Slashdot Mirror
Richard Clarke on Microsoft security
hizzo writes "Richard Clarke, former White House cybersecurity and counterterrorism adviser, harshly critized Microsoft's security track record. 'Given their record in the security area, I don't know why anybody would buy from them.' He also called for some regulation of security for ISPs in addition to better industry self-regulation, such as disclosing QA practices and becoming more accountable for secure code. I wonder if anyone will finally start listening to him?"
A story only a few hours ago on how Microsoft shines on security.
Fact: any box is as secure at the admin makes it.
Move along.
Clarke does deserve some kudos as the only responsible government official to apologize to the 9-11 victims's families.
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
Oh come on, watch something other than Fox and read something other than NewsMax and FreeRepublic for once. :P
Lets take a wide gander here. You've never read his book. You didn't listen to his testimony - only selective excerpts and clips. Your knowlege of his history comes from one or two right-wing articles, without ever reading any counters.
I was (foolishly) hoping that this thread wouldn't get dragged into a left-right debate. I was wrong.
"Well, then fire it up and show me what this..." (sigh)
Security issues are a wonderfull way to convince people that the government should regulate IT, but ironically it will actually play to the favor of Microsoft most of all. As soon as regulations start out, it will start increasing the bariers to entry in the IT space.
.... yeah ..... right.
This has happened in every industry it's been attempted in. Plumbing, electricity, telephones, auto-repair. Hell, you can't even sell a hot-dog without going thru 10-20 thousand dollars worth of regulation for it to be legal. Yeah, I know, don't say it. There is always a good sounding reason for these
"In a statement responding to Clarke's comments, Microsoft said it has formalized its internal security efforts by adopting an official life cycle that it uses to develop secure software,[...]"
Just what the hell is that supposed to mean?
The heat from below can burn your eyes out
Well, he handled CIP during his time with NSC, and was cybersecurity czar after being shoved out of his counterterror role. 'Czars' of various sorts are, given their lack of power, perhaps the most ironically-named figures in Washington, but Clarke was certainly the best-informed computer security layman in the nation. So, yes, when the former Cybersecurity Czar specifically singles out Microsoft as a source of major vulnerabilities, I think he's qualified to pass judgment.
She found someone else to fix it
You've just hit on the real reason people don't switch ... it's because they always find some geek they can sucker into cleaning up the mess each time, for free! Most people don't even have to lift a finger to keep their systems free of malware - there are geeks running around everywhere literally doing free maintenance - it doesn't even so much as inconvenience them, why would they change?
Why exactly are we all running around spending hours of our own weekends/evenings etc. cleaning up the mess Microsoft made for them for free? Is your time and expertise worth nothing? You feel "expected" to do it because it's a family member? Or some hot chick sweet-talked you into doing it by flirting a little? (We all know we've done that before). Utter nonsense ... start charging for it!
People will start considering alternatives when they realise it's going to cost them a tidy little packet every time their systems get jammed up with the latest MS malware.
I simply told my folks last time they bought a computer, if they buy Windows, I'm not supporting it for them, if they buy a Mac I'll support it for them. Don't expect me to spend my Saturday doing free support work for Microsoft.
What a bunch of crap. Lobbyists don't educate, they advocate. They are paid to convince your representative to act in a manner which is unlikely to be in the best interest of the majority of their constituents.
As for "shouldn't business be given the opportunity to express itself", I say no. A corporation (despite that abomination of a court ruling) is not a person. It's interests are often in conflict with those that are supposedly being represented by the congressperson. Yet its voice is magnified by the millions of dollars of influence it wields. It is a legal form of bribery.
God is imaginary
Its is all about the combination of benefits. Corporations had limited liability and limited rights later the Supreme Court read the 14th amendment as giving human rights to property, thus giving human rights to limited liability legal structures. So now they have the benefit of limited liability and the right to speech moreover money is now considered a form of speech. Therefore corporation may make money illegally, then use that money to affect government. This is just as fucked up as letting churches make money tax free and then letting them use that money to affect government. Its fucking wrong and un-American and need to be stopped. If you want to express your opinion as a business then take the money out of it, pay taxes and be subject to personal limits.
COPRPORATIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE MORE RIGHT THAN A HUMAN BEING.
No, it's not. Microsoft, like every other business in America, lobbies the government. Just like I lobby the government every time I write my Congressman a letter. It's called "representative democracy."
When you lobby Congress, it's a representative democracy.
When a business, which is not a human being or citizen but a legal construct, lobbies Congress, it is something altogether different.
Those "failed socialist regimes" are kicking our ass - haven't you noticed that the Euro is up over 30% since its introduction? No one knows what "HillaryCare" would have done - the Republican Congress's version (boosted by Bush's $750B pharma-welfare last year) is responsible for most of the remaining debt. In spite of Clinton's paydown of the Reagan/Bush debt. Which Bush Jr immediately squandered, creating trillions of new debt every year. We're staring down a $3T budget right now, financed by unprecedented (and unsupportable) debt, all after 4 years of Bush, his Republican Congress, and little denied. Where rightwingers come off lecturing about debt, failed regimes, and even socialism (like our version, state capitalism, corporate welfare) is beyond me. They get called "heartless" because "mindless" gets repetitive after a while.
--
make install -not war
BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 PDB warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB?
RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."
Now, the...
BEN-VENISTE: Thank you.
RICE: No, Mr. Ben-Veniste...
BEN-VENISTE: I will get into the...
RICE: I would like to finish my point here.
BEN-VENISTE: I didn't know there was a point.
RICE: Given that -- you asked me whether or not it warned of attacks.
BEN-VENISTE: I asked you what the title was.
RICE: You said, did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States.
Where is the word "airplane" or "weapon" anywhere in that conversation? You're so full of bullshit, and you have no desire to find out if you're wrong.
It also did not point to "possible hijackings." According to Dr. Rice, it was entirely historical. Unfortunately for her, the word "determined" means "on an unwavering course of action". That means, "will continue to be." That means, "in the future," or "not just historical." That means, she was wrong or lying.
Who's the moron now, you moron?
They represent a hell of a lot more jobs than I do.
No - the people who work there represent a lot more jobs. Microsoft doesn't represent anything except shareholders.
It's not supposed to be. You're not one of those people who mistakenly thinks everything is about the scientific method, are you?
Facts are clean, and politicians are greasy. The scientific method is the best way I know to determine facts (even facts about opinions). Tell me a better way, and I'll use it.
Until then, Microsoft greases palms, and you're an idiot for thinking they're just exercising their first amendment rights - it's a corporation, not a person. And they're buying votes. The votes that belong only and precisely to you, as a citizen of the democracy that they were elected to represent. If you don't care that you're being screwed, it's because you have no idea what being a citizen means.
When the army that's supposed to defend you starts torturing people, will you sit idly by?
Oh wait, that already happened - and yes, you are sitting idly by.
Does "America" mean anything to you, other than corporate profit and protection from terrorists?
Education is the silver bullet.