Each of those probably stands a 50-50 chance of being either rooted or patched with the new key the first time it's connected to the 'net.
It's a local exploit.
did I mention that finding another bug in another driver signed with the new key will mean the whole process must be repeated?
Third parties write crap, exploitable code and it's MS's fault? You can write exploitable kernel modules for Linux as well, yet somehow I don't think you'd be blaming that on Linus. If anything, this is an argument for open source drivers, not against MS's scheme - although how many people actually have the skill to audit the code they run, let alone auditing it?
did I mention that if someone finds such a bug and sits on it, they have root to any Vista system in existence
Every Vista install that uses the exploitable driver, you mean. Just as an exploitable driver for Linux would open every Linux install that uses that driver. For example, I have an NVidia card; as and when I upgrade to Vista, I won't be vulnerable to this particular exploit.
Try to tone the hyperbole down a little, it's not very becoming.
the fault does according to previous statements from Microsoft no lie in the sending application (Firefox) but in the receiver (Internet Explorer 7).
This touches on what is quite possibly the most basic lesson every single programmer should learn - your application absolutely must not trust data from uncontrolled sources. In fact, trusting data from trustworthy sources is a bad idea, as those sources may be tampered with or otherwise corrupted.
Always, always check your inputs!
Never mind what MS did or did not say, I am increasingly of the opinion that any half-way experienced programmer who doesn't realise the danger of accepting arbitrary input from arbitrary sources and trusting it to be safe shouldn't be in the job.
OK, it's less functional and robust compared to the dominant player
Unfortunately, that will kill it dead in the corporate space. Cheaper isn't cheaper if you lose money because the server keeps going down (or whatever).
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loathe Outlook and regularly curse the fact that I'm required to use it at work, and would dearly love there to be a viable replacement. As such, I'm quietly rooting for any such project.
But make no mistake, "cheaper but less functional and robust" (than Outlook!) isn't going to cut it. Given time I'm sure it'll get there, but if that's an accurate picture, then it's not there yet, unfortunately.
You do realise that the report was released by Sophos, don't you? This isn't a governmental thing, so trying to make it sound like the EU is trying to paint itself in a better light isn't really a valid point this time.
(Incidentally, Sophos is a British company, and we Brits are generally somewhat Eurosceptic; it's not at all surprising to see them not consider the EU as a whole. Mind you, the whole "not being a single country" thing might have something to do with it too...)
I'd be amazed if any such law is lax enough to allow you to get away with taking advantage of a pricing mistake of a factor of 10 - that's such an obvious miskey (.409 instead of 4.09) that I would have an extremely hard time believing that anyone would fail to realise.
I can live with using the input devices on a laptop short-term, but for long-term ("real") work, I need a high-quality keyboard and a mouse. Admittedly I haven't used very many laptops, but the half-dozen or so I have used have all had sub-optimal keyboards. The screen has also tended to be smaller than I'm comfortable with and lower resolution (I'm used to 1600x1200).
So, I'm happy to use a laptop, but for real work (or serious games playing), would want an external keyboard, mouse and monitor (and graphics card for the games).
If you really want to promote innovation, then stop wasting taxpayer money on this type of crap and lower corporate taxes, encouraging an environment where the fit will thrive and the unfit will die.
How does lowering corporate taxes do anything other than making it a little less likely that the unfit will die? (Or at least extending the amount of time they can hold out for)
Activation and a fisher-price interface (which you can disable) are the big differences
And improved software compatibility; I had a number of apps that crashed or failed to start at all under 2k that worked fine under XP. Oh and the firewall.
Oh, and comments like "Fisher Price UI" betray your bias, too.
the only really bad difference between XP and 2K was that XP was limited to 10 TCP/IP connections at a time OOTB.
No, XP limits the number of TCP/IP connections you can have in the wait state; you can have thousands actually open. The goal is to prevent/slow down apps that open large numbers of connections simultaneously, which includes an awful lot of worms and other malware. Of course, it also includes p2p apps under even fairly moderate usage patterns, and in both cases it merely slows the app down at startup, rather than killing it completely.
Not to mention that assuming he's trying to argue against Windows, the argument blows up in his face when you count the number of CDs the average Linux distro ships on...
Could someone explain to me, preferably without recourse to religious argument, what is wrong with these kids viewing porn? I mean, they're actively seeking it out, and so must already be interested, so you can't argue that the laptops are somehow corrupting them - they're already corrupt (by that definition)...
How would stores shift the mid- and high-end PCs, given that most people don't play modern 3D games, if they didn't inflate the specs required to perform more common tasks?
I've even seen stores recommending at least a mid-end PC if you want to surf the web. Presumably the low-end ones aren't powerful enough to run a web browser...
It wasn't more or less on topic, it was a direct response to the closing remark in the summary. Of course hard drive failure may prevent Windows from booting - but it'll prevent any other OS from booting too, so why the unnecessary swipe at Windows?
