Yeah well. If you're logged in as an admin user to your computer, while surfing the web, then it's your (!!!) own fault if your computer gets infected.
Do not blame the creator of the OS.
Inconvenience?? What inconvenience?? The only time you need to be admin, is when you install software and/or make changes to your OS. At all other times, admin privileges are not required.
Yes - I know. Some software out there still requires admin privileges to run. These should be banned and burned.
It's not up to Microsoft how Windows is installed on a computer delivered to an end-user. It's companies like Dell, HP and computer shops who actually install Windows.
They (Dell, HP and computer shops) need to learn to install Windows properly: ntfs, no automatic login to admin user, least-privileged account, etc, etc, etc.
And power-users don't use pre-installed OSes anyway, correct? So the main problem is with users who use computers with a pre-installed OS.
I believe we should use Heisenberg's development model.
Due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle the outcome of this development process is uncertain.
Could be a webbrowser or... maybe an os.
But then... we will never be able to determine what was actually developed, will we?
"Bingo. It is a pickle, no doubt about it. Bad news is there's no way you can really know if it's an os or a webbrowser. So it's really up to you. Just have to make up your own damn mind."
Maybe the Lorentz development model is better actually: It (Lorentz transformation) reflects the surprising fact that observers moving at different velocities report different orderings of events.
Mozilla reports "Bug fixed". User reports "Bug not yet fixed".
yuk - even with the Lorentz development model, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle still applies. We still can't tell for certain if a bug was fixed or not.
Excuse me - and why is that? Why does every employee at IBM or Apple need to have a routable ip address?
If IBM has 100 ip addresses for gateways to provide access to and from the Internet. And another 100 ip addresses for external webservers. Then I believe 200 ip addresses for IBM are plenty enough.
Please explain to me why 256 IP Addresses for IBM is not enough?
And to be honest, I feel quite comfy behind my stealthy NATed DSL modem, knowing that NOT everybody on the Internet can access my computer.
Yes - I still run a firewall on my computer to protect myself from laptops that friends or family connect to my little internal network. But it's a big difference between protecting my computer from the occasional other computer on my little internal network, or protecting my computer from 5,000,000,000+ other computers on the Internet. Which is what I would have to do if my computer had a routable ipv6 address.
So why do the files contained in "IE8-WindowsXP-KB978207-x86-ENU.exe" all have a date of "6-Jan-2010" or older?? The files contained in "IE8-WindowsServer2003-KB978207-x86-ENU.exe" are dated "22-Dec-2009" or older. Why?? And when the patch is installed, the files that are updated, like "mshtml.dll", have a date of "22-Dec-2009".
Wasn't the vulnerability, that this patch supposedly addresses, discovered (published) around 14-Jan-2010??
Anybody has an idea why there is a discrepancy??
Looks like Microsoft had the problem already fixed before it was even published. No??
If my ADSL connection is down for thirty minutes, I can't do anything with the piece of hardware and software sitting on my desk. Since all the apps are on... the Internet.
So... WHY would anybody use this???
Anybody remember GMail's outtages... ???
Looks like vendor lock-in to me... all depends on Google. If Google ever goes bye-bye, all your data goes bye-bye too.
If you're logged in as Administrator or a user with administrative user rights/access, while surfing the web, checking your email, etc. --> you're vulnerable.
Until users change their behavior and start using least-privilege accounts while surfing the web, it's wrong to blame the browser.
Microsoft even says it in their security advisory kb 979352: An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the local user. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less affected than users who operate with administrative user rights.
And this applies to any OS: Linux, Windows, Mac OS, etc.
Rootkit - contrary to what its name may imply, a rootkit does not grant a user administrator privileges, as it requires prior admin access to execute and tamper with system files and processes.
Think again - unless the following issues are being addressed, piracy will not go away.
DVD technology: a dvd has a region code so that a dvd bought in one region can not be played in another region (unless you use an illegal hacked player). While an.avi file can be played anywhere.
Payment methods: not everybody who wants to buy movies, music or software has a credit card. If you want everybody to buy your product, then you (the company) need to provide payment methods that cover all needs, incl. cash only. Another example: somebody has enough credit in their paypal account to buy a product, but they still can not buy the product they want, because at the end of the purchasing process, one is still required to enter a credit card number, despite sufficient credit in your paypal account. This example assumes the paypal account is not linked to a credit card and/or bank account. I do not know if this is an issue with paypal and/or the company selling the product, and I don't really care. It's a problem - and if you (the company) do not address it, piracy will continue.
