Microsoft of course, not being in this for the higher noble cause, realizs that it is cheaper, quicker, and easier to just extend their tools to use the x86+64 instruction set rather than redoing everything in IA64.
Except for the minor fact that Microsoft already ported everything to the itanium. See this press release from last year...
Actually, more and more of the patches from MS don't require reboots. They've started listing whether a reboot is required under the "Additional Information" section of the security bulletins... See ms02-018 for an example. No reboot needed on IIS 5.
Actually, MS is moving towards adding more text-based and command-line tools. See the overview of dotnet server where it lists a bunch of additional command line administration tools (page 4 talks about command-line admin for IIS 6.0).
See also the recovery console in XP...
1. Stop auto-execution of content within Outlook. Ideally, make it impossible to execute content from a mail reader.
Done. With the (free) Outlook Security Update, or Office XP, all executable (exe, vbs, etc) attatchments are hidden by the client.
2. Stop designing operating systems where the default user account has write access to system binaries. Make it easy enough to do basic administration without formal administrator access that users don't run with administrator access by default (NT, W2K, XP desktop use).
Done. Win2k and XP both have System File Protection, which prevents system binaries from being overwritten. And XP makes it much easier to set up non-admin user accounts. The "runas" command makes doing occassional admin tasks really easy.
3. Build bounds checking into Visual C++, at least as an option. Require programs under development to be tested with bounds checking on in order to detect buffer overflows.
If you had this Security Update, then this virus just wouldn't affect you, as it both blocks access to executable attatchments and blocks scripted access to the address book!
Your momma. And I mean that. While you might be well cable of troubleshooting the problem yourself, please tell me if your mother (father/uncle/neighbor/etc) is capable of that? What would you say is better for them, blocking known buggy software, or having their machine crash at random times?
This is not a rhetorical question - keep in mind that XP is consumer operating system. What do you honestly think is better for the average luser consumer?
Maybe thats because you're not running XP? Zone Alarm bluescreens on XP, so it was blocked. What's better, displaying a message to users letting them know they need to get a new version, or having their system bluescreen at random times?
Due to new (fucking lame) Federal Laws regarding "deadbeat dads" who owe child support, all state DMV's are required to collect SSNs. They are not required to put them on the license or do anything with them besides turn them over to the feds.
Check out WA State law, especially the part where the legislature says "the use of social security numbers on licenses is inappropriate, intrusive, and offensive".
(note - please don't point out that this is only for commercial licenses. Read carefully - The federal deadline has passed so its now required for all licenses).
Windows XP has a new feature called Fast User Switching(FUS), which makes it easy for home users to have multiple accounts (with different permissions) and switch between them easily, leaving programs running.
Also, on windows 2000/XP it is not too painful to run day-in/day-out at a normal user, and then use runas.exe to elevate your priviledges to admin when you need to do something tricky. (its not advised to use runas.exe to reduce privedges (sandboxing), its not really designed for that).
"Allegations that a large incident of HEU unaccounted for at the U.S. NUMEC facility in the 1960s was caused by theft of some 100 kg of HEU for transport to Israel, while never fully resolved, are probably incorrect.
In the 1990s when the NUMEC plant was disassembled, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission found over 100 kilograms of plutonium in the structural components of the contaminated plant, casting doubt on 200 pounds going to Israel.
Question for Craig: If, as you say, Microsoft shares its source code "more widely than is generally realized," then why don't any freelance programmers have access to it? For example, why doesn't the Wine team have access to it (not even one member)? And so on.
The one thing the WINE team must avoid at all costs is access to the windows source code! If they had access to the source code, then they would not be (legally) reverse-engineering anything, but just simply cutting and pasting... If you could somehow force a WINE team member to look at the windows source code, they would have to remove themselves from the project, as then MS would have legal grounds to shut it down. And they know that.
Oh, and how widely MS shares its source code is completely unrelated to how many "freelance programmers" have access to it. Plenty (200+) of universities and (large) companies have access. Yes, they had to sign NDAs, but the point is still valid: most people think no-one has access.
Ummm, all the linux geeks here must not be familiar with NT's (and thus windows 2000, XP, etc) internal representation of time. It's stored (in a quadword) as number of 100 nano-second intervals since 1600 (since its usefull to have a single format which can express events which happened in the past - you can't write an app which stores birthdates in a UNIX-time compatible format).
If I remember correctly its illegal for prople to own guns in Australia.
Oo, troll. FYI, you remember incorrectly. We outlawed automatic weapons (read: guns designed specifically for killing large numbers of people).
Wrong! Wow... I find it sad (but not surprising) when an australian doesn't even know the state of their own laws.
Listen up nerds - we all get so upset when we hear moronic legislators passing laws on computer technology that they clearly don't understand. Its happens all the time (witness clinton's digital signature bill), and we all cringe when we hear these legislators struggling to wrap their little minds around complicated topics.
Well, with all due respect, as someone who knows a great deal about firearms, I can tell that you don't know too much about firearms. Therefore, I request that you either A) educate yourself, preferrably through 1st hand experience, or B) refrain from pushing for legislation on topics which you don't know enough about.