I'm sorry, but you're *really* clutching at straws there. I personally don't know of anyone who runs Linux from CD. I appreciate that you can, and that some people almost certainly do, but if they're anything but a tiny minority of users I'll eat my PC.
You're also ignoring that every OS X system will be running from a hard drive, so it's as much an OS X issue. And a *BSD one, a Solaris one, and every other OS.
Mindless Windows bashing just is not cool, and only serves to lessen the impact of genuine gripes.
Is that it simply used social engineering to convince the recipient to run the tainted executable, thus infecting himself, rather than relying on being able to exploit a hole that may or may not be present. Male teenager? Offer him free porn, he'll barely be able to double-click the exe fast enough...
Actually most movies would fit on a 4.7 GB disk provided you dispense with all the crap surrounding the actual movie.
Most of the DVDs I've looked at copying (my daughter has an annoying habit of dumping DVDs wherever's handy when putting a new one on) don't quite fit in 4.7GB even without the extra crap. Most are within 10% or so, but are still too big, and I'm loathe to compress them.
I get upset every time I spend money to hire a DVD and then be forced to sit through warnings and adds.
I get even more upset when I buy a DVD and have to sit through the stupid "PIRACY is a CRIME" thing. Yeah, it's illegal - but I haven't pirated the disc I've bought it, so fuck off and let me watch the damn film!
Network upkeep, maintenance, not a government fee, yadda yadda...
So it's an unelected corporation taking the money off you rather than the government (who would presumably spend it on public projects rather than shareholder dividends); you're still paying more than you'd necessarily have to otherwise.
You're probably right, but whether the mails died at the techs or went all the way up to the CEO, either way it's Sony that's in the frame for it, not Media Max.
Unless of course Media Max kept quiet about the potential problems (or didn't realise, or whatever) I really can't see Sony winning this.
Isn't that like asking a physicist about cellular mitosis?
Well, I admit that we didn't cover that, but I did do a module on "The Physics of Nerve Cells and Networks" in the third year of my undergraduate physics course, so it's not impossible that a physicist would know quite a lot about cellular mitosis.
That would be a good idea, as that "no chance of life" was written by the article submitter (amigoro), and doesn't appear in the article itself. You can accuse scientists of being wrong until you're blue in the face (and as they're only human, of course they're wrong sometimes), but not this time.
You might be annoyed, you might have to put up with people talking about it, you might even have to put up with your politicians making laws based on it.
You might have to put up with politicians going to war because of it too.
You guys can believe whatever you want; just don't drag my country down with you.
I just don't think the majority of adults even really care about AO games.
Personally, I couldn't care less what the game is rated, I just care that it looks like something I'd enjoy. My daughter has a DS, and I love Super Princess Peach. I also love games like Oblivion, and actually thought that Postal 2 was really good fun. Same with films - the certificate is the last thing I look at when deciding what to watch (in fact, I only look at it when deciding what to watch with my 7 year old daughter)
Slashdot Mirror
Each of those probably stands a 50-50 chance of being either rooted or patched with the new key the first time it's connected to the 'net.
It's a local exploit.
did I mention that finding another bug in another driver signed with the new key will mean the whole process must be repeated?
Third parties write crap, exploitable code and it's MS's fault? You can write exploitable kernel modules for Linux as well, yet somehow I don't think you'd be blaming that on Linus. If anything, this is an argument for open source drivers, not against MS's scheme - although how many people actually have the skill to audit the code they run, let alone auditing it?
did I mention that if someone finds such a bug and sits on it, they have root to any Vista system in existence
Every Vista install that uses the exploitable driver, you mean. Just as an exploitable driver for Linux would open every Linux install that uses that driver. For example, I have an NVidia card; as and when I upgrade to Vista, I won't be vulnerable to this particular exploit.
Try to tone the hyperbole down a little, it's not very becoming.
Always, always check your inputs!
Never mind what MS did or did not say, I am increasingly of the opinion that any half-way experienced programmer who doesn't realise the danger of accepting arbitrary input from arbitrary sources and trusting it to be safe shouldn't be in the job.
OK, it's less functional and robust compared to the dominant player
Unfortunately, that will kill it dead in the corporate space. Cheaper isn't cheaper if you lose money because the server keeps going down (or whatever).
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loathe Outlook and regularly curse the fact that I'm required to use it at work, and would dearly love there to be a viable replacement. As such, I'm quietly rooting for any such project.
But make no mistake, "cheaper but less functional and robust" (than Outlook!) isn't going to cut it. Given time I'm sure it'll get there, but if that's an accurate picture, then it's not there yet, unfortunately.
You do realise that the report was released by Sophos, don't you? This isn't a governmental thing, so trying to make it sound like the EU is trying to paint itself in a better light isn't really a valid point this time.
