Slashdot Mirror
Homeland Security says 'Patch Windows Now'
gregger writes "Wow, so the Department of Homeland Security is really concerned with Microsoft patches now... enough to come out and tell us to patch our machines. This warning, chronicled in eWeek, was issued less than a day after the release of 23 patches from Redmond. So, if you don't apply the patches, then what?"
What a remarkable commentary on the sad state of affairs in the "Land of the Free" that our government makes a press release regarding patches to our computers and the first thing we think of is that the patch is associated with monitoring us somehow. For the record, I had the exact same thought as the OP and agree 100% with what he said.
This is unprecedented action. Why now?
So great, DHS is recommending that people keep their machine patched. Anyone who says this is a bad thing has their tinfoil hat on a little too tightly. The only thing that concerns me is that DHS's responsibility in the US government seems to get more and more broad; anything that can be deemed in the protection of "Homeland Security" they can control, from intelligence to customs and border patrol to cyber security.
Anyway, this isn't that big a deal.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
What HS really means: Get UBUNTU Now ! ! ! Do it now ! ! !
After Microsoft stuck their WPA Notify spyware on my machine, claiming it was an important, possibly vital update, how am I expected to trust them?
* No * Thank * You *
I have a better solution: I run Windows 2000 SP4 (XP is bloatware in my opinion) inside a Virtual Machine on Linux. The virtual machine has no connection to the internet (its IP address is blocked by the router), and does not run email or a web browser. When the copy of Windows is shut down, *it reverts to a snapshot*. All data is stored external to the VM's "C drive", where it's protected by Linux. Voila, no updates needed!
We've all heard how Microsoft's latest efforts to fight piracy hurt innocent people running legitimate copies of their software. We have all seen how Microsoft installs "beta" software without asking permission. Distrust, like trust, is earned. The folks in Redmond have *earned* my distrust.
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
Actually, you can blame just the current administration for letting Microsoft get away with things. The Microsoft anti-trust case began during the previous administration. A few weeks after Bush entered office he removed every lawyer on the case with any experience in monopoly law. He had them replaced with novices and shortly after the case ended with Microsoft not even getting a slap on the wrist. Gates was never even investigated for his perjury in federal court. While Microsoft is guilty of illegal business the current administration specifically let them off the hook.
Of course the customers let them off the hook for writing bad software, but that's another story.
Developers: We can use your help.
So I head off to boot my lappy to XP, something it hasn't done in weeks, run the updater, deselect the WGA option, and the sonofabitch installed it anyway.
/., and that makes me look like a nubie, which I hardly am, and you all know that. IMO, the inbreeding in Redmond has reached the point of no return, and I'm thinking of reclaiming the space the XP install uses for something usefull.
Is there no end to the microsoft perfidity?
Oh, wait, this is
--
No Cheers this time, Gene
How about monitoring 10 million phone calls?
And with a handy backdoor installed monitoring computers would be even easier to automate.
I'm not saying they have, merely that your pooh-poohing of the whole idea is a bit baseless when they've already been caught doing essentially the same thing in a different medium.
Sorry, just to clarify:
The constant exposes of systematic corruption throughout all levels of the US government, from pre-warnings of 9/11 through to financial scandals to the gutting of judicial oversight and introduction of almost limitless executive power for the Whitehouse... two blatantly corrupt elections, at least one illegal war and enough lying, bullshit and willful misrepresentation to indict and incarcerate any normal group of people ten times over... and all this means you're less likely to don your tinfoil hat?
The only way this makes sense to me is if you're saying conspiracy theories shouldn't attract tinfoil hat accusations any more... because everyone knows they're watching you, lying to you and breaking the law all the damn time?
Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
Well, let's take a cursory glance then.
d report_012204.pdf
s Releases.Detail&Affiliation=C&PressRelease_id=960& Month=4&Year=2005
Wikipedia (Unless you think I've conspired to make up the entry here):
"The department was created from 22 existing federal agencies in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001."
Making a single department from 22 agencies is called consolidation.
Next, distractions: An alert system which never goes off alert is not an alert system at all. It's a continuous message to be vigilant, which is not information, it's a fear tactic. What's more, there would have been a massive uproar if the government had no internal response to the hijackings, so they took existing groups and rebranded them as a single simple solution to the communication problem. Then muddied up the water with reorgs and ill-managed funding.
http://www.usmayors.org/72ndWinterMeeting/homelan
http://hsgac.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Pres
these go on and on. It's the '80's Pentagon spending all over again.
Stop worrying about how I say something and actually take a look around.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
Actualy I've worked pretty closely with some guys from the DEA, FBI, BATF and Secret Service, and the truth is they're not bad people but I wouldn't want their trash talk to turn into group-think either. One thing we should realize is that the mid and lower levels people know they have powers that they shouldn't have and they need these powers to keep some really vicious people under control. Most of these guys have families and they want to protect their families as much as they want to protect us, and if they mis-use these powers they really shouldn't have, they'll be taken away, they realize this. Using these let's call them Supra-legal powers in cases of normal criminality would be such an abuse.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Has anyone considered the possibility that the patches contain monitoring code that will in fact allow the department of Homeland Security to monitor people's computer communications? It is not as if such accusations have not come forth before. This article over at the CBC website comments about alleged CIA operations, in where they are flying prisoners around the globe to be handled in different jurisdictions. This particular article comments about such flights landing in Canada. In Gander to be exact. So it is not to far fetched to consider possible ulterior motives to getting people to update.
