuter, spay, declaw, and shave/fleece ms until it is no more a threat than a caged monkey coming down from PCP binge.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
"... I'm pro-gun and pro-life..."
You really couldn't make this stuff up.
I'm sitting here at work, posting a comment on Slashdot, and as I type this, a Lexar JumpDrive is plugged into my keyboard.
;-D
To think that at some companies there is at least one immediate-termination violation here is frightening. My company seems to love the fact that I take stuff home; as an hourly employee, I don't get paid for the work I do at home!
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
"He has completely ignored, if not actively schemed against, the government checks and balances to provide a truly free society and economy."
Hey, Mr. Bush. Here ist Bill, from Micro$oft,
u know. There is a way how we can defeat these
Linux-Communists, all we need is an closed eye.
The cheque is in the post, OK?
I think what you expect from the governments is
an illusion. They made software-patents legal,
they'll make "security-enhancing" hardware-features legal...
Given Microsoft's already tenuous relationship with the Department of Justice's anti-trust division
Sure, like the fact that Microsoft likes to be on top all the time, and the DoJ wants a little more lube some of the time, when they're in bed together.
Maybe next year this won't be the case, but for now, MS has nothing to fear from the US DoJ.
--LWM
This is the problem with having "standards" put out by people other than the IETF and IEEE
MS and Intel originally worked on USB. The hardware and Windows drivers were available for nearly a year before the iMac. But, no one made any devices to plug in. That's because, regardless of who is behind it, no one in the Windows market wants to be first movers on new hardware technology (software is another matter). There are already "good enough" solutions for the security.
Without another iMac like transformation of the market this would NEVER take off primarily because existing software and hardware solutions to the problem will be considered good enough.
However, I bet new USB devices wont work with old USB ports. Before you say 'no way, wont happen', this happens all the time... New devices won't work with your old pc.. ( or OS ) and it forces upgrades of PC hardware, which will of course have the new ' content control' parts.. ( example fierwire.. new ports do take hold in the market place )
In time most devices will be DRM-USB, and if Microsoft flexes its IP muscle, it can stop all 3rd party drivers for all existing devices.. So there is a concern..
All of this talk is just postponing the inevitable anyway, where just a few companies will have effective control over pretty much all digital devices, and the content they allow us to consume ( remember we are just 'consumers' to them ).. We may not see it in our life time, but our children will..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
A "Standard" is supposed to allow all similar devices to act/interact the same. WHen the internet was first beginning, a tonn of companies were making propriatary devices. This was bad because your CISCO router wouldn't work with your HP network switch. Standards were set in place so that ALL devices could work in a network/internet enviroment.
A "Standard" isn't supposed to descriminate based on Operating System. At that point, its not a standard, but a propriatary set of rules used to further monopolise windows.
MICROSOFT EMPLOYEES: Save yourselfs and write letters to Bill that this is a low blow and has damaged his PR. (I thought i had no respect left for microsoft after XP SP2, but i was wrong. This has clearly has disgusted me.)
INTEL EMPLOYEES: Withdraw yourselfs from this bad idea. If MS is the only one who likes this so-called "Standard", then you should have no part of it. If this is not possible, deny support vocally. No one can stop your basic freedom of free speech.
You are confusing me with someone who cares.
Control over plug and play is highly desireable for other reasons, such as debugging problems, as well as security. It is not limited to USB. serial and parallel port devices cause just as many problems, and it would be very easy to tap into the network interface, but that could be dealt with by a simple hardware lock making it difficult to unplug network cables to gain access, without leaving evidence. Otherwise you just need a smallish PDA or similar with an ethernet interface, running Linux and Samba, to pose as the Primary Domain Controller, and whatever else the Monopoly OS needs to see in order to log a user in. In fact, you could have a fake server which would validate the user as an administrator!
Of course in Linux, or BSD, it is straightforward to remove a few bits from the kernel source (if necessary, the USB handling may be in userland, again things can be removed or modified) so that unknown or unauthorised devices can not be accessed. The Convicted Monopolist is reacting in their usual incompetent and deceitful way to the fact that once again, something can be done in most free OSs that is lacking in Windoze. A medium to large organisation can easily customise their Linux desktops any way they want, including locking the floppy, USB and anything else down as tight as they require.
The proper way to do the thing might be for the workstation OS to have to ask the server, hopefully secure, for permission to add a device. Surely that is simple to implement?
It is also probable that the major semicinductor manuafcturers, who by making the hardware, or otherwise, actually control the realisation of the USB standard, will have nothing to do with this. Why spend millions re-engineering every USB chip, some of which sell for negligible cost. The semiconductor industry is far, far bigger than Sir Bill's ego, never mind his bank balance. They need to make profit, even on low-margin commodity items. And why would they, and the peripheral manuafacturers, some of whom are also semiconductor manufacturers, want to risk adverse publicity due to the usual round of bugs that will happen when this is introduced? And, of course, with the rise of Linux, extrapolated from current trends, they would lose 10 to 20% of possible sales volume. It makes no sense whatsoever from the hardware point of view, when it is (or should be) far, far easier to fix the OS.
I work in a secure environment with a private network, and have a separate PC nearby for outside access. The biggest risk to security is the floppy drive. I have somewhere an adaptor which I used with my old digital camera to read potentially large memory cards in a floppy drive, it also had write capability.... Win2000 is set up to need administrator privilege for just about everything, and I don't think it would allow a USB drive, although I am not willing to try, as I would lose my job and probably go to jail, even if no data was stolen. But I might ask the IT department to try it on Monday, just to prove that the system is already secure against casual attempts at least. We all know that a determined hacker could penetrate any Monopoly OS, given time and a way to get to the hardware.
"I'm pro-gun and pro-life."
Intersting...*g*
"I also want lower taxes and smaller government."
*LOL* Bush lowered the taxes for _millionaires_.
But not for the normal guy...
And the governmental apparat has been exploded under his leadership. Fat, swollen and opaque.
If your job is to have people read what you write, you'll want to stick your neck out and say things people react to.
Its not like someone is going to call him on it two years from now, and point out that vendors found it easy to support both the standard and non standard methods.
The block, is that you won't be able to upload into a usb device from windows -- nothing says the usb device has to enforce the block the other way.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
Well, call me crazy but that's not pro-life.
If you support Bush, you support what he's doing in Iraq. Which is, he is losing the illegal war, which was unjustified as they have conclusively reported that there was no WMD in Iraq.
Let's not mod by opinion, m'kay?
Hmm. It was awfully easy to hack my Xbox, even though I had to solder on the new BIOS chip to 6 different points on the motherboard, so I say to MSFT as W. says to the terrorists. BRING IT OWN! WE'RE GONNA SMOKE 'EM OUT OF DER CAVES! MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Seriously, I don't have any faith in MS being able to secure ANY of their products, even at the HARDWARE level. There is always a workaround.
Unlimited growth == Cancer.
So tell me how many linux distributions with a normal install from the distribution can play a DVD?
In particular how many free ones. Sure you can go download the decss code afterwards but for your average Joe user they aren't goign to understand that.
This likely is a big deal and likely will hurt Linux just as DVD decryption issues have to some extent. Many people don't watch DVDs but how many USB devices does the modern computer use.