A reasonable summary (found in 5 seconds of web searching) of what firearms were recently banned in AU is here. To directly correct your mis-statement, they banned semi-automatic (one bullet fired for every pull of the trigger) firearms, not fully automatic (= continuous stream of bullets) firearms. Fully automatic weapons have been highly regulated (6 month waiting period, when not effectively banned) in the US since 1934! And I suspect are even more restricted in australia.
Slashdot Mirror
Being marked interactive is OK as long as they don't create windows (which they don't).
Actually, more and more of the patches from MS don't require reboots. They've started listing whether a reboot is required under the "Additional Information" section of the security bulletins... See ms02-018 for an example. No reboot needed on IIS 5.
Check out http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/tabletpc. It actually looks pretty cool.
The article is just being reprinted from the Wall Street Journal.
Actually, MS is moving towards adding more text-based and command-line tools. See the overview of dotnet server where it lists a bunch of additional command line administration tools (page 4 talks about command-line admin for IIS 6.0). See also the recovery console in XP...
encrypted data is much more random than a normal image... You can detect it because its too random...
And how many releases has the Solaris/AIX hole been around for? IIRC, something like 5 years!
Umm, what? Why not tell your users to install the Outlook Security Update by going to http://office.microsoft.com/ProductUpdates.
If you had this Security Update, then this virus just wouldn't affect you, as it both blocks access to executable attatchments and blocks scripted access to the address book!
XP is sooooo much more secure (and generally better) than any other version windows.
And what "pay-per-use" are you talking about? I use XP and never heard of this?
Why don't you try using a product before bad-mouthing it?
The poster is 100% correct!
Your momma. And I mean that. While you might be well cable of troubleshooting the problem yourself, please tell me if your mother (father/uncle/neighbor/etc) is capable of that? What would you say is better for them, blocking known buggy software, or having their machine crash at random times?
This is not a rhetorical question - keep in mind that XP is consumer operating system. What do you honestly think is better for the average luser consumer?
"ZA always worked great for me."
Maybe thats because you're not running XP? Zone Alarm bluescreens on XP, so it was blocked. What's better, displaying a message to users letting them know they need to get a new version, or having their system bluescreen at random times?
Due to new (fucking lame) Federal Laws regarding "deadbeat dads" who owe child support, all state DMV's are required to collect SSNs. They are not required to put them on the license or do anything with them besides turn them over to the feds.
Check out WA State law, especially the part where the legislature says "the use of social security numbers on licenses is inappropriate, intrusive, and offensive".
(note - please don't point out that this is only for commercial licenses. Read carefully - The federal deadline has passed so its now required for all licenses).
That works well until your sister comes out to visit and tries to turn on your computer :)
Windows XP has a new feature called Fast User Switching(FUS), which makes it easy for home users to have multiple accounts (with different permissions) and switch between them easily, leaving programs running.
Also, on windows 2000/XP it is not too painful to run day-in/day-out at a normal user, and then use runas.exe to elevate your priviledges to admin when you need to do something tricky. (its not advised to use runas.exe to reduce privedges (sandboxing), its not really designed for that).
The above post is simply not true. The vast majority of users will click Yes/OK to any dialog box that comes up, no matter how scary.
Want to try reading some more reliable sources? According to this MIT "Nuclear Economics" course material: See also Section III of this US Air Force paper, which says:
GUIDs are now generated using an MD5 hash of the old guid scheme (mac address + time).
Oh, and how widely MS shares its source code is completely unrelated to how many "freelance programmers" have access to it. Plenty (200+) of universities and (large) companies have access. Yes, they had to sign NDAs, but the point is still valid: most people think no-one has access.
So your POS SCSI controlled takes 10 minutes to enumerate drives, and you are blaming NT? Explain that one to me....
Ummm, all the linux geeks here must not be familiar with NT's (and thus windows 2000, XP, etc) internal representation of time. It's stored (in a quadword) as number of 100 nano-second intervals since 1600 (since its usefull to have a single format which can express events which happened in the past - you can't write an app which stores birthdates in a UNIX-time compatible format).
Wrong! Wow... I find it sad (but not surprising) when an australian doesn't even know the state of their own laws.
Listen up nerds - we all get so upset when we hear moronic legislators passing laws on computer technology that they clearly don't understand. Its happens all the time (witness clinton's digital signature bill), and we all cringe when we hear these legislators struggling to wrap their little minds around complicated topics.
Well, with all due respect, as someone who knows a great deal about firearms, I can tell that you don't know too much about firearms. Therefore, I request that you either A) educate yourself, preferrably through 1st hand experience, or B) refrain from pushing for legislation on topics which you don't know enough about.
A reasonable summary (found in 5 seconds of web searching) of what firearms were recently banned in AU is here. To directly correct your mis-statement, they banned semi-automatic (one bullet fired for every pull of the trigger) firearms, not fully automatic (= continuous stream of bullets) firearms. Fully automatic weapons have been highly regulated (6 month waiting period, when not effectively banned) in the US since 1934! And I suspect are even more restricted in australia.
FYI, the bigcharts.com site contains an abbreviated version of the original article from EE Times. It's got a little more technical detail in it.