Windows Update? Or are you talking about someone hosting all of the current updates for Win98 elsewhere? If so, that is not a difficult thing for anyone to do. The question is...why? Most users advanced enough to want the patches probably do not use Win98 anymore. If you want them for yourself, burn them all to a cd for future reference.
I do not see what the problem is. When you work for any government intelligence agency in the world, there will be a great deal of secrecy and many things that do not make sense. All countries want to protect themselves (not just the USA). If there is a problem with allowing an employer to delve into your private life, an intelligence agency is certainly not the way to go. Most small commercial sector companies don't care what you do in your free time, as long as you show up to work.
It'd be nice to think that, but these were being sold to the general public in the bookstore. There were no checks to see if someone was even a student. As they were not upgrade copies either (full versions of XP Pro), I am not sure of the legalities of it.
Check the legalities of it. I just noticed the local university of 30,000 students selling XP at an extremely low price. It turns out that the copies were OEM versions and look exactly like the ones shipped with new PC's (perhaps the sys admins making some extra money from leftover CD's?)
Well, it's the Army, here in the Air Force, we use Red Hat and Sun Solaris around my area. Trying to train lots of grunts in the field whose sole purpose is to kill things and break stuff would not be cost effective and detract from their mission. Nothing wrong with the Windows licenses, until someone can come up with a viable way of moving a 1,000,000 person organization onto Linux.
What? So Caldera buying them wasn't good enough? Go figure. Considering the companies this SCO/Caldera monstrosity has sued in the past, it seems that these tactics are nothing but a desparate bid for survival. Perhaps redoing their business model and creating a modernized viable product might be a better way to go?
As this company has already sued Novell for DRDOS and Microsoft, perhaps lawsuits is their version of fundraising? Ever since Caldera bought SCO, their business has not improved nor their profit margin. It seems everytime they are in trouble, they find someone new to sue. Perhaps if SCO/Caldera International/Caldera/SCO Group could present a decent bsuiness model and learn to turn a profit, they would not have to rely upon lawsuits to make money.
When it comes to biological weapons, I have to agree with the government. I prefer not to have every home-grown (not foreign) terrorist with an itnernet connection creating biological weapons in their basement because they are upset at the government. If I recall, McVeigh and company used instructions they found with little research to kill 169 people in OK. One guy, pissed off for one reason or another, can wipe out an entire city with a tiny amount of biological weapons. This is not about open source, this is about public safety.
Why did Red Hat bother? I think NSA's Linux kernel at their website is probably better than anything Red Hat has put together. Seems a waste of time and effort for the DOD to certify something when they already have a distro for DOD purposes. I recommend SELinux for it's kernel security (it's only a kernel, no fluff). Red Hat is probably just looking for another revenue stream and DOD decided to go along with it.
Amazing, I see some posts that actually support this guy. As to most of the others, I agree that the Admins of public domains need to be mroe security conscious. However, we cannot fault the users of these computers. Most of the/.'ers are all in the IS/IT/(whatever it is called now) field and do not realize that the common public do not want to learn everything we know. In the same way I could care less all the ins and outs of, say, biology when all I want to do is plant something. The inner workings of chlorophyl is not something I particularly care about, I just want my plant to grow. In the same respect, a common user is not going to care about how computer security should work and whatnot, they just want to use this fancy cool-looking email to go to their friend/significant other/(whatever they call them these days). This guy is a criminal, stole information, and then may or may not have used i for personal gain, although it sounds like he did. The guy is at fault, not the users. Don't blame the sheep for getting eaten by the wolf, blame the wolf for eating the sheep.