XP only hardware: ATI Radoen 8500 All in wonder DV. Combines a video tuner and a video card into one device. On the windows platform only XP is supported and a abandonware 2.4 kernel module sorta (read flakey) implements it on linux.
regarding " Exactly how many products do you see that only work with windows XP SP2?". One would be too many. Just the rumors that SP2 will or might break some older applications has scared hundreds of companies and SysAdmins from applying that "patch". The way to interpret that reluctance is "score a point for MS alternatives" [which now include their own legacy OS products]. The only way they are going to solidfy their eroding market share is having a solution to security problems that is not itself yet another problem. And it is increasingly the case that that solution would have to be technichally better than Linux or OS X can provide. The market has become too sophisticated for for MS to torpedo competition by sneaking in self-serving "standards".
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
I read the story, but my take on it is this: It's jaded overreaction. My arguments:
Microsoft has historically bent over backwards to make their software backwards compatable. You can run all sorts of outdated hardware on the Windows OS. The only reason that current versions of Windows won't install on a 386 (via software lockout) is because MS doesn't want your computing experience to be ruined because of hardware issues. ("Hey, W2003 is crappy because it runs too slow on this 386!")
Think about it, you still can run crusty old 16 bit apps on windows. Unless they had pressure from customers, why not do away with them, amd make people use software that would be more stable in a modern OS? So, my first point is, MS would get real heat if the tried to aggressively obsolete things. (gad-I just verbs a noun again.)
Second, don't forget that MS lives under the shaddow of the DoJ case. While they got off with a wrist slap, no sane manager at MS (Yes, I know...) is going to suggest a course of action that causes them to tangle with anti-trust issues again. BG has stepped down as #1 cheese. Why would he do that? Because he wants to get back to working with coders? Or, because his leadership style was percieved as too agressive? That is a pretty big step to take unless you REALLY have an issue with leadership.
While MS would like LINUX to go away, they aren't about to do anything that could get them into another round of lawsuits. Litagation is expensive and risky, even to Bill. Most companies with an ounce of brainmatter use it only as a last resort.
The big C writes some interesting stuff, but this strikes me as a little too reactionary. The sky isn't falling on LINUX (yet).
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Finally a reason to go and get a windows box. I have had all of my corporate secrets stolen 4 times in the last month via a usb device.
This seems like the sort of problem that can be addressed with a conventional AAA approach: Authentication - Verify the user is who she says she is. Authorization - Verify the user is authorized to boot/write the device. Accounting - Log when files are written by the user. All these tasks should happen completely independant of the media. Media serialization/identification could be made part of this scheme, but only the truely paranoid would ever need require it.
...looks like flamebait... Yup it's flamebait.
Slashdot - Where the slash is most definitely to the left.
Since the Department of Homeland Security has labled -Windows- as the insecure OS that people are warned not to use, I suspect that that 'agreement' could be sued.
Is it just me but since MS is considered a person, isn't illegal to sue them for the same crime twice? I mean, it's all based on what they did to Netscape, etc all over again.
It depends on wether or not you had enough umpulse control to not actually run through the office like that.
If you actually did it, that's bad. =)
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Nothing in this universe can technically prevent to do in software what can be done in hardware. And vice versa. Future Secure USB emulator in some old PDA will do the job well.
More, I bet my hat the OSS implementation of anything standardized will be more compatible, more secure and less buggy than Microsoft one. Linux drivers included.
Funny part of it is, banning USB disks will bring on alredy existing technology: ethernet disk drives. SATA over IP. With Microsoft's history of networking code nonquality, there is nothing to be afraid of.
There you are, staring at me again.
I'm not getting something in this discussion. Or, more likely, the powers-that-be are intentionally ignoring this.
It seems that there is no need to make hardware changes to USB to prevent unauthorized writing of data to external USB memory. At least in the UNIX/Linux/MacOSX model, you could just make the automount daemon (or windows equivalent) require certain privileges (e.g. specific group membership) before allowing r/w access to an external device. If computers installed in a corporate/secure environment had this requirement, it would prevent external filesystems from having data written to them. For a home/nonsecure environment, the daemon responsible would allow anyone to attach r/w.
Devices (such as HID things like mice) at present don't store any data, so allowing r/w access to such components would be harmless. At least in a corporate environment, it would also be easy enough to require that your mouse be a specified model/brand and (maybe in the future) even present credentials if requested by the computer before attaching. This would make it at least quite difficult for people to figure out a backdoor by storing data in a bogus mouse-like device somehow. This still doesn't require a hardware change, since all you would be doing is asking the mouse to sign a message, for example, to verify it is authentic before allowing it to interact with the system, and on systems where security was being checked, the mouse would just be a regular mouse.
Setting things up this way would make it easy for a user with administrative privileges (who, presumably, has the authority to transfer data on and off the computer), to use external devices, but would make it quite difficult for the regular users to do so.
Is there an obvious security hole in this model, assuming that unauthorized users cannot find methods of privilege escalation?
http://www.ati.com/products/radeon8500/aiwradeon85 00/faq.html says you are wrong, with Windows Me/2000/XP support:
Direct Quote -
Q5: What operating systems does the ALL-IN-WONDER® RADEON® 8500 support?
A5: The ALL-IN-WONDER® RADEON® 8500 supports Windows® Me, Windows ® 2000 and Windows ® XP.
Do some research before spouting off like an idiot.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Winmodems exist because they allow one to replace electronic components (comparitively high marginal cost of production) with software components (comparitively low marginal cost of production). I think that in the long run, we will see open source drivers for these, but they may be at least a few years out. Also the complexity of the software involved is not to be dismissed here.
Even today, controller-based modems are at least twice as expensive as controllerless (software) modems, and in some cases the cost difference is more like three or four times. This is not only an economy of scale issue.
I don't think that any sort of USB address change would or security fix would be enough to hurt Linux seriously.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Hello,
:-)
;)
I think this is not a problem, becouse if this happens there will absolutetly be an adapter that converts "MS Security Patched USB" to standard USB. Then you can plug your new USB device to Linux computer without any problems...
And Bill boy will love the adapter
-Zipi
... is that there will be a lot more linux friendly usb devices on ebay for cheap! One of the best things about Linux is that it works on OLD hardware very well, so why should we care about 2006 hardware standards, when most of us can run webservers on '96 hardware ;-) If we need more power than that, there's always the .... wait for it .... beowolf cluster of '96 hardware. I'm also a little insulted that Cringely ends with the thrown gauntlet to the hacker community. You can't shame M$ for using FUD and in the same article, try to use it to inspire us to hack harder or call our congressman. Just ask me to do something straight up - my tin hat blocks all that jedi mindtrick mumbo jumbo anyway,
geek out
If they aren't in the works, it sounds like about time to do it.
I have access to valuable/confidential data, here at this very computer.
It isn't only the high and mighty management that needs information to do their job.
I sure am glad my iPod uses firewire...
Cringely knows very little about computers or technology.
But this idea isn't a technology article.
He is using a technical example to explain a competative strategy. The important part is the behaviour, not the technical issue.
I just have to laugh at how much hyping up is being done to the whole "using USB to steal data"
I mean, yeah, some companies and most government agencies are all paranoid about what goes in and out, but every place I've worked since '96 or so has just about insisted that I take my laptop home with me so I can work nights and weekends.
