Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Blocks FSF Donation Website As a 'Gambling Site'
An anonymous reader writes "The FSF slammed Microsoft for categorizing donate.fsf.org website as a 'Gambling Site.' Corporate systems that use a Microsoft 'network security' program cannot access FSF donation website because of this and as a result, many people were unable to make donations. FSF has submitted a correction to Microsoft and they are now waiting for a response. However, John Sullivan warned corporate about Microsoft's proprietary network security programs."
Software fails - software is fixed. Story at 10.
Hysterics and hyperbole do not serve us well.
IF MS ignores the correction, sure. But that hasn't happened, has it?
You can go directly to http://my.fsf.org/donate/ if donate.fsf.org is blocked by your local friendly firewall. You can also use Tor to bypass blocks like these.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
what's that old saying "never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence" or whatever? I mean this is MS we're talking about...
"FSF has submitted a correction to Microsoft and they are now waiting for a response."
So there was a problem with their website that caused it to be blocked automatically by their web filtering software, how is this news? Why is everyone so paranoid and not even waiting for Microsoft to reply or give them an exception? Even if they don't allow it, maybe they would rather their employees donated in their own free time and not on their network?
What a load of anti microsoft tripe. Calm your tits, it was likely a mistake, seeing how its obviously not a gambling website.
The situation is sort of like this:
"Crasoose is a bunny licking spoon bender!"
If you don't agree, you are free to submit a correction which may or may not result in correcting the classification.
John Sullivan warned corporate about Microsoft's proprietary network security programs.
Are there any non-proprietary corporate network security options?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The FSF should sue Microsoft for loss of donations and ask for punitive damages for monopolistic anti-competitive behavior.
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
All's fine until you try that. Like this guy, he can browse smoothly, usi .. see ... right pages using cleartype ...
oh, wait... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1zxDa3t0fg
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Or incompetence in this case.
It seems that this could be considered an anti-competitive practice that might have some legal consequences for Microsoft. They are basically using their privileged position to prevent their own clients from donating funds to an open source 'competitor'.
It's very unlikely that Microsoft would pay humans to manually create a filter list. They most likely wrote a custom Bing spider that searched for sites to block, with no human oversight. And we all know how accurate the Bing search engine is....
breast cancer web sites some times get flagged as sex / pron sites.
maybe some thing on the site trigger a bot to flag it.
why is pornbb.org suddenly gone from the internet, i mean the hostname is gone, the dns seems to have been scrubbed, no redirects to the fed and no domain jacker serving spam so what happened? who took it down? is it blocked for everyone or just verizon? what the fuck is going on?
Hmmm... www.ubuntu.com and www.debian.org lists a scary red shield with a white x in the middle designated for the Shareware/Freeware catagory while www.redhat.com, www.suse.com, www.opensuse.org and www.fedoraproject.org do not.
I always figured OSS was gambling on the human nature in an indirect form; you never know how software developers turn out. The project you liked may flourish or just die away. By giving money to a project you're betting on the human nature of the developers. Some might just pocket the money and take a vacation. Some might actually dedicate more time to the project. It's not like they're contractually required to do so.
Of course, non-free software is even worse; the people there are only in it for the money. More they can milk out of you, the better for them. Sounds more like extortion than gambling :-)
However, John Sullivan warned corporate about Microsoft's proprietary network security programs."
Way too many people are hung up on the idea of Microsoft "abusing its monopoly" by accidentally blocking the FSF's donation page. Let's pretend Microsoft had a monopoly on web filters or something. Does preventing people from donating to the FSF make it more likely that people will donate to Microsoft's Open Source charity? Since Microsoft doesn't have an Open Source charity, I'd guess no.
Ah, Bullwinkle, that trick never works.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Microsoft has ALWAYS behaved this way. How many 3rd party applications or features have /.ers discovered dont work properly in Windows when there is anything remotely resembling a competitive product offered by Microsoft...anyone ever try to use hotmail in non-IE browsers or chat on msn via trillian? Browsers in general for those of us that remember the big IE integrated with windows debate/doj case and the resulting minor concession MS was forced to make.
I am not just talking about when MS updates Windows and your display drivers start causing bsods and you grab a vendor update and its fixed, I mean real anti-competitive practices in Microsoft's consumer and enterprise products... If I sat here and thought about it I know I would have a long list - what about u? How many times have you all looked straight up and raged GAAAAAAAATES!!
will work for dragon quest localization
Microsoft have a terrifying security history, who is using their network security tools?
Can someone give me a list of those companies so I can make sure I don't deal with them?
It's happened to me in the past, & recently - I disproved 5 major antivirus vendors' false positive detection on an app I wrote recently (they didn't understand the exe compression scheme I use was why, & auto-flagged it as a trojan - dumb, Dumb, DUMB & obviously a default "rule" that's incorrect).
Details? Ok:
I wrote up an application for custom hosts file import, creation, deduplication/normalization of repeat entries, & alphabetic sorting of entries, + filtering of entries that cause "issues" w/ CDN utilizing sites.
I submitted it to hpHosts/malwarebytes & securemecca.org (2 reputable & reliable sources for custom hosts file data), & they ran it thru the JOTTI online & VirusTotal online antivirus scanners (run on Linux systems iirc).
What happened?
---
1.) McAfee
2.) Symantec/Norton
3.) Comodo
4.) Arcabit/ArcaVir
5.) ClamAV
---
Detected it as a trojan but in the 32-bit MODEL ONLY!
Additionally - with a SPECIFIC trojan family name!
Now, 70++ others, INCLUDING Microsoft Security Essentials here locally said it was FINE/OK vs. their "false positive" detections from the antivirus vendors above listed!
So, @ that? I wrote & confronted each of them, each (save McAfee, who is "traditionally SLOW" about this, per Mr. Steven Burn of hpHosts/malwarebytes & Mr. Henry Hertz Hobbitt of securemecca.org told me they are so, & have BOTH seen this happen to their wares & those of others as well!)
This is no "1 time thing" - anyone can ask for instance, Mr. Nir Sofer about it happening to HE as well (on his 64-bit wares OR 32-bit ports of them) - he & I had large discussions online about it, & he did a blog on it as well which I helped point him to more data on it occurring for others also (including Dr. Mark Russinovich of MS, a former "co-worker" of mine for Sunbelt software whom we retailed various wares through online in the mid to late 1990's).