Perhaps some of the resources being spent on upgrading and adding security software should be rerouted. Does anyone else think it may be important to find the root cause of these, ie the people who create them. Rather than hype up just security, is anyone chasing after the culprits? If they are funded by a foreign gov't, things like this can be seen as equal to an attack, which in turn means an act of war. If they are merely foreigners, the host country should be tracking them down. If they are a bunch of pimply faced script kiddies, the FBI should be banging down their door. Point being, all the resources should not just be going into increasing security, but also going after those who cause these problems. I suppose eliminating the internet is their end goal, but we cannot allow that to happen in this day and age. I am not a big fan of the "rat out your neighbor" approach to things (sounds like McCarthism), but where is the line drawn for allowing this to happen or actively seeking out those who try to destroy the net. Destroying the net sounds overboard, but I don't see any alternative phrases to describe what people who cause such viruses is.
No one is seriously claiming this is an act of terrorism, no reason to jump on the anti-government bandwagon again. Al-qaeda has no operatives on the International Space Station or the moon...at least as far as I know. The odds of taking out the equivalent of a ballistic missle is pretty slim. It was simply a technical failure with disastrous results. The most unfortunate part is, due to the mentality of many people, I foresee parts being sold on ebay in no time by some money-seeking texans. Nothing like another tragedy to place dollar signs in people's eyes...
My settings on my Win98 box are on default. This Xupiter thing still installed, no warning, no options to not install. This much be a breach of privacy, no company has the right to use any of my computers as their personal playground. Try getting rid of the thing, it's a beast.
Do I have feed this geek? Do their laundry? Hope not...I debate if some of the geeks who spend all the hours of the day posting on/. wash their clothes ( and themselves ). On a serious note, I think it is a great idea. The open source world could certainly use some more programmers, this appears to be a good way of obtaining them. Nothing like having a young padowan learner...
I think what people fail to realize is that no.mil address contains classified or otherwise "cool" information. So you can find out what units exist in the military? I can do that by going to any bar near a base. Something about drunk service members make them very talkative. Considering all the antimilitary rhetoric I see in many of these posts, how many of you would really *want* a.mil domain? If you are against the concept of a military, it seems silly to want a domain that advertises for them merely by the suffix. On a side note (and a bit offtopic), I venture to say that the military is not at fault for political decisions, the politicians are. Blame the person, not the tool.
I do not believe the people responsible for such attacks realize they are being self-destructive. The only end goal of such actions is not to increase security-mindedness in the computer world, but rather scare the normal users, the public, from ever touching the Net. Without the users, companies will be stretched to find the cash to keep up the backbone structure and I am sure it would fall apart. The media hypes anything that is detrimental to the public, including viruses, DDoS attacks, etc. This does nothing but a) scare users off the net 2) make the Net look bad to the public. So are all these kids out there pulling stunts going ahead with the goal of destroying the Net in mind? Even though that seems to be all they know? Interesting, work to destroy the only thing you know. Perhaps I should start a crusade to physically destroy computers too? My actions would teach people they do not *require* their computers to survive right? Just like taking down sites will serve to show people security vulnerabilities?
So all the overweight types who claim they have no time nor desire for exercise will have a motivational shift? Will the next generation of geeks be in shape and well-desired by women? And I thought this was a sign of the apocalypse...
And I thought only Apple cared about the look. Cases need handles and easy accessibility, not new designs. How are all the SCSI and IDE cables going to fit in this thing?
If this person is in the USAF, I might be surprised. Solaris and Linux are used for the sensitive stuff. NT is used because sysadmins go through a 5 month tech school and it is easier to use. Easier to train an 18 year old with no computer background on how to admin an NT file server for a bunch of users...
What are you talking about? Out here in flyboy land we still have NT servers. Upgrading all the workstations to Win2000...but budgets are budgets. You all made of money or something?
Does this mean the industry is going to attempt to sue every company that produces file-sharing software? That could be the largest lawsuit in history. I do not believe the music industry realizes the hole they are digging themselves into. Their lawsuits are only applicable in the U.S. anyway so it appears to be a lost cause for them. Perhaps new groups should not bother with producers and labels?
