Slashdot Mirror


IE Developer Responds to Mozilla Accusations

sriram_2001 writes "Dave Massy, a Microsoft employee who works on the Internet Explorer team has a response to the Mozilla Foundation's Mitchell Baker's comments. Specifically, he responds to the claim that IE is a part of the operating system. 'IE is part of the Windows Operating System so that parts of the OS and other applications can rely on the functionality and APIs being present. To be clear there are no Operating System APIs that IE uses that are not documented on MSDN as part of the platform SDK and available to other browsers and any other software that runs on Windows..'

11 of 782 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Automatic Cup Holder by dknj · · Score: 4, Informative

    Uh, if mozilla supports vbscript then it would be allowed in mozilla or any other web browser for that matter. That does not make use of any unknown undocumented APIs. Try this, paste this code into a text file (hint: it came straight from your website):

    Set oWMP = CreateObject("WMPlayer.OCX.7" )
    Set colCDROMs = oWMP.cdromCollection

    if colCDROMs.Count >= 1 then
    For i = 0 to colCDROMs.Count - 1
    colCDROMs.Item(i).Eject
    Next ' cdrom
    End If

    wscript.echo "Automatic Cup Holder."


    Then run "cscript filename". Oh my god, Microsoft tied vbscript into a stand alone application on your system!!! Give me a break, mod the parent down please

    -dk

  2. Re:what i want from Firefox... by LEgregius · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can do that from windows explorer, and you could before IE was "part of the os," so that's a windows core function, not an IE function. As for browsing pages from a server like that, click on the files in the browser once you navigate to them.

  3. Re:MS needs to change windows fundamentally by dknj · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not to negate your post, but have you used any modern window manager that was big on eye candy? They use just as much ram as windows xp does. Mac OS X with less than 512mb of ram is a joke (heck,even with 512mb of ram it slows down when I fire up more than one resource intensive app) and KDE is just as bad. If you go back to Windows 95 or NT 4 before all these themed desktops came into light you wouldn't need half a gig of ram to show systray icons..

    -dk

  4. IE's Win Connections arethe Problem by sjvn · · Score: 5, Informative

    IE is part of the Windows Operating System so that parts of the OS and other applications can rely on the functionality and APIs being present.

    Guys, uh guys, that's The Problem.

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1776387,00. asp

    To sum my thoughts in that story up, you have a gateway, IE, to the Internet that has deep, Inadequately Protected, connections to the core operating system.

    IE, in specific, and Windows, in general, cannot be secured.

    Microsoft's one seamless whole is really one giant security hole.

    Steven

  5. They lied about it last time by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Informative

    An article from 2003:

    Microsoft allegedly opened up Windows APIs last year... Now, Devos claims that Microsoft's disclosures remain sufficiently inaccurate and incomplete for developers to continue using his own documentation.

    Devos claims that Whirling Dervishes has discovered hidden Windows interfaces that are crucial for the development of such applications, but whose existence is denied by Microsoft. Not much change there then, post-lawsuit. These and other interfaces which Devos says should have been part of the API disclosures are used in NSELib, and he proposes to make public full documentation on how to use them.

  6. Re:Dr Seuss explains IE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nice. I read that in mud help files in 1994, only substitute all the modern technologies with mainframe jargon. I don't mind the update, but don't hijack it, paste a new face over the top of it, and try pass it off as your original work. That's very Microsoft of you.

  7. Re:I'm Confused. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative

    They dont contradict each other. What it is saying is that IE is implemented using publically available OS API calls only, not secret ones as people have surmised, and that it is PART of the OS in order to provide some DIFFERENT API calls to third party applications.

    The two statements bear no relation to each other, other than that they both relate to IE and APIs.

  8. Re:MS needs to change windows fundamentally by zoney_ie · · Score: 4, Informative

    Simple answer. Turn off the eye-candy. It's pointless. I use WinXP with classic theme (and theme service turned off), and along with turning off other unneeded services, WinXP runs with a memory profile of about 70MB when idle with no apps loaded.

    Now as you do want to run multiple apps, even 128MB isn't enough leeway - but I do get by fine with 256MB.

    --
    -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
  9. Re:Antisocial Engineering by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Informative
    Yeah, I mean seriously. IE only uses documented APIs? What's this then?

    Can somebody - Dave? - point me to the API that let IE4 add a "Favourites" item to the start menu in Windows 95? I don't mean something that was documented last year, I mean something that was documented ... in 1995. I don't think there is such an API. I don't think there ever was.

    Can somebody - Dave? - tell me why the IE installer calls the undocumented Extract cabinet.dll function?

    As far as I'm concerned this is all very simple. Could Netscape have done to Windows 95 what Microsoft did with IE4? Obviously the answer is no: IE did things that weren't just *adding* APIs, they were replacing core parts of the OS like Explorer in order to add the Favourites menu, Active Desktop etc etc. Dave is full of shit and the sad thing is, he probably believes his own story.

  10. Re:Dr Seuss explains IE by juggleme · · Score: 4, Informative
    Yup. And the original's a whole lot longer.

    Here's a link to a copy of the original.

  11. Great comment: by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 4, Informative
    The linked article is Dave Massy's blog entry with comments at the bottom. Dave attacks the Firefox site's assertion that it is more secure because it is not "rolled into the OS" like IE is. In the comments at the bottom, this one by Dave Thomas puts it up so well...
    "Now I'm pretty confident that Mitchell doesn't actually know the details of how IE is developed so I don't fully understand the basis of the statement."

    The basis of the statement is:

    (1) That Microsoft itself argued in a court of law that IE was embedded in the operating system.

    (2) That many Windows apps, such as Explorer and the Help System, use the guts of IE to render content.

    This is why people say IE is in the operating system. Because IT IS. No, not from a "I'm a kernel hacking geek" point of view, but from a practical one.

    And why does this matter in terms of security? Because when IE gets hacked, it means all those programs that make up the OS environment are now vulnerable, and in many cases, now present new vectors for the attack, and more importantly, hacking IE can present a person with many channels into core OS programs.

    This does not happen with Firefox. If you find an exploit in Firefox, you have exploited Firefox.