I'm not saying that it isn't being misused, but my point is that there are a zillion ways to "steal data" but for the vast majority of home users, and probably a large percentage of business users, the much MUCH greater threats are VBS, IE vulnerabilities, Stupid users opening unknown attachments, and lost productivity from spam.
It seems like a big, expensive, invasive solution looking for a problem.
The Digital Sorceress
Like we won't reverse engineer it in a week or so.
irc.enterthegame.com #linux
You got that right! In return for joining Bush's coalition of the willing, Australia's reward was a free trade agreement with the US. But before that takes effect, Australia has to harmonize their copyright and IP laws with those of the US - including an Australian version of the DMCA and software patents.
Don't take my word for it - read about it here*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Only the clueless equate 'gun owner' with 'murderous savage'. Looks like you're one of them.
Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
Is the linux crowd so small that this would roll?
Are Open Source enthusiasts so quiet and sedate that they wouldn't have a field day with this?
Buck up buddy, there's certainly enough Yang for their Yin.
Direct away from face when opening.
Wait for a chinese MOBO that will enable/disable the DRM feature.
That's marketing, and that enable/disable feature is something A LOT of people would be willing to pay for.
Change the /etc/fstab file so the USB device is mounted read-only. Or so only root can mount it at all.
Sure, Microsoft may WANT this to happen, but it won't. I for one would not run out to get a new MS approved DVD player just to play the newest movies, and keep the old one so I could still play my older movies. Then I guess I would have to have 2 CD players in my car for older CDs and newer 'secure CDs'. Nope, I don't see this happening, now or ever. As controlling as the MPAA and RIAA are of their products, they're not about to support a system that would allow Microsoft to grab ahold of them by the short and curlies.
Only the clueless equate 'pro choice' with 'murderous savage'. Looks like you're one of them.
So in the next Sandra Bullock (isn't she dead?) movie the supersecret sweet young lawyer/ninja/hacker breaks into the evil corporate network and downloads 500 gabillion volumes of incrminating documents showing they purposefully dumped mercury in the school lunches for 5 decades. In order to do this we'll a brand new gizmoid that you can zap a teragazigabyte instantly.
After of couse, randomly typing a 384 character string password in, on the third try successfully on the screen that says SECURITY PASSWORD in 4 inch high letters.
n/t
My wife is a D.A., and uses a 486 Compaq that I bought for her when she (that was my gf at the time) passed the exams for her job TEN YEARS AGO (down here District Attorney jobs are gotten by exams, not vote).
It's one of those "integrated" Presarios, and (remember this is pre-iMac era) altough they were expensive, I tought it would be easier for her to assemble wherever she had to go (DA's are sent to small-town districts before they can apply for a transfer -- even today, 10 years later, my wife is the DA of a sub-100,000-people district -- initially, she was sent to a district 700km (~450miles?) away from our home town)
It has 8Mb of RAM, 270Mb HD, and is used up to the present day for the purpose it was bought initially: producing 40+ pages/workday of legal documents.
BTW, I bought it together with a HP500C printer which is still active today, too, and that prints the mentioned workload, and that never ever gave any glitch. I only buy HP cartridges for it, if it matters.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Of backwards compatibility.....
Microsoft developers work long and hard on new operating systems so that old apps won't be broken by an OS upgrade. Microsoft knows that it's dominance (much like the x86 architecture) comes from it's backwards compatibility.
Now microsoft wants to push a new USB standard that forces everyone to upgrade their USB devices? How many people will toss out last years scanners, cameras, iPods, floppy drives, flash card readers, and countless other devices just because Microsoft says so?
Microsoft better tread lightly here. They are reaching a point where most people see no benefit from upgrading operating systems or office suites. Forcing people to throw away good hardware will almost certainly hurt sales of their software.
-ted
Although I doubt that Microsoft would want the negative press that surrounds the critical bugs, it does make a convenient way to create forced obsolesence; have a 'vulnerability' that is only discovered after you have EOLed a particular version.
For example, "Gee, you can keep using win95/office97/etc., but we are no longer releasing security updates, so you are likely to get a virus or worm, if you do."
McFly777
- - -
"What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" -Marilyn Pittman
Tin foil hats will be handed out durring the next break...
The firmware that is in use on most devices is a Linux or BSD derived type of Unix
Nope. While I'm sure you could point to some examples, most USB devices use very lowly microcontrollers such as 6800 derivatives or dedicated USB Controller / CPU combos from Cypress and the like, and have only the thinnest of OS-like infrastructure. The reason is simple -- most USB devices don't have to do very much actual work, at least not the kind that would require a large OS like Linux or BSD.
While there may be USB devices based on Linux or BSD, these are by far the exception and not the rule.
People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
First the assault on linux is legal by trying to outlaw it by patents,drm, you name it they will try it. But it doesn't really look like it is coming from them it is coming from their "business partners". now they are going to try to basically make linux a non factor with new standards that they will try to force down our throats. they have no business in the hardware business - why don't try to write a good os first - maybe bush and DOJ will see this and stop these monopolistic tactics - oh wait - nevermind
I've got 5:1 that this will get cracked in 24 hours from release.
Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.
Simply put: What this guy says is NOT going to happen.
I'm leaning towards FUD, just by his tone in the article..
I am the maverick of Slashdot
Apple anyone?
Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
May I mention 2000 selection of GWBush, Iraq war w/o UN Security Council approval? For that matter, Beta. On the third hand, it is equally unlikely that security hacks will not become widely available and implemented, ala DVD encryption. Remember, there are two Norwegian citizens in US federal prison for initially hacking that, but DVD copying/burning software came with my current OS.
They are in talks to get the RIAA to support a format to make CDs unreadable in machines other than those running Windows (I presume this would include insecure versions of Windows as well). They are working to get the MPAA to agree to allow them to distribute movie materials via WMP which will likely lead to DVDs "protected" with MSFT products.
What will this do? Simple. Created the biggest push for piracy since napster, it's nieve to think this technology will do anything in the least to prevent piracy. Didn't work with CSS. Won't work with this. If you can watch it or hear it, there will be a way.
Though this isn't anything new with the microsoft model, screw the paying customer in their favor in the guise of anti-piracy.
This is another one of the reasons why I've converted over to OSX. Apple will not want to go down this route and may try and resist it, but if it becomes inevitable then they will embrace it for the benefit of their customers. And it will be easier for them than for Linux vendors because the blend of licensing models they use gives them more room to maneuver in situations like this.
I know that the moral thing to do here is to resist and fight the good fight; but the other half of me that just wants to use my computer and not be bothered by any of this sh*t feels secure that my future interests are in good hands no matter what happens.
Again, no sign of creation
The problem is once this happens, musicians will have to get "distribution" licenses from MS. This means MS will technically become a record label. With such a license your music won't play on other computers so you won't be able to distribute your music. Even if you distribute it FREE, because it'll cost MONEY to GIVE AWAY your music.
Yay for the free market! Nuke Microsoft before it's too late.
Ok, I spend too much time on Fark. I read that as "Microsoft's disastro.
seg fault
OK, let's assume the worst thing possible happens and Microsoft actually does get a standard like this implemented and built into every new computer out there.