It's WRONG!
APK
P.S.=> Results thusfar?
Well... EACH of the above antivirus vendors has retracted the false positive on this ware of mine @ this point, McAfee's the ONLY 1 left (on the original builds they tested):
http://securemecca.com/public/APKHostsFileInstaller/2012_06_01/APKHostsFileEngineInstaller32_64bit.exe.zip
You simply extract its files to ANY folder you like (usually one you create for it, doesn't matter where, but you MUST run it as administrator (simple & the "read me" tab shows how easy THAT is to do):
What's it do for you?
It's a custom hosts file mgt. program that does the following for end users (Calling it "APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++")
---
1.) Offers massively noticeable increased speed for websurfing via blocking adbanners
2.) Offers increased speed for users fav. sites by hardcoding them into the hosts file for faster IP address-to-host/domain name resolutions (which sites RARELY change their hosting providers, e.g.-> of 250 I do, only 6 have changed since 2006 - & when sites do because they found a less costly hosting provider? Then, they either email notify members, put up warnings on their pages, & do IP warnings & redirectors onto the former IP address range to protect vs. the unscrupulous criminal bidding on that range to buy it to steal from users of say, online banking or shopping sites).
3.) Better "Layered-Security"/"Defense-In-Depth" via blocking host-domain based attacks by KNOWN bad sites-servers that are known to do so (which IS, by far, the majority of what's used by both users (hence the existence of the faulty but for most part working DNS system), AND even by malware makers (since host-domain names are recyclable by they, & the RBN (Russian Business Network & others)) were doing it like mad with "less than scrupulous", or uncaring, hosting providers)
4.) Bet
I'd agree that fsf.org was almost surely miss-categorized by a filtering algorithm.
In particular, Microsoft has surely added filters that reduce the possibility that Windows users happen upon software that directly competes with Microsoft's offerings.
In principle, they'd avoid blocking important sites like fsf.org, but presumably they block less important stuff. It's simply that fsf.org fell through the cracks.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Who is John Sullivan? What "corporate" did he warn about Microsoft's propietary network security programs? Is with the FSF?
"the most amusing thing here, from my point of view, is that only last week I pulled the corporate edition of the AV suite from 'Macdubhsith' from a client's machine as it had allowed 20 different Trojans to infect it (Infections spotted by the four other virus scanners I have, mbam and spybot, and confirmed by submitting a sample infected file to virustotal)." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 24, @11:45AM (#40429631)
Glad YOU found it "amusing" - I'll tell you 1 thing, point-blank, from being on the "receiving end" of such false accusations... it's NOT fun!
(Pissed me off royally to be quite honest, especially considering I am giving of my OWN FREE TIME & EFFORT creating a FREEWARE that benefits the end user of it in more than just security, but also for better speed they pay for (saving them those monies)).
---
"Somehow, the fact that their software flags a non-trojan application as a Trojan does not surprise me in the least." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 24, @11:45AM (#40429631)
Well, since I mentioned Nir Sofer earlier, since it has happened to he MANY times more than it has myself (& he does a LOT of really NEAT "powertoys" type apps in both 32-bit + 64-bit form as I do)?
Again - feel FREE to write him about it (he won't lie or deny what I noted here, & in fact, will probably tell you more)!
Yes... it happens, a LOT - & once more:
Even to Dr. Mark Russinovich of Microsoft!
(Whom I noted as well, & on his pstools more than a FEW times no less).
It happened to me YEARS AGO with Computer Associates, & I passed ALL 21 OF THEIR QUESTIONS FOR REMOVAL!
For an app that launched other apps invisibly - a puny 3 lines @ most of API calls which I did for a user to launch OLD Apache webservers that didn't run as trayiconized apps as modern apps do, & it bugged him it was in his startbar ALL THE TIME, so I asked him:
"Can you script it to run the way you like automatically on startup w/out having to use the GUI interface first?"
He said YES, so I wrote the app up for him to eliminate the issue!
After - CA got hold of it, via a Thor Schrock (idiot with NO CSC degree even), & classified it as a malware... I confronted them, they lowered it to a ZERO THREAT LEVEL, but should have removed it period...
They got sold off in the end, lol, & CA's no "reputable" company anyhow & are in fact, CONVICTED CRIMINALS - couldn't happen to a "NICER BUNCH OF GUYS"... why?
I called a Mr. Jensen there, directly, who heads that project in the former CA security suite... he told me first nicely he'd look into it. I called him days later directly & he told me "do not call me again" (to which I told him to go FUCK himself).
(In the end? LOL, HE GOT HIS... See here on THAT account -> http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Computer+Associates%22+and+%22scandal%22&hl=en&gbv=1&prmd=imvns&ei=PTjnT9_lNYKf6QHk0bTgDg&start=10&sa=N ))
"WHAT GOES AROUND, COMES AROUND!" It's ALL karma...
* So, on what Nir Sofer suspected, & what the parent poster here noted:
"Antivirus vendors classifying the competition as malware" - by Arancaytar (966377) on Sunday June 24, @09:51AM (#40428751) Homepage
About major companies attempting to "shit on the competition"?
In fact - Nir Sofer AND MYSELF also BOTH suspected they do it MORE to the "little guys" (like myself & he) than they do to their MAJOR larger competitors...
(Why? Easy - we're a LOT simpler to "crap on", & we're smaller/more nimble, & can produce patches FASTER & THEY KNOW IT, and we have less overheads... BUT, those same large companies have fleets of atto
Since Microsoft has no desire to secure its OS, you can get a virus at the slightest thing. It wouldn't be difficult to secure Windows OS. Just secure it so things can't be installed outside the directory you put them in, and can't affect things outside that directory. Leave a backwards compatibility mode for those who's systems rely on legacy software.
God spoke to me
.. Why would you visit that kind of website on a corporate systems anyway? Do that at home.
this situation brings to mind the supposed comment by Gates to the effect that Microsoft needed to stomp on Netscape's oxygen hose.
Yes -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2931443&cid=40420635
* I don't care for your "std. troll evasions" here, because I KNOW you'll do them here rather than "face the music" in that link in that link above...
Right?