Side note: Bad credit and credit cards is what got us into the financial crisis in the first place.
Cost: a newly released dvd cost around 28 - 40 us$. How much does it cost to produce the dvd: probably one us$ or less. It doesn't matter, the question is: where is the bulk of the money we pay for a dvd going? To the artist? Probably not - but it should go to the artist.
Side note: greed is the other reason that got us all into the financial crisis.
Business model: you do not actually buy software - no - you buy the right to use it. Who came up with this idea??
Unless the above issues (and I am sure other people have additional issues) are addressed, piracy will not go away.
20 years ago I was flying from Frankfurt, Germany to Bombay, India on a night flight and I spent more than an hour in the cockpit of the 747-200 talking to the pilots and just enjoying the night time view of the earth.
It's very sad that today's young generation can not have these kind of experiences any more.
Locked cockpit doors, passenger's hands tied to the chair in front of them, sedated passengers,... What's next?
Think again - unless the following issues are being addressed, piracy will not go away.
DVD technology: a dvd has a region code so that a dvd bought in one region can not be played in another region (unless you use an illegal hacked player). While an.avi file can be played anywhere.
Payment methods: not everybody who wants to buy movies, music or software has a credit card. If you want everybody to buy your product, then you (the company) need to provide payment methods that cover all needs, incl. cash only. Another example: somebody has enough credit in their paypal account to buy a product, but they still can not buy the product they want, because at the end of the purchasing process, one is still required to enter a credit card number, despite sufficient credit in your paypal account. This example assumes the paypal account is not linked to a credit card and/or bank account. I do not know if this is an issue with paypal and/or the company selling the product, and I don't really care. It's a problem - and if you (the company) do not address it, piracy will continue.
Side note: Bad credit and credit cards is what got us into the financial crisis in the first place.
Cost: a newly released dvd cost around 28 - 40 us$. How much does it cost to produce the dvd: probably one us$ or less. It doesn't matter, the question is: where is the bulk of the money we pay for a dvd going? To the artist? Probably not - but it should go to the artist.
Side note: greed is the other reason that got us all into the financial crisis.
Business model: you do not actually buy software - no - you buy the right to use it. Who came up with this idea??
Unless the above issues (and I am sure other people have additional issues) are addressed, piracy will not go away.
On every OS, even Linux based, the user has the authority to wipe out their home directory and personal settings. This isn't a security flaw.
Is that so - so why does a Guest (!!!) account have the authority to wipe an Admin account's home directory. That IS a security flaw.
You are making a mistake: the user has the authority to wipe out their own (!!!) home directory - not somebody else's.
Since the Guest account obviously has access to the Admin account's home directory somehow, this does expose a deeper security flaw.
Why don't we send all of Microsoft to Mars (please see article One-Way Trip to Mars) and then Microsoft can have their global patent system... all for themselves... on Mars!
Until OpenOffice can properly open docx documents created by Omnipage Professional 17 (OCR Software), OpenOffice is not an option. I am sure there are more examples like this.
just what is so horrid about having my computer serve content by allowing connections to it?
How can I be sure that the content you are serving is the same as on the original server? How can I be sure that you are not messing with the content before serving it to me?
The term rootkit or root kit originally referred to a maliciously modified set of administrative tools for a Unix-like operating system that surreptitiously granted root access. If an intruder could replace the standard administrative tools on a system with a rootkit,...
Well - only if one is foolish enough to surf the web and check email and do your other daily computer chores, while being logged in as root/administrator to your computer...
rootkits, malware, trojan, etc. still require root/administrator rights to install themselves.
The above is old school on Unix (and applies to any OS) - only login as root/administrator if you need to do system maintenance.
For everything else use a Least Privilege User Account.
And - first install and run software in an isolated virtual machine with InstallWatch running and see what is being installed/executed. If the installer/software is doing anything suspicious, simply do not install it on your real machine. As simple as that...
Google leads to piracy and should be blocked (Score:1)
by yoyodyne_usa (1534821) on Friday April 17, @09:59PM (#27613197)
Google is a pirate site and MS and everyone else should block any site that can lead a user to copyrighted material. We all now know that because TPB trial has proven that any site that leads to copyrighted material must be a piracy site.
I can only agree with this statement. Well said!! Thank You!!
I've been trying to register the domains porn.ie and pornography.ie for about four years. Every time I try to register either domain, the Irish Domain Registry (IEDR) refuse my application because "the proposed domain name must not be offensive or contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality."