What's to stop some enterprising device manufacturer from creating a USB bridge that has a trusted connection on the "B" side that goes to the machine, and an "A" side with four regular old-style completely-writable ports? The bridge would take the write requests from the machine, acknowledge that "yes I am a trusted device" and then send the write requests on to the legacy ports.
Or you might be able to drop an old-style USB PCI card into a new-fangled machine and just use the ports on that card to do legacy USB interaction.
Or have BIOSes designed so the necessity for the hardware handshake can be turned on and off, like CPU IDs.
Personally I think that as software problems go this one isn't much.
Someone you trust is one of us.
So we stop using Universal Stupid Bus devices and go back to Firewire.
Carry on, nothing to be see here you insensitive clod.
It hardly matters what MS does to USB. Apple has gone to firewire and it's far, far better. USB is a dead-end road; let them go play alone down there. Firewire is where it is *at*, folks. USB is so old school.
If this were Usenet, I'd killfile the lot of you.
Let's see, I believe the Xbox was "locked down" to prevent people from using it as a cheap console-style PC right? And let's all admit that as far as security hardware control goes, it's been a real success.
On a similar note, it seems that Microsoft's record at coming up with and implementing hardware standards is a little spotty at best (think about how well-used uPNP is these days).
My point is that the market will dictate whether or not this becomes widely used - Ma & Pa computer user are not going to be buying a new PC every year just because microsoft says "jump", just as there son and/or daughter will be more than happy to "fix" that old computer to make sure that there usb key fob still works fine.
Whether it's a hardware or software hack, there's always going to be ways around any system such as this, and I have faith that Linux developers will find a [legal] way to address this issue if it comes up. Oh and seriously, some references would be nice when I read this kind of hyperbole. Don't know where he obtained his journalism credentials, but I bet I could get my rocket scientist diploma from the same place with no problems.
"Nokia is not a country, it's the capital of Finland!" -Moderated "Informative". Yeesh.
Hmm, big difference between the MS and compatible manufacturers and Apple.
Only Apple makes Apple hardware and it specifically makes the OS to run on that Hardware alone. They make no bones about it. But they do comply with standards, have sought to make open ones and certainly have not followed the 'we want to own you' strategy of MS. It's to their benefit that standards for communicating with and interacting with machines on a network are open standards because of their position in the market. Duh. The biggest difference is intent.
MS, on the other hand and the PC cartel that they wag, are in a position to set what ever standards they think the suckers, err public, will buy.
Now, some have said by golly the DoJ will never let this happen! they'll go after them for monopolistic activities, blah, blah. I imagine they will have a chat but it will be more along the lines of describing to MS the way in which they WILL grant the DoJ access to what ever goodies MS implements. Did you really think the original trial was about shutting down MS? Really? I have a bridge for you. The Fed (as any bureaucracy) seeks to enlarge it's sphere of power. Nothing new here. Computers and the internet are nascent challenges to federal hegemony over media, technology, etc. And no, this isn't about a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy nor about an equally Vast (if a bit more disorganized, he) Left-Wing Conspiracy. Just the Federal bureaucratic animal protecting and growing it's turf. You imagine "your guy" is interested in your sorry ass? heh. That's right, Pollyanna. Be a double plus good citizen.
Did you notice that little part about serialized USB devices? I assume (as I have not read the detailed article, shame on me) that the user somehow registers that device with the OS as 'Trusted' (by whom, it's trusted I'll leave as an exercise). Will the data on the stick be encrypted to prevent tampering by bad guys - like the proposed ATA standard, by the OS? This is the same machine with the enabled/disabled key list DRM system? So what if I am a Fed reviled Journalist (but I repeat myself) such as Matt Drudge or perhaps a protester against - oh, I dunno - a fascist computer regime? How hard would it be to issue a killfile for the key to my devices? or maybe a killfile for the data on them? Granted, one would need to identify me as the owner. All we need to do is classify computers as a device capable of enabling terrorists and viola - you give a thumb print upon purchase of your sealed box and make futzing with the ID system a kick-your-cherry-butt felony. In the interest of stopping terrorists ( and kiddie porn pervs) who may be hell-bent on getting *your* children. Any decent SF author could cook up an endless supply of very plausible mis-uses for this sort of control in an 'open' society. And it really doesn't take that much - just listen to C-SPAN for a few weeks. Some of those guys are major whack-jobs who have difficulty distinguishing between the the bill of rights and toilet paper.
The real question is whether it will be rejected like DiVX or sucked up because it doesn't block access to the Prole's porno supply and in fact comes with a built in lube-dispenser.
-Otto
there are two Norwegian citizens in US federal prison for initially hacking that Can you give searchable references for this? I remember the Norwegian kid who hacked CSS using the crippled (Korean?) DVD player, but I thought he was tried at home, in Norway....not trying to start a flame war, just trying to verify my recollection. Thanks.
Only the clueless equate 'kitten' with 'poptart'. Looks like you're one of them.
The implementation I envision is a "trusted user" approach
The problem that MS is pretending to solve is not user based but device based. A company will want all users to be able to send information to a USB printer connected to the computer but no users to be able to send information to a random USB harddrive that is connected to the computer. Users don't come into it. This is about indentifing and locking out untrusted devices, at least from writes.
Of course this will really not solve the problem since there are plenty of other ports on the computer that could be used by a "spy". Serial ports are slow but devices exist for them and with a bit of hardware and software hacking USB devices could also be made to work over serial by someone with enough motivation. Shit, if you want speed convert a USB harddrive to work off a monitor connection. I'm sure you could get a reasonable transfer rate and write only is all you want.
If you aren't into soldering stuff just bring a screw driver and another IDE harddrive into work, slip in when no one is around and copy anything you want onto it, and take it out again. In fact portable storage devices aren't even the biggest psuedo-problem you can think of. What about WiFi cards? Slip a WiFi card into you work computer and you can be copying data to the laptop in the boot of your car in the car park all day, everyday. This sort of thing has no end. Once you DRM one bus or connector you have to do the every single bit of hardware to close every loop hole, which is probably the whole point.
That's a good point about the "win-usb". But I think it has less chance of succeeding than win-modems. The latter could always be sold cheaper than 'real' modems because they required less hardware. But MS's drm'd usb will require more hardware, so it's likely to be more expensive.
That means the cheapskate (like me) will buy an old-style usb, then scream to anyone who will listen about how my Windows machine won't work with it, and that the only response from MS was to buy a more expensive version.
Didn't I just see an update come through apt-get that asked me if I wanted to give everyone read/write to the usb drive? And if not, just don't add them to the 'usb' group or something.
Tell me you can't do this under Windows. I'm sure you can.
--wheel, too lazy to log in
Linux already has this advantage. Simply set the permissions so only root can access the USB devices.
Sorry to state the obvious, but that is often necessary in these parts.
Democrats are anti-life (pro-abortion) and anti-death penalty. They believe in killing the innocent and saving the guilty. You really couldn't make this stuff up.
That's like saying that if I serve 20 years for murder, then get out and murder someone else, that I can't go to jail again because I committed the "same crime."
In reality, it means that I couldn't be taken back to court for the original murder. Any further murders are fair game.