Well, let's see about that - whatever you say here is immaterial - this on MY part's just to "shame you" a bit for trolling me in the past... turnabout's fair play (except I don't RUN like you do, Forrest... lol! I confront fools like yourself & systematically DESTROY them!).
---
A.) You run from the link above? You prove my point for me.
B.) You show up there attempting to disprove my points (which you run from to NO end)?? You know I've already "eaten you alive", & thus, you evade 3 simple questions there.
---
* You can't win, & YOU FAIL, bigtime, troll... (you know it, I KNOW IT, anyone reading here now, knows it!).
APK
P.S.=> Yes... You're usually QUITE verbose, until you're caught with your pants down I've noted from that discussion, lol... what's the matter NOW? "Cat got your tongue"??
Again - I won't even look here for your evasion reply, but instead, I'll be waiting @ that link to humiliate the HELL out of you publicly here because you'll evade answering as you have numerous times now already!
(Since I also showed you've "trolled me" before on the same issue, custom hosts files, & you RAN... "Run Forrest, RUN!")...
... apk
Some employee could be acting alone to do such things; but then the lack of documentation allows for the perfect cover. Unless required to keep emails and memos for every action and a policy or law to retain those in a secure fashion you can't be sure of WHO is behind many actions performed.
Obviously, SOMEBODY does it but with a chain of command it is so much easier to spread, dilute, and HIDE blame.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
OK, let's put things in perspective:
1) These lists aren't made manually. They're made by an algorithm. Part of the algorithm searches for key words. /.ers know about them. And by traffic, the FSF is number 49,225 according to Alexa. Hardly what I'd call a major website.
2) Let's say 95% of sites that accept Bitcoins are actually gambling sites. That means that the words associated with accepting bitcoins have a high correlation to gambling sites. If there are other words that trigger the "gambling" classification, it's probably going to get classified that way.
3) Let's say there is a whitelist of "good" domains. It's probably going to include domains like Google and Amazon. It probably includes all of the major websites. But major websites are determined by traffic, not by how well
"Go away, APK, and stop shilling your software." - by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday June 24, @12:32PM (#40430017) Homepage
So, little boy - realize this:I don't pay attention to, OR obey, YOUR "orders", get it? So, throw your childish 'tantrums' with mommy & daddy, not with me... they MIGHT actually INDULGE you - I won't.
* So, make me go away... you can't! So, your "impotent demands"?? Useless...
(I merely stated facts, and you come in here doing that, trolling me off topic? LMAO @ U!)
APK
P.S.=> Lastly, at least I have my own software, & most of it's done well, & WELL before you were born possibly I'd almost wager - have YOU done MORE, BETTER, & most importantly EARLIER than I have in it (from this small & only VERY partial list of some of my "favs" over time)?
PROVE IT... "put up, or shut up", pretty simple!
---
"My Name is Ozymandias: King of Kings - Look upon my works, ye mighty, & DESPAIR..."
----
Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61
(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)
PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there
PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there
CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there
GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it
HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!
Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn't buy it... by that point, I had moved onto other areas in this field besides coding only...
Being paid for an article that made me money over @ PCPitstop in 2008 for writing up a guide that has people showing NO VIRUSES/SPYWARES & other screwups, via following its point, such as THRONKA sees here -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ee926d913b81bf6d63c3c7372fd2a24c&t=28430&page=3
It's also been myself helping out the folks at the UltraDefrag64 project (a 64-bit defragger for Windows), in showing them code for how to do Process Priority Control @ the GUI usermode/ring 3/rpl 3 level in their program (good one too), & being credited for it by their lead dev & his team... see here -> http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/handbook/Credits.html or here http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2993462&group_id=199532&atid=969873
----
What do I have to say about that much above? I can't say it any better, than this was stated already (from the greatest book of all time, the "tech manual for life" imo):
"But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." - Corinthians Chapter 10, Verse 10
(And, because I got LUCKY to have been exposed to some really GREAT classmates,
Where have you been? Sullivan's been with the FSF for about a decade.
coding is life
"hey apk? I downloaded your software, but it doesn't do anything after extraction. I'm running Slackware -current, if that helps you out. Can't wait to try it." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 24, @12:57PM (#40430241)
It's a Windows 32 bit & 64-bit app, sorry... of course, from experience here? Anyone replying to me by AC is usually a troll also!
* So thus... sorry to say, but - Thus, I can't trust what you've stated as NOT "trolling", but the answer is above from me (there you go).
APK
P.S.=> It also HAS to be run as Administrator, VISTA onwards... apk
Hey Microsoft I just gave the FSF $120 because of your actions.
FSF has no grounds to sue Microsoft, even if this is deliberate. Microsoft has no monopoly or close to it in the webfilter arena. Microsoft isn't secretly mucking with dns or some other blatantly illegal action. Client corporations voluntarily elect to use Microsoft's security software to control their own traffic. MS makes no claims that it is 100% accurate. Additionally, MS has procedures in place to correct a misclassification. And even if they didn't, there's no standard by which third-party private web filters are actionable, other than say, breach of warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. But in that case, the proper plaintiff would be Microsoft's customer, not FSF.
Oh, FSF might lose some donations? How is that MS's problem? FSF's suing Microsoft is like advertisers suing the makers of NoScript and Adblock for depriving them of eyeballs.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
A whole ago, I watched a program on the huge teen prostitution problem in Vacouver. High school girls apparently found out that a little lip service was enough to fill their wardrobes with name brands. I have a daughter that will soon be a teen... So I'm not moving there!!!
Shit... I can't remember the name of that movie where some politician tried to gain points while running for office by trying to declare war on Canada... That was too good... Not joking when I say that I met someone who actually only caught a few minutes of the film back then and actually thought Canadians were dangerous. I told him "Only the French speaking ones. Their communists and hide behind their language.". Not sure what happened to him... But if he's still alive, he probably still believes it.
I am almost certain this categorization originated from BrightCloud (subsidiary of Webroot), which is well known to be one of the content rating and categorization suppliers of Microsoft. Their systems perform categorization largely automatically (obviously this is the "secret sauce" of the business) with partial human audits, but also to some extent based on feedback which one can provide on their website. I don't believe this miscategorization is in any way connected to interests of Microsoft - probably it's just a glitch in automation.