According to David Curtain, the chief executive of the IEDR, "the domain registry has no authority to vet content" (Sunday Tribune, 27/08/07) so their refusal is based on both words being offensive, rather than any objection to pornographic content. I tested this assertion by registering the domain orn.ie and setting it up so it displays hardcore porn under the title "p.orn.ie". This domain was deemed acceptable as the word "orn" is not offensive. Have a look for yourself: http://p.orn.ie/
Two years ago I decided to take legal action against the IEDR as I felt it absurd that they could judge either word as offensive. Apart from the obvious fact that both words are clearly not offensive ("pornography" is a noun, with "porn" being a shortened, slang version), I was also the owner of a business called "Porn" and a business called "Pornography".
I found myself a solicitor who specialises in digital law (i.e. cases involving the Internet) and arranged an appeal against the refusal of registration. Included in the first letter of appeal was the following:
Neither the term pornography, nor its abbreviation porn, can be described as offensive, contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality. The leading dictionary of the English language, the Oxford English Dictionary, contains usage notes which mark terms as being rude, derogatory, or offensive. However neither term is marked in this way.
Indeed, the notion that the term pornography could itself be offensive, contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality is simply absurd given the judgment of the Oireachtas that the term is appropriate for use in the title of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998.
Similarly, the term porn has also been frequently used in Parliamentary Debates and on no occasion has the term been objected to as unsuitable.
Both terms have been permitted by the Companies Registration Office for use in the registered business names held by our client, and it is entirely inappropriate for the Respondent to second guess the judgment of the body which is specifically mandated by law (under the Registration of Business Names Act 1963 as later amended and applied) to consider whether to refuse the registration of names which are considered undesirable.
It should also be noted that adult material is perfectly lawful in this jurisdiction unless it falls within a narrow class of material which may be prohibited by either the Film Censor or the Censorship of Publications Board. Consequently it is also entirely inappropriate for the Respondent to substitute its own judgment for that of the legislature by refusing to register a name in a manner which would appear to express a disapproval of adult material.
Indeed, even if the Respondent were entitled to express a disapproval of adult material, they could not do so in a manner which arbitrarily discriminates against a particular applicant. However, the Respondent has permitted the registration of numerous other terms which relate to either sexuality or adult material, for example, sexandviolence.ie, fcuk.ie.
The IEDR then responded with the claim that I had never formally or informally attempted to register porn.ie or pornography.ie. This of course was rubbish so we sent the IEDR copies of their previous refusal letters.
A week or so later we received their rather bizarre response which spoke of child pornography and other
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah well. If you're logged in as an admin user to your computer, while surfing the web, then it's your (!!!) own fault if your computer gets infected.
Do not blame the creator of the OS.
Inconvenience?? What inconvenience?? The only time you need to be admin, is when you install software and/or make changes to your OS. At all other times, admin privileges are not required.
Yes - I know. Some software out there still requires admin privileges to run. These should be banned and burned.
It's not up to Microsoft how Windows is installed on a computer delivered to an end-user. It's companies like Dell, HP and computer shops who actually install Windows.
They (Dell, HP and computer shops) need to learn to install Windows properly: ntfs, no automatic login to admin user, least-privileged account, etc, etc, etc.
And power-users don't use pre-installed OSes anyway, correct? So the main problem is with users who use computers with a pre-installed OS.
I believe we should use Heisenberg's development model.
Due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle the outcome of this development process is uncertain.
Could be a webbrowser or ... maybe an os.
But then ... we will never be able to determine what was actually developed, will we?
"Bingo. It is a pickle, no doubt about it. Bad news is there's no way you can really know if it's an os or a webbrowser. So it's really up to you. Just have to make up your own damn mind."
Maybe the Lorentz development model is better actually: It (Lorentz transformation) reflects the surprising fact that observers moving at different velocities report different orderings of events.
Mozilla reports "Bug fixed". User reports "Bug not yet fixed".
yuk - even with the Lorentz development model, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle still applies. We still can't tell for certain if a bug was fixed or not.
I give up.
Excuse me - and why is that? Why does every employee at IBM or Apple need to have a routable ip address?
If IBM has 100 ip addresses for gateways to provide access to and from the Internet. And another 100 ip addresses for external webservers. Then I believe 200 ip addresses for IBM are plenty enough.
Please explain to me why 256 IP Addresses for IBM is not enough?