Your honesty is commendable and not far from the mark. Planned Parenthood's roots lie in those who didn't like the early twentieth-century flood of Jews from Eastern Europe and Catholics from Southern Europe. Catholics hate Planned Parenthood for much the same reason that blacks hate the Klan.
It's all detailed in a book that includes extensive quotes from Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood's founder, and her liberal/socialist allies. You can download a free PDF of that book from:
Eugenics & Planned Parenthood
There you'll find out why many liberals call themselves "prochoice" rather than "prochoices." They want poor women to have only one choice available. It's as deeply rooted in what liberalism believes as Microsoft's behavior is in the similar Social Darwinian beliefs of Bill Gates--survival of the fittest, might makes right and all that.
Aside from the fact that discussions about Microsoft and abortion are both about people who want to crush those who get in their way, this is dreadfully off-topic.
--Mike Perry, Inkling blog , Seattle
You have to explicitly enable user access to USB devices in /etc/fstab for the unpriviledged users to use USB devices.
This is NOT a legitimate problem with USB devices. It is a legitimate problem with WINDOWS.
Maybe that's true for $20 USB flashdrives, but consumers won't go along with it if the "old device" is a $500 digital camera.
Cringely cites the precendent of IBM, who tried (and failed) to achieve lock-in by changing the PC hardware standard. I think MS will have similar problems if they try this. THE USB-makers are already annoyed with them for trying to sell licences for the VFAT filesystem.
You can call it whatever kind of whacked acronym that your 5-year-old daughter managed to come up with during breakfast. There will be a new standard for optical media drives. And hard drive controllers. And graphics cards. And sound cards. And speakers. And monitors. And keyboards. And trackballs (mice, for you poor bastards still living in the 80's). And routers. And Firewire.
And USB.
They have to change everything in order for the internal encryption to work. The only question is whether all the 10-22 year olds in America will find something else to do than watch movies and listen to "current" music. There may very well be some massive fucking migration to physical activities like killing anyone with a marketing degree. Remember that it only takes one year of an 80% reduction in revenue for them (and all their investors) to bail out of the entire program. All companies operate on quarterly earning statements, these days. But I digress.
Palladium is on it's way. The name has been changed because someone leaked the plans out, and they are under
an assumed name.
You will suck it down.
Also, open source has taken hold in many of these developing countries, so there will be software to keep old standards alive (scary as that sounds).
MS displays much hubris if it thinks it can shove this up the rest of the world.
Well in the article cringley talks about usb devices having write protection (unless enable viw M$ new licensing). I have a big issue with that. What about printers!! surely these are writable devices, or are they expecting everybody to buy a new usb printer. Oh but they ccould limit writing to just printer you say, well then my usb key will pretend to be a printer and I will print all my companies secret docs to it. This whole idea is M$ FUD for a good analysis regarding locking usb key thobs etc.. refere to cryptogram july 15th (Bruce schneier), way will always be found to overcome such limitations to the would be data thief.
This eliminates rich CEOs making 240 times what their employees make. This eliminates all need for further reform of the tax code and simplifies it greatly. This also eliminates the USA as the desired stopping point for greedy folks that just want to come here and become millionaires.
Any negative side effects from this policy can be attributed to people that long for the Bush economy and other discredited politicians. Since they won't be relevent anymore and everyone will have an equitable wage, we can ignore any dissent.
I'd like to know your crazy reasons. I have some Ideas too that would be considered "eccentric", and they have full merit for me.
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Microsoft is funny. I could do this in FreeBSD and Linux right now. Isn't usb in linux/freebsd manageable via file permissions. I mean really. I want to disable access to the usb devices I will make a seperate group for the usb devices and lock everyone else out. This meets everyone's needs. the hobbiest who doesn't care the corporate who can lock accounts out. You just can't do that with Windows. that's the beauty of file based system.
Crow pie. US officials tried to extradite him, and initially the Norwegian gov't was okay with this, but he fought it and won. (bad memory, and jumping to assumptions... made an ass of me.) Amgine.
In reply this comment (by conservative):
As far as "being dependant"... many, many *newborn babies* are completely dependant on the various hospital machines to live. By your logic, they are "dependant" on something, so it should be fine to kill them.
My reply:
Do I really need to spell this one out?
By your logic, depriving someone of health care is murder. Therefore, the state should provide universal, and equal health care to everyone, or we are committing mass murder.
My rant:
The conservatives (and many liberal politicians/people's) REAL problem is they don't start out with a basic set of assumptions, and derive their beliefs from this (at least in a logical way). I love it when a conservative will say "abortion is murder", but then say they'll support laws that allow abortions in the case of rape or danger to the mothers health. If I thought thought abortion was murder I sure as HELL would not support it under any circumstances. These are the WORST kind of people, people who think murder is ok, because it makes their politics seem less extreme then they really are. At least the Buchannan's of this world stick by their logic. The pussy Bushes of this world just stick by their guns, and throw logic and reason out the window! Damn you people!
FutureSoft.com has a piece of software that has had the ability to lock down USB or any other removeable devices on client machines... The sneaky thing about it is that it also allows you to just monitor usage instead so you can catch people in the act... their i:scan product does a lot of file survaillance stuff that's got me paranoid at my company...
Do yourself a favor, run Linux or get a Mac.
Sorry, I don't have enough free time to use Linux. And the Mac crowd makes my skin crawl. I couldn't stomach being part of the iconoclastic/conformist mass that is the Apple fanboy community.
I'll stick with Windows because that's where the money is. And because, "Windows. It just works."
Well since everyone agrees that there is a security problem with these types of USB devices, why don't open-source supporters (IBM, Novell, etc) beat MS at their own game and develop their own OPEN standards for more secure devices. Even if Microsoft does have significant influence over the hardware developers and follows through with such a standard, I would see no reason that the hardware developers would choose the closed standard over an open one. There is no doubt that there are people capable over developing such a standard among the open source community.
Just my two cents.
God! You people are either quoting the "Fahrenheit 9/11" script like it was the Holy Bible,
his buddies the saudis were more closely related to 9/11 than iraq ever was
or you're babbling helplessly in a paranoid haze like you need your medicine adjusted!
Dick Cheney by extension - can anyone say huge conflict of interest
Repeat after me: Bush did not create the economic crisis we're currently recovering from, he dealt with it swiftly and boldly. Repeat again: Bush did not create the terrorist crisis we're in, he dealt with it as no one else would do.
Right now, about half the PCs out there are still running older versions of Windows. The majority of those are running Windows 98 (!). The rest of running some form of XP
Prove it. Do you have any links or statistics to back these claims up?
Longhorn isn't going to install on any current machines, most likely.
Again, can you prove this?
Now, given this statistic,
What statistic?
how long is it going to take for Longhorn to get to 50%?
50 percent of what? 50% of all PCs that run Windows? 50% of the original price? What?
You'd best believe that product is going to be shipped, during the Longhorn period, that works on the last two version of Windows, - Win2k and XP.
What does this even mean?
I'm guessing that it will take at least until 2010 before the majority of PCs have are Longhorn enabled.
What?
When that happens, it'll be a the beginning of a problem. Possibly longer if corps go kicking and screaming, which they will.