It certainly wouldn't be the first time - I remember an occasion when they miscategorized ClamAV update site as malware site. Often their categorization is quite accurate on widely popular used sites in English, but on fringe sites and fringe languages can cause odd mistakes. It's very hard to see the great conspiracy behind them, despite the fact miscategorizations are certainly annoying.
... the FSF called on organizations to use Firewalls licensed under AGPL 3 as opposed to GPL 3, so that the firewall that replaces Microsoft's proprietary firewall, is truly free, as opposed to the not-truly free nature of a GPL 3 based firewall, which wouldn't give out the source code to the firewall
Didn't you realize Win32/Win64 exes are for Windows, not Linux?
APK
P.S.=> Trolling by ac replies on your part's possible too, from experience of having my "trolls anonymous 'fanclub of apk stalkers' @ /." club... lol! apk
On his program, others did. Why's he downmodded? He's on topic on antivirus false positives too. What's wrong with slashdot inappropriate down moderations lately? It was a good tale to learn by.
Wouldn't you think Microsoft.com should be blocked and black-listed as a distributor of malware?!?
In all likelihood, this will prove to be a false positive generated by some poorly engineered classification algorithm at Microsoft. I dislike Microsoft as much as everyone else, but c'mon guys, this is so obviously bogus that it can't be malice. Even if it is Microsoft we're talking about here. IMHO, it's a clear case of MSAU (MS Artificial Unintelligence) at work.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
Crasoose is a bunny licking spoon bender!
"Bunny licking" I get: helping a rabbit with its hygiene. As for the rest, I know of air bending, water bending, fire bending, and earth bending, but what traditional element is "spoon"?
For convincing me to become a contributing member of the FSF today.
The idea that Microsoft would try to block access to fsf.org is not plausible for the reason cited.
What they have really been caught at is blocking a website based on keyword scanning without any human review.
Surely a check of whatever reputation score Bing had compiled for fsf.org would have flagged this as a doubtful gambling site, and called for human review before taking automatic action.
"So, you wrote a self modifying .exe" - by marcosdumay (620877) on Sunday June 24, @06:03PM (#40432353) Homepage
WRONG - My program PROTECTS ITSELF vs. self-modification OR VIRAL MODIFICATION, & via this idea I implemented decades ago vs. that(was modded up here in "Coding for Defcon" @ /. in fact, years ago) -> CODING FOR DEFCON (my compressed/packed exe + sizecheck @ startup technique): 2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158231&cid=13257227
If it detects modification to itself, & if not same size @ byte level, it shuts itself down (can't be infected if it changes size, which IS what true "computer viruses" usually do to executables)
(It works... in fact, I am astounded other coders don't use the idea, because std. virus in the classic sense in executable infectors would be a thing of the past... or prevented to a HIGH degree/extent).
---
"that writtes on the hosts file" - by marcosdumay (620877) on Sunday June 24, @06:03PM (#40432353) Home
So does Spybot Search & Destroy - in pretty much the same way/for the same purposes-reasons: Security vs. online threats. Mine does a lot more than just that... but, point's there - it FAR from malicious, & in fact it speeds up users online in 2 ways, + protects them from online threats, and also gives them more abilities like better "anonymity" vs. DNS request logs & being able to bypass DNSBL's IF they like too!
---
"and you didn't imagine it would be tagged as a trojan?" - by marcosdumay (620877) on Sunday June 24, @06:03PM (#40432353) Home
Not @ all, for the reasons noted above... & you're VERY OFF per the above also - did you think you were correct? No... sorry.
---
"I'd advice you to not compress the next version of your software, or if you really must, use a normal zip algorithm, using mainstream lib. - by marcosdumay (620877) on Sunday June 24, @06:03PM (#40432353) Home
My program's NOT MALICIOUS - it produces a file for users they "tune" themselves in fact easily, that does QUITE the OPPOSITE... and thus, who are you to give advice?
See above again - even when slashdot had an article on protecting code, for Defcon? I was uprated for the VERY IDEA you're trying to advise me on... lol!
APK
P.S.=> You're not one to advice, vs. the above, & ESPECIALLY when you have the mechanics of my program completely wrong & especially since it functions like others like it for security purposes, e.g. the program I noted above...
... apk
You're correct on all accounts noted - I have a "Troll Fanclub" that likes to troll me by ac posts, & downmod my initial posts...
* That's since I have beaten the tar out of them in techinical debates here SO MANY TIMES, they're just victims of their own "geek angst", & act worse then women now, with those "honorable" (lol, not) 'tactics', in "effete retaliation" (because they know they can never get the best of me in computing related debates).. pitiful!
APK
P.S.=> Every once in awhile that happens - someone states the truth & obvious on 1 of my downrated posts that have nothing but facts in them... apk
There are indeed gambling references on fsf.org:
https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/dbd/sites/www.defectivebydesign.org/modules/contrib-5/spam/spam.install
db_query("INSERT INTO {spam_custom} VALUES (1, '/(adipex|cialis|phentermine|viagra)/i', 1, 1, 2, 0, 0)");
db_query("INSERT INTO {spam_custom} VALUES (2, '/casino games|poker online|texas hold\\''em|texas holdem/i', 1, 0, 2, 0, 0)");
db_query("INSERT INTO {spam_custom} VALUES (3, '/(american|casino|free|grand|online|party)(|-)?(blackjack|casino|gambling|poker)/i', 1, 0, 2, 0, 0)");
db_query("INSERT INTO {spam_custom} VALUES (4, 'diet pill', 0, 0, 2, 0, 0)");
case 'pgsql':
db_query("CREATE TABLE spam_tracker (
sid serial PRIMARY KEY,
Never trust people who wish you to hold two mutually-exclusive things to be 'true'. We need to come up with a name for people like that. I don't think 'fanboy' does it justice.
"This is of course entirely co-incidental. Microsoft is an ethical company that would never stoop to breaking its own software in order to defeat a competitor.
Net greeting card company alleges Microsoft is trying to destroy them
AccountKiller
He said control - not write your own code. The rest of your piece is just one gigantic strawman.
AccountKiller
Your reply has nothing to do with monopoly abuse. If you want to post about some crazy conspiracy, write your own post. Don't piggyback off of mine.
"There's speculation that their accepting of Bitcoin inadvertantly categorised them as a gambling website"
Does the speculation have any idea why no other site using bitcoin were equally labeled?