And to be honest, I feel quite comfy behind my stealthy NATed DSL modem, knowing that NOT everybody on the Internet can access my computer.
Yes - I still run a firewall on my computer to protect myself from laptops that friends or family connect to my little internal network. But it's a big difference between protecting my computer from the occasional other computer on my little internal network, or protecting my computer from 5,000,000,000+ other computers on the Internet. Which is what I would have to do if my computer had a routable ipv6 address.
The patch was released today - 21-Jan-2010.
So why do the files contained in "IE8-WindowsXP-KB978207-x86-ENU.exe" all have a date of "6-Jan-2010" or older?? The files contained in "IE8-WindowsServer2003-KB978207-x86-ENU.exe" are dated "22-Dec-2009" or older. Why?? And when the patch is installed, the files that are updated, like "mshtml.dll", have a date of "22-Dec-2009".
Wasn't the vulnerability, that this patch supposedly addresses, discovered (published) around 14-Jan-2010??
Anybody has an idea why there is a discrepancy??
Looks like Microsoft had the problem already fixed before it was even published. No??
If my ADSL connection is down for thirty minutes, I can't do anything with the piece of hardware and software sitting on my desk. Since all the apps are on ... the Internet.
So ... WHY would anybody use this???
Anybody remember GMail's outtages ... ???
Looks like vendor lock-in to me ... all depends on Google. If Google ever goes bye-bye, all your data goes bye-bye too.
Can anybody explain to me , please ... Why???
It doesn't matter which browser you're using ...
If you're logged in as Administrator or a user with administrative user rights/access, while surfing the web, checking your email, etc. --> you're vulnerable.
Until users change their behavior and start using least-privilege accounts while surfing the web, it's wrong to blame the browser.
Microsoft even says it in their security advisory kb 979352: An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the local user. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less affected than users who operate with administrative user rights.
And this applies to any OS: Linux, Windows, Mac OS, etc.
Rootkit - contrary to what its name may imply, a rootkit does not grant a user administrator privileges, as it requires prior admin access to execute and tamper with system files and processes.
I've said it before and I'll say it again ...
Think again - unless the following issues are being addressed, piracy will not go away.
Side note: Bad credit and credit cards is what got us into the financial crisis in the first place.
Side note: greed is the other reason that got us all into the financial crisis.
Unless the above issues (and I am sure other people have additional issues) are addressed, piracy will not go away.
Just my .02 us$ worth ...
It's very sad that today's young generation can not have these kind of experiences any more.
Locked cockpit doors, passenger's hands tied to the chair in front of them, sedated passengers, ... What's next?
Side note: Bad credit and credit cards is what got us into the financial crisis in the first place.
Side note: greed is the other reason that got us all into the financial crisis.
Unless the above issues (and I am sure other people have additional issues) are addressed, piracy will not go away.
Just my .02 us$ worth ...
man
NOUN:
pl. men
For crying out loud ...
On every OS, even Linux based, the user has the authority to wipe out their home directory and personal settings. This isn't a security flaw.
Is that so - so why does a Guest (!!!) account have the authority to wipe an Admin account's home directory. That IS a security flaw. You are making a mistake: the user has the authority to wipe out their own (!!!) home directory - not somebody else's. Since the Guest account obviously has access to the Admin account's home directory somehow, this does expose a deeper security flaw.
Remote Desktop Connection (port 3389) through an SSH tunnel works beautiful.
Why don't we send all of Microsoft to Mars (please see article One-Way Trip to Mars) and then Microsoft can have their global patent system ... all for themselves ... on Mars!
Until OpenOffice can properly open docx documents created by Omnipage Professional 17 (OCR Software), OpenOffice is not an option. I am sure there are more examples like this.
And who came up with this great idea of connecting the electrical grid to the internet??
just what is so horrid about having my computer serve content by allowing connections to it?
How can I be sure that the content you are serving is the same as on the original server? How can I be sure that you are not messing with the content before serving it to me?
That's the problem with this.
Well - I guess "EXACT" means different things to us then ...
In my world "foo bar baz" is not the same as:
"foo, bar, baz" :bar, :baz"
"foo,
"foo = bar = baz"
"foo->bar->baz"
Oh well ... could just be me ...
Yup - there is.
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4582957/slackware-12.2-dvd-iso
The latest Slackware 12.2 Linux distro.
Check the md5 sum though, just to be safe.
ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-12.2-iso/slackware-12.2-install-dvd.iso.md5
Well - there's is one thing left to do for you.