What problem? Everything you talk about boils down to "get more market share or go out of business." Well, no kidding.
oh, and since Apple has complete control over their own hardware (not to mention the fact that Firewire, not USB, is the future of the Mac platform), I doubt this whole hullabaloo worries them much.
the coolest club on
We can spend all day yelling about how evil Microsoft is, we can whine about the future of the industry, and we can shout our declarations that we will never purchase DRM'd material.
It still doesn't change that copyright needs to be fixed.
Microsoft isn't the only evil corporation out there using copyright as a weapon instead of what it was intended to be. We can bat down stuff like Sender ID, heck, we might even get this USB stuff licked, but the abuse is just going to keep coming. Sooner or later there will be too much of it for our protest signs to even make a difference. The real fix to this whole mess is to update copyright law so that it is relevant agin.
..... as a macOSX machine if this nightmare ever becomes a reality!
You think AMD and Intel will just sit there while they take it up the ass?
Intel has an internal Linux users group that has over 10k members!
AMD will see this as an oppurtunity if Intel ever does the usb to mass market an alternative to geeks.
If MS does not have critical market share of this new hardware than they wont cripple longhorn. IT would piss off too many customers.
I keep hearing this rumour about pallidium (or whatever it is called). Its just not feasible.
Also the DOJ will smack MS ass if they ever do anything like this to hurt the pc market.
MacOSX machines are looking better and better everyday. I will start saving money now and hopefully in 3 years I will have enough money for a nice g5 based powerbook.
http://saveie6.com/
Repeat after me: Bush did start an unnecessary war under false pretenses that has resulted in over a thousand American deaths and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi deaths, and he dealt with it as poorly as no one else could do.
Paranoid haze? Uh, most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi, none were Iraqi. Halliburton gets a no-bid contract with no upper limit and we think that is wrong, so we need our medicine adjusted.
I think you are the one that needs to stop listening to Bill O'Reilly, and think for yourself.
Under Linux (or any good OS) USB port access can be restricted to admins only- the regular user would have no access.
:)
Another way: (I believe) build kernel with only serial USB- not block (just don't compile in the USB block driver.) Would that do it?
Oh- not running Linux yet? Why deal with all the costs and headaches of yet another MS mess, and end up buying new hardware again- now's a great time to upgrade to Linux and keep your good hardware!
LOL, Mysticalfruit. That would be one damned awesome DRM BIOS!
:-)
Insert bootable CD with auth sig = error
Insert bootable CD without auth sig = it works!
Phil
Sigh. I don't suppose you have ANY evidence to support your assertions... not that such a lack will EVER prevent the Slashdolts from moderating you to the moon for your anti-Microsoft rhetoric.
If MS bullied the hardware industry into making Linuxphobic hardware, they might get beaten up by antitrust people. However, if they encourage the industry to form standards committees, and dominate the activities of the standards committees, and the standards committees release standards that aren't implementable by Linux (e.g. because the license terms are wrong), that's unlikely to be an antitrust problem. I think they were one of the main players encouraging "legacy-free hardware", though there were a number of hardware vendors encouraging that also. It's still mostly a niche market, though USB seems to be increasingly common in mice, and of course there's the entire Mac market.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
All you'll do is force it into dark rooms out of sight - the same place priests rape choirboys and religious leaders get blowjobs.
If America turns into a theocracy, it's going to get damned dangerous to go to church.
Think about it before you start waving that razor-sharp-edged cross around.
It's _kind_ of like the Froenhofer(sp?) MP3 licensing...did you notice it when you bought your mp3 player?
Well, I bought an iRiver... what I noticed in the price was the (utterly cool) remote and the (nearly as cool) ogg support, plus stuff like built-in FM radio, etc.
I don't have the exact figures, but Fraunhoffer's licencing fees are pennies per unit. That all ads up to a large chunk of cash for them, but very, very little to the end user. Hell, it's more expensive to add hardware ogg support, because the chips aren't produced in anything like the quantities.
As for buying stuff over and over, that's the primary tennet of 'planned obsolecense' economics.
That's true enough, but stuff does unavoidably break as well. The push for ever cheaper prices has lowed quality to the point where it happens more quickly than perhaps it should, but it would happen to everything eventually anyway.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
He's commonley known as "DVD Jon" and seems to have made it his (so far very successful) mission to reverse engineer every media "protection" gimmick he can get his hands on.
Go DVD Jon!!!
sigaar
They found out USB drives may be used to "steal" data!! what's next? Floppy drives?
How are they going to make USB devices that work on legacy OSs like Windows XP but won't work on Linux or OS X?
Is he suggesting that hardware manufacturers are going to build a piece of hardware that will only work on Longhorn?
OK, I'm starting to see devices that require Windows XP so I guess so, but I can't imagine that one day we'll wake up and find that it's impossible to buy USB drives that work under Linux. If they do start making these drives that are compatible with the Longhorn standard, they'll be reverse-compatible with the older standard as well so they can maintain the OS X/WinXP/etc market. No problem.
The result if this happened would be that those with Longhorn would be unable to use their existing devices except as read-only, and those with older/different OS's would be able to use whatever they heck they wanted. Not exactly good publicity.
The only way something else would happen is if Microsoft told vendors "You can't make dual-mode driver chips; we own the standard and we'll hunt you down if you try to mix our new standard with the old standard." This seems like asking for a lawsuit though.
I always opt for Firewire devices over USB 2.0 whenever I have a choice.
Firewire is technically superior to USB 2.0 in every respect.
Even though Firewire "a" is rated at 400Mbit/s and USB 2.0 is rated at 480 Mbit/s, Firewire usually has a higher sustained transfer rate than USB 2.0.
Firewire has more power than USB 2.0
Ilink is Firewire without the power. Why??? This is a stupid idea.
Firewire "b" is rated at 800Mb/s. Smokin!...for those of us who could actually use it. Such as in multiple daisy chained devices.
fuck you. Suck my big fat dick. You're an idiot. Please do not vote this year, you've failed the basic tests required for it... like kindergarten
"which will likely lead to DVDs "protected" with MSFT products."
IMHO, better Microsoft than some company that could actually make an effective protection scheme!
ND
Anything that can slow down the juggernaut-pace Linux has on the desktop can only help matters. We all know we don't need any more monopolies. I imagine next year is the year of Linux on the desktop.
Personally, I don't run Mozilla and GTK as root.
IMHO (and this jusy may be because I've got a good paying job) I have no problems paying DishNetwork for their protected access to AV content. How is THAT different from a Microsoft Cartel doing the same thing for the same (or less) money?
Does DishNetwork have an effective monopoly on ALL popular media, forcing you to have DishNetwork service if you want to watch anything besides the local news? No, normally you have a choice between them and other cable/satellite providers. You can also rent/buy movies from a video store, listen to the radio or get music from a music store. DishNetworks is not a "cartel" that is being allowed to hardware-control the entire personal entertainment spectrum of products. THAT is the difference.
Anyway, shouldn't you be against "cartels" as a matter of principle at the very least? They do real damage to the economy and our freedom of choice. Are you against freedom of choice because you have a good paying job?
Chinese APEX 600 DVD player came out with Macrovision disable/enable option. :-)
-- A proud owner of APEX (disassociative disclaimer : I didn't say which model).