AccountKiller
Given that this software is designed for corporate networks, I don't see this as bad as all the "safe browsing" stuff that's being put into web browsers these days. Automated blocking isn't really something we should be pushing with regards to things like gambling. Save the blocking (with overrides) for malware sites.
Also, do corporations have to use Microsoft's Reputation Service, or are they able to add/remove sites themselves? The comment from the FSF about the proprietary nature of Microsoft's software make it sound like any level of manual control is impossible. Is it?
One thing that isn't mentioned in the article is whether this security suite is meant for use by ISPs. Does it only work on corporate servers on their own intranet, or is this something that could potentially block people's home computers from accessing the FSF donation site? If it only affects corporate networks, claiming it could prevent people from making donations to the FSF is unnecessary and sounds like attention whoring to me.
I hate to sound like a devil's advocate, but I'd like more facts and less bashing.
Anyone know the odds on Microsoft fixing this is?
Have gnu, will travel.
Well, I guess M$ is taking a gamble at trying not reduce the money goint to FSF.....
Fuck off.
ZERO is the resulting answer... lmao! Especially vs. this from you:
"Nobody cares what you've done." - by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday June 24, @08:04PM (#40433575) Homepage
You obviously do care, since you're responding again, & have zero to show for yourself!
Given a challenge put to you by myself, that's your result? Please: "Run, Forrest - RUN!?? It's not much of a result on your part...
---
"We just don't want to get hit by you constantly self-masturbating over your own stuff." - by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday June 24, @08:04PM (#40433575) Homepage
I merely state facts, and you provide us the FACT YOU ARE MERELY A "ne'er-do-well" (lol) - thanks for proving my point on that account... &, you're also now "projecting" what you yourself like to see (lol, "manual entertainment")? Please... lol!
---
"If you're a great programmer and you have nothing to prove, why do you insist on doing so?" - by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday June 24, @08:04PM (#40433575) Homepage
No - I merely stated facts that proved that you have zero, no "pot to piss in", & that you're an off-topic "ne'er-do-well" who runs from a challenge put to he here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2935243&cid=40430417 because YOU HAD TO RUN!
(Since you've managed to accomplish ZERO OF NOTE/WORTH in the art & science of computing).
---
"It's just sad." - by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday June 24, @08:04PM (#40433575) Homepage
What's saddest of all is the fact that YOU came in here "barking orders", & yet you have no authority, or even accomplishments in the computing field to even begin to lend you any authority, hence why nobody pays YOU any mind or lends you any credence... period.
(You know it, I KNOW IT - now, anyone reading, also knows it... lol!)
APK
P.S.=> After all - the results speak for themselves & yourself (big fat ZERO)...
(So all your "ne'er-do-well" tantrums, off-topic illogical failing ad hominem attack attempts etc.? Useless... just like you!)
... apk
Look, I'm a liberal, and I found this to be funny. He was pretending to be from Microsoft and was pretending to be a FOX News zombie, and in that character he listed off a bunch of phrases that any conservolibertarian might want to block for fear that any site using such a phrase might also contain information contrary to the usual right wing propaganda. I do not believe the author's intent was to offer any actual commentary on any of the phrases nor was there any intent in trivializing any of the issues associated with those phrases. It was simply a list of phrases likely to make a right wingnut fearful and/or angry.
The target of this humor was Microsoft and to a lesser extent conservolibertarians. I do not think any slight to the severity of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was intended.
But the reason this has traction is that Microsoft has a long history of doing sleazy things to undermine those it considers competition. I do think Microsoft has improved in this regard and finally understands how it hurts their public perception when they do underhanded things to competitors, but the public still remembers how Microsoft used to be, and you can't really blame people for jumping to these particular conclusions. If Microsoft hasn't done so many things like this in the past, then stories like this wouldn't gain traction without firmer evidence to back it up.
This is the drop that may fill and overflow the latrine of M$ doings!
"I know the programmers I admire and they ain't the authors of Shareware #4352 on some god-awful Windows 'zine. And they certainly don't have such a low self-esteem to be constantly showing how big their balls are.." - by icebraining (1313345) on Monday June 25, @03:40PM (#40442951) Homepage
First - You're NOT THEM, are you? No... lol!
I know 'em too, & AM ONE OF THEM (with over 32++ extremely large "enterprise-class"/"mission-critical" systems that run ENTIRE COMPANIES information systems to my credit professionally, since 1994... SO, again - HOW ABOUT YOU?)
"Not only am I the president of the 'hair club for men', but I'm also a member..." & you? Clearly, your not, based on your evasions & lack of accomplishments in the art & science of computing (& yet you saw fit to "bark orders" @ me like YOU OWN /.? Please... lol!).
SECONDLY - At least I have self-esteem & demonstratable proofs to my credit in the art & science of computing YOU CAN'T EVEN BEGIN TO TOUCH on your part -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2935243&cid=40430417 ... lol, you're an "armchair QB" talker, nothing more!
---
"Yes, I know, but I have nothing to prove to you, unlike you who apparently are in need of social validation." - by icebraining (1313345) on Monday June 25, @03:40PM (#40442951) Homepage
No, rather YOU HAVE NOTHING TO PROVE IT WITH, & I proved that much with the challenge you RAN from Forrest -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2935243&cid=40430417
(I just "shot you down in flames" is all, using facts - Proof? Well, that's easy - See link here http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2935243&cid=40430417 (lol))...
Once more - "Run, Forrest - RUN!!!"...
---
"And if you want to take this as an admission of my "worthlessness", be my guest, I literally couldn't care less." - by icebraining (1313345) on Monday June 25, @03:40PM (#40442951) Homepage
LMAO - Oh, really? Is THAT why you're posting now?? B.S., you clearly DO care, but you can't salvage yourself @ this point, you've done ZERO - but, that's what you get when you troll me, see link above & my subject-line also...
(You're a LOT OF TALK, but no action!)
---
---
"But I see my case is hopeless, so I'll stop wasting my time with it. " - by icebraining (1313345) on Monday June 25, @03:40PM (#40442951) Homepage
Good move outta you, for once @ least, lol!
I mean, hey - You? Trying to "take me on" from YOU, armchair QB "ne'er-do-well"??
Impossible...
You FAIL, everytime, and on the grounds I noted above. Period.