So while I applaud the Department of Homeland Security for advising the citizens of the USA to stay on top of their computer updates, I also wonder if there is any ulterior motive behind it. Have they asked Microsoft to include some code that they can use? Or for the bigger conspiracy theorists out there, have they infiltrated their own programmers among those who are writing Windows updates and Vista code?
And for the ultimate in conspiracy theories! Has anyone thought about the timing of the press release? One day before terrorist in the UK are busted in the closest terrorist attack since 9/11, and no one can use the argument that Homeland Security did not know about it the day before. It's not like they woke up and said "Let's bust some guys in England who just happen to be plotting to do something with commercial flights going to the USA"
My opinions might not be popular but they have a point. Be skeptical of everyone, till they prove you wrong!
-Ghost
Global warming isn't the government's fault, it's OUR fault. Does the government make you drive a car to work?
;)
OK, I'll bite, but keep in mind I'm half-joking here. (And I do agree that global warming is a collective "we" fault).
Ok, so, the Federal Government has massive yearly deficits, and a total nation debt in the trillions, not even counting future promised expenditures such as Medicaid/care and Social Security payments. Refusing to raise taxes to cover these costs because it is politically untenable means that they must sell debt to foreign investors and then literally print the rest of the money. This is an inflationary policy that increases the money supply hugely, causing the misallocation of resources and fueling the boom-bust economic cycle while claiming to try to prevent it. This has caused a massive housing bubble which has seen home prices nearly double in many areas in the last 5 to 10 years. At the same time, real wages have barely kept up with core inflation (which itself is undercalculated by using metrics that don't actually apply to real-life costs). Thus the current average worker is even less able to afford housing today, especially in well-developed and urban areas where a great deal of commercial and industrial jobs are located. Hence, in order to be able to afford housing that fits their pay they must relocate to less densely populated areas where home prices and rents are within their means, and thus they must commute farther to their jobs. So, there, I proved the government makes us drive our cars to work.
Of course things like car-pooling, buying more efficient vehicles, cutting down on uneeded driving, etc are all things that help reduce emissions and are largely being ignored. There's no small solution to the problem. And while I was being rather tongue-in-cheek with my seven degrees of seperation style argument above, all of it is true to a certain extent. There are a lot of problems in this country that stem from a misallocation of resources due to Federal fiscal irresponsibility (Bush hasn't yet met a spending bill he didn't like, and none fo the spending bills have any 'signing statements' that reduce spending. Don't let my hatred of his policies make you marginalize me however, plenty of Dems are causing the spending problems too, the whole fed level is out of control in a nonpartisan way.). If the government would be reduced to a level that doesn't consume 40%+ of it's citizens' incomes, plus more deficit spending on top of that, then perhaps we'd have some "extra" capital to throw at other problems, gloabal warming being one among many but an important one. Food for thought.
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
If you mean _naive_ sentiment, I would obviously disagree. I would posit that the most horrendous crimes in the history of the world are actually executed by a tiny majority in overly strong governments which take advantage of a weak-minded and normally peaceful populace. I would like you to give me an example of a genocide or other serious crime against humanity that wasn't orchestrated by a dictator, monarch, or totalitarian government of some sort.
You claim that government keeps people in line. But this is a circular argument, because people pre-existed government; people created government, which indicates that the morals and values and organization that create government come from the people, and not the other way around. Countless philosphers, historians, heros, saints, and common folk throughout time developed civilization's sense of justice and morality that government is built upon without a beating stick keeping them in line, and I feel sad for you if your root of your values is the fear of punishment.
What this boils down to is that I believe that the vast majority of people are good (or at least good intentioned), but perhaps a bit gullible, and a small minority take advantage of this, some of them evil, some of them not.
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
I'm old enough to remember how Reagon was demonized just like Bush Jr.
Firstly, I'm old enough, too. Reagan was a porn star compared to Bush Jr. and Crew. This goes beyond Bush. This enters the Senate, the House and now the Supreme Court. Zoning boards across the nation are zoning anything the chrisitians don't like out of town (porn shops, strip clubs, etc). Are you old enough to remember the hub-bub about Janet's boob? When was "intelligent design" even on the table at school boards, let alone a serious consideration?
The truth is the people, the voters, are in control. Politicians of the left and right are only getting away with what the voters *allow* them to get away with. Stupid crap happens because the irritation level does not rise to a level that motivates enough voters. When politicians do cross that line they get whacked down by the voters.
So, what you're saying is you're old enough to remember the dream, but haven't awakened to the reality yet? 'pubs are fixing elections across the country, ADMITTING to fixing elections, and no one raises an outcry. Of course, give people even the whiff that their american idol election is fixed and then you'll get a letter-writing campaign.
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
People are not GOOD or EVIL. That's religious minded crap and is not intelligent. People are selfish. It is the primary reason we are as adept at life as we are. We take what we need in order to survive. It is only when there is plenty for everyone that we start talking about morals.
Government came from groups of people attempting to find a better way for the good of everyone, true. But that's NOT where we started. Take it back a bit further - remember the dark ages? Remember where we decended from. It's been a long road of evolution to end up where we have the luxuary of being moral creatures.
Fact is that an overwhelmingly large majority of people on the planet would slit the throat of anyone if it was life or death. You or me... hrmm.. me thanks. That is human nature on its very basic of levels. That's the nature of any creature. It's survival. Anyone who says different is ignorant of what life is really about.