Rather than encouraging sheeplike behavior, why not consider the evidence for and against the proposition that Bush's buddies may be baddies; and the evidence for and against the proposition that Dick Cheney has huge conflicts of interest.
Unfortunately, most people don't bother -- like you, they simply parrot their party lines again and again.
It is a pretty well-established fact that most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, and I'm too lazy to check but ISTR that none of them were actually Iraqi.
It is also pretty well-established that the administration actively distorted intelligence that was being fed to them. The question of who, exactly, lied is somewhat academic -- the whole team seems to be making questionable decisions.
It's telling that many of the recurrent scandals about the admistration and its members could be cured by even a small amount of honest talk (of the sort that we were promised in the last election).
As for Cheney -- well, if he were innocent of conflict-of-interest, why didn't he divest from Halliburton and resign from the board? At the very best, that shows poor judgement -- on a par with (to pick a random example) philandering in the Oval Office.
Here at bank.net we have a "Trusted" vault. Thieves are required to fill out form 22A in duplicate and present three forms of identification before attempting access to the vault.
Thieves are also required to access the vault via the main secured entrance, not the unsecured janitor door.
Bank.net is not liable for any theft resulting from a failure to follow above procedures.
Oh, and it isn't the job of our OS to ensure applications behave appropriately either, we have paperwork for that too.
You're right, but link to the right product. The 8500 AIW DV is different from the 8500 AIW.
5 00dv/specs.html
http://www.ati.com/products/radeon8500/aiwradeon8
Do not assume the status quo as the norm. If you take a look at jos and his article on 'how ms lost the api war' - 'The Two Forces at Microsoft', you might better appreciate that within microsoft the, Chen (backwards compatability at os level) vs the MSDN Magazine (who dish out microsoft spagetti recipies) is as unified as many make it out to be.
peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
I thought I got AOL to do it when they bought Winamp...
Repeat after me: Bush did not create the economic crisis we're currently recovering from, he dealt with it swiftly and boldly.
As a Republican, I have to say that Bush's guns-and-butter policy "boldly" following the example of LBJ doesn't impress me at all. The $20 per month income tax cut isn't fueling wild spending on my part to restart the economy. The massive deficit spending, as it did several decades ago, is causing higher interest rates and renewed inflation.
Repeat again: Bush did not create the terrorist crisis we're in, he dealt with it as no one else would do.
For the country's sake, I hope no one else would handle the problem as Bush did. Attacking a straw man and antagonizing the rest of the world is hopefully something most American leaders wouldn't do. Creating a massive new money hole like the DHS while refusing to police our borders is patently absurd. Promoting the exportation of American jobs because it's good for the economy is equally ridiculous. Replacing social welfare with corporate welfare is reprehensible. The neocons have to go - they are not really Republicans.
Ok, they've made deals with Intel, and they're making a new USB format. But frankly, everyone's not going to be happy with having to buy everything anew. They'll HAVE to make their new peripherals backwards compatible, no matter how hard they'd want to avoid that, because geeks that just bought their PCs aren't going to buy a new one a few months later when they don't have the cash for it, and they're going to be pissed if they can buy, say, a new memory stick, but that new memory stick won't work because of the USB mods. Second, they didn't make deals with AMD, which to ME suggests that AMD might not follow the "hype". Nowadays we have divisions in the motherboards anyways, just by looking at the socket for the various processors: one socket for intel P4's, one for AMD's 32bit Athlons, one for the Opterons, one for the Athlon64 first version and then one for the new Athlon64s. So, in fact, the motherboard market is pretty much divided. Not to mention that no matter how hard they try, that IS anti-competitive, and even with the DMCA at hand, there is a clause that says that a user has to have a choice on various things, and one of them is the right to create an operating system or a bypass or some sort of device that will make the new technology compatible with any OS. Linux is big in the server market, everyone knows that, and to be frank, I know a whole lot of people that would like their corporations to switch to linux. That move might make corporations spend a shitload of money, maybe more than switching to linux. I see it as the final challenge: either they'll buy a whole new set of PCs, or they'll keep their hardware and go to linux. It's a challenge, but as many others I'm sure this is one that the open-source community has a chance to win. Time will tell, but I feel reasonably confident.
---- I am certain of only one thing : I know nothing else.
I have no problems paying DishNetwork for their protected access to AV content. How is THAT different from a Microsoft Cartel doing the same thing for the same (or less) money?
Dish network doesn't dictate what brand of television you have to watch their programming on. If you don't like Dish Network, you can also choose DirecTV, local cable, or rabbit ears.
Froenhofer(sp?) doesn't refuse to decode music they don't like.
"To boil a frog you can't just throw a live frog into a hot pot of water (it'll jump out). What you do is put a frog in a cold pot of water and slowly turn up the heat, the frog never leaps out because the change is too slowly, then when the water's too hot the frog can't jump out because it's dead." MS keeps making computing less and less under your control. Everyone puts up with it because they do it slowly. No one 'jumps out' because they dont realize the heat is being turned up.
I just don't understand why people think MS will scrap NT in favour of Linux and then build Win32 over the top.
The problems people have with Windows today are with Win32 and not with the kernel itself. The viruses, spyware, shatter attack, activex, etc all attack the Win32 subsystem not the underlying kernel.
What benifit is there in replaceing a fully functioning kernel that has had over a decade of development?
MS is going in the other direction and introducing WinFX as a replacement for Win32 still built on NT. They have also released services for unix for free so you can have the full posix environment running on NT as well.
Having applications that run on Linux is certainly a possibility if Linux gets enough market share for it to be worthwhile, but why bother with an MS version of Linux? Doesn't make any sense to me.
"Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
The Commission states that the Belande and Garca administrations are to be held responsible for failing to implement an integral strategy and for allowing human rights violations to become a systematic practice by the armed forces during some periods and in certain zones of conflict.
In just two years--1983 and 1984--under the Belande government, as many deaths occurred as during the entire conflict: 19,468 victims, or 28 percent of the total.
The Peru way
there's the matter of printer cartridges, which the courts haven't seemed to have issued a similar slap-down on
True about the Courts.
Everybody else, however, is on the side of the Sandford, NC aftermarket company.
The North Carolina State Legislature passed a measure that gutted Lexmark's Prebate program.
The U.S. Copyright Office ruled that Lexmark's DMCA contentions were "without merit".
gewg_
people still use windows 95. If those people haven't upgraded to windows 98, just imagine how long it will take them to upgrade to windows 98 se!
I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
"We'll build an alternative network on alternative hard/software and have lots of fun. "
You can't even build one NOW. What makes you think you can do it under pressure?
It is obvious to me that linux has reached critical mass: there's massive developer interest, LAMP is huge on the server side, and it's getting easy enough to use that unsophisticated users can be productive with it.
Look at linux today, and compare it to say five years ago. Then imagine that rate of improvement projected five years into the future. There's no way Microsoft can be competitive long-term on a purely open hardware platform.
Ergo, Microsoft's only real chance of stopping the juggernaut is to own the hardware. You can be sure they're making the rounds to all the vendors right now. In my more optimistic moments I tell myself that it's already too late. But I'm worried. You should be too.
So lets say Microsoft gets this standard in place and makes USB unusable by any OS except for the latest version of Windows.