---
"And you can stop wasting yours too, since your posts will be invisible to me from now on." - by icebraining (1313345) on Monday June 25, @03:40PM (#40442951) Homepage
Oh, that's IT: "Run, Forrest - RUN!!!"
---
* You FAIL, I win, as usual...
APK
P.S.=> Well, you just KNOW I've just GOTTA say it, as-is-per-my-usual "inimitable style":
This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'", & it always IS, because of "ne'er-do-well" trolls like icebraining - who "talk a good game" but when the chips are on the table? They have ZERO... lol! Everytime...
... apk
"Genuinely curious: why actually compress your .exe rather than use a regular SHA256 type hash?" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 25, @11:10AM (#40439009)
2 GOOD SOLID REASONS:
1.) Compressed/Packed executables are HARDER to disassemble/reverse engineer (even Dr. Mark Russinovich uses the technique I noted & was modded up here for during "Coding for Defcon" -> CODING FOR DEFCON (my compressed/packed exe + sizecheck @ startup technique): 2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158231&cid=13257227 )
Why? It worked for him on ROOTKIT REVEALER is why - ask him yourself!
I.E./E.G.-> It makes it tougher on hacker/cracker types to mess up his work (for he, it dealt in hWnd intercepts & messaging which this works for also, via obfuscation exe packing yields... easily!).
---
2.) Compressed/Packed exes LOAD FASTER FROM DISK (over networks especially) - & today's extremely FAST cpu's make up for the decompression stage in memory...
---
* And, there you are... & yes, my sizecheck technique works for both reasons above, & makes "resource hacking" my apps harder to do also (bonus)...
What you're suggesting's another possible (I was going to do CRC checks also but just stuck with my simple technique's all).
APK
P.S.=> It's also "seamless" & EASY to implement - done AFTER the exe's built by the compressor itself... So, that "all said & aside"?
Any other questions?? Ask
... apk
I never HAD a registered account of "APK" (or any other other than 1 in AlecStaar I built to speak to John Carmack here ONCE, in 2002 that I don't even RECALL THE PASSWORD TO ANYMORE, lol)
So, I can't use APK (an Andrew K has it)...
* So much for THAT, from you...
---
Since I, unlike you, APK, am still allowed to log in and have plenty of karma to burn" - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:37AM (#40449443)
See above, "Rinse, Lather, & REPEAT"... so it sinks in, & you can "drink it in & digest it" washing it down with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat" & your foot in your mouth (for FLAVOR, lol - how's it taste?).
(To the next troll - "NEXT"... lol, I'll just blow them down too, with facts & logic!)
APK
P.S.=> I honestly could care LESS about "karma points", especially when I can demonstrate with proofs that I still get highly rated here usually when I post, ala:
Roughly 200++ of them & I post as AC (hard to get even +1, as /. hides our posts & we "AC"'s start @ ZERO/0 points, unlike registered "lusers", lol!):
+5 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (6):
HOSTS & BGP:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1901826&cid=34490450
FIREFOX IN DANGER: 2011 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2559120&cid=38268580
TESLA:2010 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1872982&cid=34264190
TESLA:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1806946&cid=33777976
NVIDIA 2d:2006 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=175774&cid=14610147
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES BUSTED FOR ACCOUNTING FRAUD:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1884922&cid=34350102
----
+4 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (4):
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167071&cid=13931198
INFO. SYSTEMS WORK:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161862&cid=13531817
WINDOWS @ NASDAQ 7++ YRS. NOW:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1290967&cid=28571315
CARMACK'S ARMADILLO AEROSPACE:2005 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158310&cid=13263898
----
+3 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (6):
APK MICROSOFT INTERVIEW:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155172&cid=13007974
APK MS SYMBOLIC DIRECTORY LINKS:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=166850&cid=13914137
APK FOOLS IE7 INSTALL IN BETA HOW TO:2006 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=175857&cid=14615222
PROOFS ON OPERA SPEED & SECURITY:2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=273931&cid=20291847
HBGary POST in Fake Names On Social Networks, a Fake Problem:2011 ->
"Yes, they are wrong" - by marcosdumay (620877) on Monday June 25, @01:47PM (#40441171) Homepage
Absolutely! The 5/70++ antivirus vendors were WRONG on my app... no questions asked, & hence, their removal of false positives!
A Mr. Steven Burn of hpHosts/malwarebytes ( services@it-mate.co.uk ) & Mr. Henry Hertz Hobbit of securemecca ( hhhobbit.airelle@spamgourmet.com or hhhobbit@securemecca.com ) are others that can verify that, as they worked on it with me, & doubted myself @ first (I don't blame 'em - they get ATTACKED regularly) - So, BOTH gents can TRIPLE VERIFY my words here...
(So, write them IF you wish, or just see my next paragraph below in reply to you now):
(I had to prove it to them too, first... &, like usual? I did!)
---
"I didn't say your program was malicius, and the anti-virus was right tagging it." - by marcosdumay (620877) on Monday June 25, @01:47PM (#40441171) Homepage
It's ANYTHING BUT malicious & does end users of custom hosts files good, in these items:
---
1.) Blocking out malware/malscripted sites
2.) Blocking out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware
3.) Blocking out Bogus DNS servers malware makers use
4.) Blocking out Botnet C&C servers
5.) Blocking out Bogus adbanners that are full of malicious script content
6.) Getting you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking out adbanners + hardcoding in your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution)
7.) Added reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers).
8.) Added "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs)
9.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
10.) More screen "real estate" (since no more adbanners appear onscreen eating up CPU, Memory, & other forms of I/O too - bonus!)
11.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD drived IP stack).
12.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins (which "layer on" ontop of Ring 3/RPL 3/usermode browsers - whereas the hosts file operates @ the Ring 0/RPL 0/Kernelmode of operation (far faster) as a filter for the IP stack itself...)
13.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
14.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them.
---
* & FAR more... Heck - it's "Anti-Malicious", if anything!
---
"All I said is that it does some things that normaly raise the suspicion of anti-virus (because lots of virus do them), and one should expect some of them to tag you because of that." - by marcosdumay (620877) on Monday June 25, @01:47PM (#40441171) Homepage
Which they are WRONG on, & you even state it also!
(Trust me - when I point out "false positives" to them? I don't just say they are - I prove HOW & WHY they are, which of course, helps "better" their antivirus wares too - "bonus").