Cancel your subscription and if many many people do the same, BT and Vodafone et. al. will go bankrupt and out of business.
And then we can start over with a clean slate. On our terms!!
The term rootkit or root kit originally referred to a maliciously modified set of administrative tools for a Unix-like operating system that surreptitiously granted root access. If an intruder could replace the standard administrative tools on a system with a rootkit, ...
Well - only if one is foolish enough to surf the web and check email and do your other daily computer chores, while being logged in as root/administrator to your computer ...
rootkits, malware, trojan, etc. still require root/administrator rights to install themselves.
http://kareldjag.over-blog.com/article-1232530.html
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb456992(loband).aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc700846(loband).aspx
The above is old school on Unix (and applies to any OS) - only login as root/administrator if you need to do system maintenance.
For everything else use a Least Privilege User Account.
And - first install and run software in an isolated virtual machine with InstallWatch running and see what is being installed/executed. If the installer/software is doing anything suspicious, simply do not install it on your real machine. As simple as that ...
Google leads to piracy and should be blocked (Score:1)
by yoyodyne_usa (1534821) on Friday April 17, @09:59PM (#27613197)
Google is a pirate site and MS and everyone else should block any site that can lead a user to copyrighted material. We all now know that because TPB trial has proven that any site that leads to copyrighted material must be a piracy site.
I can only agree with this statement. Well said!! Thank You!!
And in the case of google, the large majority of material is completely legal.
Excuse me!!! Just search for "adobe flash cs4 torrent" in google. What do you see???
... I rest my case ...
Links to torrent files
Porn.ie and Pornography.ie banned in Ireland
Sex.ie
I've been trying to register the domains porn.ie and pornography.ie for about four years. Every time I try to register either domain, the Irish Domain Registry (IEDR) refuse my application because "the proposed domain name must not be offensive or contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality."
According to David Curtain, the chief executive of the IEDR, "the domain registry has no authority to vet content" (Sunday Tribune, 27/08/07) so their refusal is based on both words being offensive, rather than any objection to pornographic content. I tested this assertion by registering the domain orn.ie and setting it up so it displays hardcore porn under the title "p.orn.ie". This domain was deemed acceptable as the word "orn" is not offensive. Have a look for yourself: http://p.orn.ie/
Two years ago I decided to take legal action against the IEDR as I felt it absurd that they could judge either word as offensive. Apart from the obvious fact that both words are clearly not offensive ("pornography" is a noun, with "porn" being a shortened, slang version), I was also the owner of a business called "Porn" and a business called "Pornography".
I found myself a solicitor who specialises in digital law (i.e. cases involving the Internet) and arranged an appeal against the refusal of registration. Included in the first letter of appeal was the following:
Neither the term pornography, nor its abbreviation porn, can be described as offensive, contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality. The leading dictionary of the English language, the Oxford English Dictionary, contains usage notes which mark terms as being rude, derogatory, or offensive. However neither term is marked in this way.
Indeed, the notion that the term pornography could itself be offensive, contrary to public policy or generally accepted principles of morality is simply absurd given the judgment of the Oireachtas that the term is appropriate for use in the title of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998.
Similarly, the term porn has also been frequently used in Parliamentary Debates and on no occasion has the term been objected to as unsuitable.
Both terms have been permitted by the Companies Registration Office for use in the registered business names held by our client, and it is entirely inappropriate for the Respondent to second guess the judgment of the body which is specifically mandated by law (under the Registration of Business Names Act 1963 as later amended and applied) to consider whether to refuse the registration of names which are considered undesirable.
It should also be noted that adult material is perfectly lawful in this jurisdiction unless it falls within a narrow class of material which may be prohibited by either the Film Censor or the Censorship of Publications Board. Consequently it is also entirely inappropriate for the Respondent to substitute its own judgment for that of the legislature by refusing to register a name in a manner which would appear to express a disapproval of adult material.
Indeed, even if the Respondent were entitled to express a disapproval of adult material, they could not do so in a manner which arbitrarily discriminates against a particular applicant. However, the Respondent has permitted the registration of numerous other terms which relate to either sexuality or adult material, for example, sexandviolence.ie, fcuk.ie.
The IEDR then responded with the claim that I had never formally or informally attempted to register porn.ie or pornography.ie. This of course was rubbish so we sent the IEDR copies of their previous refusal letters.
A week or so later we received their rather bizarre response which spoke of child pornography and other