(Incidentally, Sophos is a British company, and we Brits are generally somewhat Eurosceptic; it's not at all surprising to see them not consider the EU as a whole. Mind you, the whole "not being a single country" thing might have something to do with it too...)
you call them Favorites, but we in the non-Windows world call them Bookmarks
It's the non-IE world that calls them bookmarks, not the non-Windows world...
History might be a problem, but you can always use 'about:cache' or 'about:history' to derive that.
Do you seriously think any non-geek is going to be happy with that? Or with creating a local index.html file for that matter...
I'd be amazed if any such law is lax enough to allow you to get away with taking advantage of a pricing mistake of a factor of 10 - that's such an obvious miskey (.409 instead of 4.09) that I would have an extremely hard time believing that anyone would fail to realise.
2 more words:
1. keyboard 2. mouse
I can live with using the input devices on a laptop short-term, but for long-term ("real") work, I need a high-quality keyboard and a mouse. Admittedly I haven't used very many laptops, but the half-dozen or so I have used have all had sub-optimal keyboards. The screen has also tended to be smaller than I'm comfortable with and lower resolution (I'm used to 1600x1200).
So, I'm happy to use a laptop, but for real work (or serious games playing), would want an external keyboard, mouse and monitor (and graphics card for the games).
Might as well stick with a desktop then.
Activation and a fisher-price interface (which you can disable) are the big differences
And improved software compatibility; I had a number of apps that crashed or failed to start at all under 2k that worked fine under XP. Oh and the firewall.
Oh, and comments like "Fisher Price UI" betray your bias, too.
the only really bad difference between XP and 2K was that XP was limited to 10 TCP/IP connections at a time OOTB.
No, XP limits the number of TCP/IP connections you can have in the wait state; you can have thousands actually open. The goal is to prevent/slow down apps that open large numbers of connections simultaneously, which includes an awful lot of worms and other malware. Of course, it also includes p2p apps under even fairly moderate usage patterns, and in both cases it merely slows the app down at startup, rather than killing it completely.
Not to mention that assuming he's trying to argue against Windows, the argument blows up in his face when you count the number of CDs the average Linux distro ships on...
Could someone explain to me, preferably without recourse to religious argument, what is wrong with these kids viewing porn? I mean, they're actively seeking it out, and so must already be interested, so you can't argue that the laptops are somehow corrupting them - they're already corrupt (by that definition)...
Isn't the answer obvious?
How would stores shift the mid- and high-end PCs, given that most people don't play modern 3D games, if they didn't inflate the specs required to perform more common tasks?
I've even seen stores recommending at least a mid-end PC if you want to surf the web. Presumably the low-end ones aren't powerful enough to run a web browser...
It wasn't more or less on topic, it was a direct response to the closing remark in the summary. Of course hard drive failure may prevent Windows from booting - but it'll prevent any other OS from booting too, so why the unnecessary swipe at Windows?
I'm sorry, but you're *really* clutching at straws there. I personally don't know of anyone who runs Linux from CD. I appreciate that you can, and that some people almost certainly do, but if they're anything but a tiny minority of users I'll eat my PC.
You're also ignoring that every OS X system will be running from a hard drive, so it's as much an OS X issue. And a *BSD one, a Solaris one, and every other OS.
Mindless Windows bashing just is not cool, and only serves to lessen the impact of genuine gripes.
Is that it simply used social engineering to convince the recipient to run the tainted executable, thus infecting himself, rather than relying on being able to exploit a hole that may or may not be present. Male teenager? Offer him free porn, he'll barely be able to double-click the exe fast enough...
Network upkeep, maintenance, not a government fee, yadda yadda...
So it's an unelected corporation taking the money off you rather than the government (who would presumably spend it on public projects rather than shareholder dividends); you're still paying more than you'd necessarily have to otherwise.
Ah, overrated at the default score of 1.
I think I'll live.
You're probably right, but whether the mails died at the techs or went all the way up to the CEO, either way it's Sony that's in the frame for it, not Media Max.
Unless of course Media Max kept quiet about the potential problems (or didn't realise, or whatever) I really can't see Sony winning this.
So to get off my little soapbox here
That would be a good idea, as that "no chance of life" was written by the article submitter (amigoro), and doesn't appear in the article itself. You can accuse scientists of being wrong until you're blue in the face (and as they're only human, of course they're wrong sometimes), but not this time.
Repeat after me: Java is not an acronym.
But if you are using IE to surf for pr0n, serialz and spyware, why would you have Firefox installed?
Because someone else who uses the machine installed it? Because you heard about it, installed it, but didn't like it?
You might be annoyed, you might have to put up with people talking about it, you might even have to put up with your politicians making laws based on it.
You might have to put up with politicians going to war because of it too.
You guys can believe whatever you want; just don't drag my country down with you.