---
"but one could easily immagine that they'd be wrong and protect oneself beforehand, avoiding all the trouble." - by marcosdumay (620877) on Monday June 25, @01:47PM (#40441171) Homepage
I do what I do, & knock down "big names" in this field/art & science of computing ALL THE TIME (for their own good sometimes) - ask Dr. Mark Russinovich even, especially about memmgt & my correcting his work in the past too (telling him EXACTLY how/what/when/where/why he was "off'wrong" too, & he thanked me via email for it no less)...
APK
P.S.=> Not a first, I've helped a LOT of known coders over time (you'd be surprised were I to put the ENTIRE list out with proofs & who as well)... It's just "what I do" & "how I roll"... apk
"You get downmodded constantly by me and others because you are the most boring, smug and irritating person in the world." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 25, @09:13AM (#40437725)
LOL, no, I just "blow away" trolls like you, with facts, everytime & you can't HANDLE it! Thus, vs. your b.s. quoted above? Well... here's some FACTS!
An approximate 200++:1 ratio exists next vs. your "opinion" troll:
Roughly 200++ of them & I post as AC (hard to get even +1, as /. hides our posts & we "AC"'s start @ ZERO/0 points, unlike registered "lusers", lol!):
+5 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (6):
HOSTS & BGP:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1901826&cid=34490450
FIREFOX IN DANGER: 2011 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2559120&cid=38268580
TESLA:2010 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1872982&cid=34264190
TESLA:2010 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1806946&cid=33777976
NVIDIA 2d:2006 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=175774&cid=14610147
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES BUSTED FOR ACCOUNTING FRAUD:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1884922&cid=34350102
----
+4 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (4):
APK SECURITY GUIDE:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167071&cid=13931198
INFO. SYSTEMS WORK:2005 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161862&cid=13531817
WINDOWS @ NASDAQ 7++ YRS. NOW:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1290967&cid=28571315
CARMACK'S ARMADILLO AEROSPACE:2005 -> http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158310&cid=13263898
----
+3 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (6):
APK MICROSOFT INTERVIEW:2005 -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155172&cid=13007974
APK MS SYMBOLIC DIRECTORY LINKS:2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=166850&cid=13914137
APK FOOLS IE7 INSTALL IN BETA HOW TO:2006 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=175857&cid=14615222
PROOFS ON OPERA SPEED & SECURITY:2007 -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=273931&cid=20291847
HBGary POST in Fake Names On Social Networks, a Fake Problem:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2375110&cid=37056304
APK RC STOP ROOKIT TECHNIQUES:2008 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1021873&cid=25681261
----
+2 'modded up' posts by "yours truly" (18):
CODING FOR DEFCON (my compressed/packed exe + sizecheck @ startup technique): 2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments
"I must admit I'm surprised." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 26, @03:10PM (#40456385)
Why? Smaller files load FASTER than larger ones, less to initially "pickup" from disk!
I also note you don't question the fact that compressed/packed exe's are also harder to disassemble/reverse-engineer &/or resource hack... then again, WHY AM I NOT SURPRISED?
(I.E./E.G.-> I do it? It's "questionable" - Dr. Mark Russinovich does it (whom I have literally "schooled" before on numerous occasions & he even thanked me for it by email once)?? Oh, THEN IT'S "OK"... right?)
Then again also, to "top that off" once more?
Back circa 2005 here on /.??
Yes, I got MODDED UP for this very technique in CODING FOR DEFCON (using my compressed/packed exe + sizecheck @ startup technique): 2005 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=158231&cid=13257227 as well, so even your "/. peers" saw the value of it!
---
* The rest of what you stated? Non-Sequitur, immaterial ON INITIAL READS/LOADS, since it has to come up off disk, first!
(Especially since the stage I spoke of is OFF THE DISK ITSELF, & there's NO QUESTION a smaller file will load faster than a larger one on init. reads (& that today's MASSIVELY FAST CPU's offset the decompression stage in memory)).
APK
P.S.=> On later loads, PROVIDED THE KERNELMODE DISKCACHING SUBSYSTEM DOESN'T GET "FLUSHED" BY "MEMORY PRESSURE"? Which I don't *think* you've covered adequately pointing that out??
Caching does the rest!
(IF THAT is what you meant? Then, yes - subsequent loads will be loaded by cached memory rather than disk, but my point STILL HOLDS TRUE off the disk on initial reads)... period! apk
"I'm not surprised you're compressing your executables. That makes sense if Windows works the way you suggest." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 26, @03:47PM (#40456861)
ANY OS REALLY DOES! Think about it man:
1.) You read up from disk, into RAM to execute
2.) Then caching takes over from there (for data AND executables)
Difference being, exe's page "back to themselves" when paging (which is WHY folks see paging operations occurring even IF THEY RUN WITH NO PAGEFILE.SYS PRESENT - it's exe's loading portions of themselves 4k @ a shot when needed, otherwise, dormant portions remain on disk).
---
"What I'm surprised is that Windows doesn't map executables directly into memory, as Linux does, that it's still doing things the way operating systems did in the 1980s." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 26, @03:47PM (#40456861)
Don't quote me as saying it's NOT how Linux is doing it (loading executables) - because I am honestly NOT THAT SURE I UNDERSTOOD what you said to be honest!
(I only specifically noted that once cached by the local kernelmode subsystem, it's much the same as what you describe (IF I understood you correctly)).
For all I know from what you wrote? It's probably much the same... it wouldn't surprise me 1 BIT if it were, why? See below (everyone's STEALING everyone's ideas, but who really cares since we, the end users, get the bennies, right??)
APK
P.S.=> I'll tell you what Linux took from Windows:
1.) SMP, & thus, ENTERPRISE READY SERVERS for Linux couldn't happen until things very like:
a.) Windows NT-based OS' had in completion ports in process scheduling
b.) Re-entrant kernelmode code.
2.) True usermode threads (instead of a single 'round robin' to a single kernelmode thread as Linux had due to process fork type structuring in process mgt.)
3.) DFS (Distributed File System) was around way, Way, WAY before Linux had things like ZFS available/ported to it.
4.) Lastly but FAR FROM LEAST? What the NSA "bolted on" to Linux via SeLinux, in MAC (mandatory access control) which IS a copy of what Windows NT-based OS had LONG before Linux ever did, in ACL (access control lists) @ the filesystem, & registry levels...