So how hard would it be to design and build a USB card to put into those shiny new computers that would work just fine using any OS you want (except for maybe Windows)? I think this would be a nice sized market for a small company to get into if and when this becomes a problem.
As for the trusted computing thing, I some how think that someone will come up with a way to simulate a trusted computing device in software. At which point it won't mean a whole lot. Just another encumberance get around.
Just had to point out that the Explorer is not at fault. The drivers reacted improperly to the tire delaminating by making a quick maneuver, thus causing them to lose control. No different from if it was in any other SUV.
The tires did have a problem, but the Car and Driver test proved the Explorer was still very controllable in the event of a tire blowing. The driver even took his hands off the wheel and the truck tracked straight.
Don't blame the Explorer when the problem was that the drivers did not know how to handle their vehicle's higher center of gravity. It's not a sports car. To be usable off road, it has to be taller, meaning less stable.
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
This is actually quite silly. Market forces dictate that if enough companies want server and desktop hardware to run Linux, then the hardware will be built. If PHOENIX BIOS disallows boot to Linux, then another BIOS or OPENBIOS will take its place. If machines are made so proprietary that only one OS can use USB peripherals, then we go to court for further and more egregious violations of anti-trust laws.
I believe MS is trying to set up an indirect attack, probably two or more steps to it, to ensnare Linux adoption into a contradiction. They're very proud of their past sucessess in misdirecting market segments and pouncing. The thing about corporations, see, is that once it works, they like to do it again. And again.
SCO is one arm of their strategy, and Lord High Anti-Linux Dude Taylor is another. Attempts to coopt standards and hardware are nothing new, they've been tried before. As the more perceptive readers here have noticed, the cat isn't exactly in the bag any more.
They're fighting some of the smartest people on the plant, who for once aren't preferring the bottom line to all else. That's different. That's why it won't work. You might fool someone who's concerned with quarterly sales, not someone who enjoys logic as a way of life.
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
Why is only one side marked "offtopic"? Oh right this is slashdot, not an unbiased site (are their ANY?)
I don't see any conflict in the belief that an unborn fetus deserves legal status as a human being and the belief that self-protection is a natural right.
I'll phrase it as "I'm pro-armed defense of my life, and statutory defense of the lives of innocents."
I'm voting against Bush no matter who the Democrats run (even Kerry). Bush is an idiot.
I'm also against killing unborn babies (but it ain't a baby yet in the first trimester!). I'm also for anyone over 30 without a criminal record being able to own effective self defense hardware, including guns, cause the criminals will own guns no matter whar the law is. By the way legalize marijuana (weed, mayjane, pot) already - did we learn NOTHING from prohibition?
We're dealing with loonies: an international military response to help out a private body in a copyright dispute against an individual with no history of violence has already happened. We use computers - we must be making bombs as well, that's science too isn't it?
http://www.cypherpunks.to/TCPA_DEFCON_10.pdf
"I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
The above is only funny if you watch far too much anime.
Makes sense to me... he's pro-his life... not yours
I'm a gnu world man.
The pressure. A bit of pressure does wonders for project progress.
Kerry has ties with ketchup industry. Bush has ties with oil industry. Was there ever a war motivated by access to strategically located tomato plaintains?
(Technically, the masked thugs weren't US troops. They acted on the US megacorp behalf, though.)
Publish anonymously or pseudonymously. There are ways to avoid being tracked down, some involving cybercafes, some (the more reliable) involving wardriving, some (the more expensive) using throwaway cellphones.
As added advantage, if the thing is legal in the country where published, the probability the resources will be spent on tracking down the one who did it is quite low. Another possibility is to cooperate with somebody in Far East; China will do.
A good hint for rapid dissemination is using mailinglists. While it's easy to take down a website, a mail sent to a list is usually on the way to all the listmembers in few minutes. Once a couple hundred tech-minded or freedom-minded people have their hands on the code (or specs), it's fairly impossible to restrict its proliferation; see DeCSS or the anonymous posting of RC4 specs.
Now, the US is another story. But even here, this strategy will work only with US corporate IT sheep + rest of the morons who can be frightened/hoodwinked into accepting draconian measures in the name of "enhanced (IT) security".
Frankly, we'll all get what we deserve. In more ways than one.
Dr. Freud
Technology meets Transportation.
Agreed, and its going to get worse to as medical technology blurs the lines. The Constitution doesn't help us here. The authors referred to natural birth as the beginning point, but what happens when we can bring a human being into existance without ever putting him/her in a female womb?
Most "reasonable" people believe contraception or a day after pill isn't murder because the egg/sperm, or the small collection of undifferentiated cells the next day, aren't a human being anymore than cells from our skin are, but at the same time, at some point late in the pregnancy the "fetus" becomes a "human baby" which should be protected. But what point is that? The old idea, that the point is where the fetus becomes "viable" outside the womb, will eventually get blown out of the water by medical technology that will allow us, for example, to save a fetus at any stage of development from the death of its mother. Where is the dividing line going to be when the mother's womb becomes optional? Sorry, but I don't have an answer. We need a way of defining what "human life" is, a definition that can survive the technology and medical science advances that are coming in the relatively near future.
How about an anarchist article in Linux Gazette using toll roads as a metaphor for proprietary software?
And the Linux patch to spoof whatever the BIOS is expecting will be available, what, eight hours later?
I worked in a bank for a brief and maddenning time. Not on the floor with the cashiers, but on th e 47th floor with the international banking department... It was insane. Nobody had a spare pen or a pencil. When I asked what I had to do to get one, I was told I had to fill out a requisition form (you know, the same one I had filled out to get my PC and printer). I headed up to the supply room with my requisition form *signed by my boss* and asked them why it had to be this way over a friggin' pen. They told me that a couple of years back, it wasn't like this, but they would go through about $2000 worth of pens per month. Yes, our investment advisers certainly knew a good deal when they saw it: in this case, "free".
The general public might be naive about a lot of the stuff that goes on in the computer world; but, telling each of them that they have to go out and spend thousands of dollars to replace their perfectly good hardware, isn't going to go over very easily. The job of those that know, and are against the idea, is to educate the general public. One area of focus might be something along the lines of, "why are USB storage devices any less secure than floppies or other methods of transferring files from point A to point B."
3 194/
In reality, I see this as another "security hole" blown entirely out of proportion. But don't spend time attacking MS directly with hatred towards the idea. Focus instead on educating the public that don't know any better. Believe me, millions of angry customers who will now have to replace thousands of dollars worth of hardware, is something even MS can't ignore.
Is this leverage for Microsoft? If anything, I'd say this is leverage for the OS community who make no attempt at taking every last penny we earn.
http://www.freeipods.com/default.aspx?referer=915
My lame blog.
This thought just occured to me. If USB storage devices are such a security risk, why not just allow the system administrators to disable them? There's no reason to redesign everything! Heck, disable them by default and give me a nice warning when I enable them; I don't care!
;-)?
3 194/
Am I missing something or am I a genious
http://www.freeipods.com/default.aspx?referer=915
My lame blog.
Self-correcting parser? COOL! Where can I get one of those?
http://flashbunny.org/content/partyoftherich.html
Seriously, Bush preaching the free market is like a whore preaching chastity. Neither practices what they preach.
Learn real economics. Then you'll see why voting for Bush or Kerry is a bad idea.