I AM FAIR THOUGH - here's ideas/techniques I KNOW Windows took from Linux:
A.) http.sys being moved to kernelmode for faster processing of webrequests for servers
B.) Plug & Play IP stack initialization (which MacOS X had before Windows did)...
... apk
Either I'm dyslexic or the subject line says it all.
"In the Linux method, only those parts of the program that get executed are ever loaded into memory, and the program can start running long before any of the rest of it is loaded into RAM." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 27, @09:53AM (#40466707)
"It's important to note that PE files are not just mapped into memory as a single memory-mapped file"
FROM -> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc301805.aspx
Right - AND, even try the test below... you'll see that. It's sort of like how DLL's load (which I KNOW do not load the ENTIRE BODY of the DLL - only the portions you need, right into the calling process' memory space).
---
"Now yes, both methods eventually result in executable code being copied to RAM." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 27, @09:53AM (#40466707)
Exactly - that's exactly my point in a nutshell... but, I'm not sure if you have the paging part right in Windows, next:
---
"However, the first method, in a VM system, results in that executable code being then copied to disc again (when the process is swapped out of memory.)" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 27, @09:53AM (#40466707)
Afaik - It's not literally COPIED BACK & REWRITTEN TO DISK - because there's no NEED for that (code's the same & there - it'd load up ONLY PARTS IT HASN'T LOADED YET, or that got "paged out of memory" if not in immediate usage)...
E.G. - When it "grabs" things off disk, that's for portions that have been "paged back" BUT DON'T ACTUALLY GET WRITTEN - that has the potential to modify the executable too, by the by (it is merely just referenced/re-referenced), but read in again as needed/when needed, if paged 4kb @ a time...
---
"In the Linux system, the executable code isn't copied to disc, because it's already on a disc." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 27, @09:53AM (#40466707)
That's what I've said above... same, same, same - afaik! It makes TOTAL sense is why... & afaik? That's HOW Windows manages it with executables, because again - DLL's are similar in nature & ONLY LOAD WHAT IS NEEDED FROM SAID LIBRARY (not its ENTIRE body) into the calling process' memory space...
---
"In the first method, the entire program is loaded before being executed." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 27, @09:53AM (#40466707)
Ok, a test for you (because this I've done before) - check the running Working Set size (& other memory columns in taskmgr.exe once you select them to be visible) - open a multi-form program, if you have one - not MDI or TABBED, but one with multiple windows (not about boxes either).
Then, start flipping thru the screens it doesn't have loaded on startup - you'll see the process size change as you do it - it's doing what you state Linux does, albeit, in Windows too...
Here - this'll prove my point on it better than I can say it:
"It's important to note that PE files are not just mapped into memory as a single memory-mapped file"
FROM -> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc301805.aspx
(Just like what I described DLL's do - portions load ONLY THAT YOU NEED, not the ENTIRE BODY).
* Now, you know that Windows does it the exact same!
APK
P.S.=> Interesting discussion, but I *think* you'll find that Windows does the SAME THING (& mainly because it makes sense) - & if you find it doesn't? I'd be VERY surprised... apk
"Some of us have better things to do;" - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
Oh, really - is that why not a SINGLE ONE OF YOU TROLLS have managed to show me you've done MORE, EARLIER & BETTER than I have from a small partial list of mine only over time?
(Again - I have a list of verifiable facts... you do not!)
---
"but you insist on posting AC and think anyone really cares that you were able to spend hours compiling a list of every post you've ever made that was modded up." - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
No, I just had them placed in a file for trolls that tried to say what they did here, & it's merely FACTS that disprove their b.s., easily (because they're verifiable facts). Which, mind you? You don't have any of here... lol, I do.
If you have a problem with my posting as ac? Tough... it's what I do. Don't like it?? Too bad!
---
"It's funny that you state that you can't trust someone else's word because they posted AC" - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
There's a difference between posting AC, & doing what I do - which IS identify myself as I post by signing off as "APK" (even though some trolls have tried to impersonate me that way, I've caught many in it & bookmarked them too (in case I ever need it)).
---
"Hahahaha you're so full of yourself." - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
You, by contrast & by way of comparison, are just FULL OF IT... lol!
---
"that's why I'm only dropping by to point this out, rather than spending way too much time to tear down every aspect of your flawed logic." - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
Funny - Most folks'd say the person with actual verifiable FACTS has more logical ammo for debate (that'd be me & said list you bitch about, that I use vs. trolls like yourself & others here)... whereas/again by way of comparison? You don't & I just put up facts that disprove your b.s. (while you troll me by ac posts & downmod my posts too, logging out of your reg'd "luser" account after doing so, & trolling by ac... I know THAT "little trick", lol, because I caught tomhudson & the trolltalk.com people doing it here... want proof? Ask!)
---
"Yes, it would be easy, but it would be too time consuming to cover all the bases and, as I've already stated, I have better things to do.." - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
You'd better have more contradictory information vs. that list of mine you bitch about of my upmods (partial only) then, because as it stands now? YOU DON'T (lol)...
(Yes, that's ANOTHER FACT!)
---
"More to the point, you can state that you've only had one account and that you no longer log in to it because you don't know the password, but you can't prove either of thise things.." - by BronsCon (927697) on Tuesday June 26, @02:14PM (#40455473)
Heh, ok - See the last time I used a registered account on /. (just once, in 2002, to talk to John Carmack):
http://slashdot.org/~AlecStaar
&
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=33453&cid=3623241
(I wasn't very interested in /. back then's all, & wanted to inquire with Mr. Carmack directly if possible on game specs for machines required to run it - that's all & then I left here for a couple years iirc).
---
"Perhaps you have multiple accounts, you can't prove you don't, just like I can't prove that you do."
Trolls I've utterly BLOWN AWAY with facts vs. their off-topic illogical failing ad hominem attack attempts, like this one I blew them away on using upward moderations I've gotten (which is hard on AC posters since /. hides our posts to begin with by default) -> http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2935623&cid=40436899
APK
P.S.=> I've dusted trolls here SO MANY TIMES & with facts (just like in that link above vs. his trolling b.s.), all they have is bogus unjustifiable downmods vs. facts I use, in "effete retaliation" (which is worse than even WOMEN do)... apk