Not often I see an article promoting regulation and government influence in the computer industry. This will serve to do nothing more than raise the price of computer repair. Many certified techs are nothing more than drones turned out of a factory. I trust some 14 year olds long before some of these production line techs with no knowledge but a certificate. Does that mean we will start requiring software engineers to have undergrad degrees posted on their cubicles? Perhaps all IT execs should have Masters and/or PhD's? If you want only a certified tech to work on your computer, you can always be sure to request one. Then again, if you are reading slashdot, should you need a tech?
I see one reason why Linux is cheaper...they don't come out with a new version every 2 years that you must buy to be legal. At least new kernels can be downloaded and recompiled. I still run Windows 98 for my dualboot...but I know soon enough my games won't run on 98 and I will be forced to upgrade again. Upgrading is fine, but not when it costs so much.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows Update? Or are you talking about someone hosting all of the current updates for Win98 elsewhere? If so, that is not a difficult thing for anyone to do. The question is...why? Most users advanced enough to want the patches probably do not use Win98 anymore. If you want them for yourself, burn them all to a cd for future reference.
I do not see what the problem is. When you work for any government intelligence agency in the world, there will be a great deal of secrecy and many things that do not make sense. All countries want to protect themselves (not just the USA). If there is a problem with allowing an employer to delve into your private life, an intelligence agency is certainly not the way to go. Most small commercial sector companies don't care what you do in your free time, as long as you show up to work.
It'd be nice to think that, but these were being sold to the general public in the bookstore. There were no checks to see if someone was even a student. As they were not upgrade copies either (full versions of XP Pro), I am not sure of the legalities of it.
Check the legalities of it. I just noticed the local university of 30,000 students selling XP at an extremely low price. It turns out that the copies were OEM versions and look exactly like the ones shipped with new PC's (perhaps the sys admins making some extra money from leftover CD's?)
Well, it's the Army, here in the Air Force, we use Red Hat and Sun Solaris around my area. Trying to train lots of grunts in the field whose sole purpose is to kill things and break stuff would not be cost effective and detract from their mission. Nothing wrong with the Windows licenses, until someone can come up with a viable way of moving a 1,000,000 person organization onto Linux.
What? So Caldera buying them wasn't good enough? Go figure. Considering the companies this SCO/Caldera monstrosity has sued in the past, it seems that these tactics are nothing but a desparate bid for survival. Perhaps redoing their business model and creating a modernized viable product might be a better way to go?
As this company has already sued Novell for DRDOS and Microsoft, perhaps lawsuits is their version of fundraising? Ever since Caldera bought SCO, their business has not improved nor their profit margin. It seems everytime they are in trouble, they find someone new to sue. Perhaps if SCO/Caldera International/Caldera/SCO Group could present a decent bsuiness model and learn to turn a profit, they would not have to rely upon lawsuits to make money.
When it comes to biological weapons, I have to agree with the government. I prefer not to have every home-grown (not foreign) terrorist with an itnernet connection creating biological weapons in their basement because they are upset at the government. If I recall, McVeigh and company used instructions they found with little research to kill 169 people in OK. One guy, pissed off for one reason or another, can wipe out an entire city with a tiny amount of biological weapons. This is not about open source, this is about public safety.
Why did Red Hat bother? I think NSA's Linux kernel at their website is probably better than anything Red Hat has put together. Seems a waste of time and effort for the DOD to certify something when they already have a distro for DOD purposes. I recommend SELinux for it's kernel security (it's only a kernel, no fluff). Red Hat is probably just looking for another revenue stream and DOD decided to go along with it.
Amazing, I see some posts that actually support this guy. As to most of the others, I agree that the Admins of public domains need to be mroe security conscious. However, we cannot fault the users of these computers. Most of the /.'ers are all in the IS/IT/(whatever it is called now) field and do not realize that the common public do not want to learn everything we know. In the same way I could care less all the ins and outs of, say, biology when all I want to do is plant something. The inner workings of chlorophyl is not something I particularly care about, I just want my plant to grow. In the same respect, a common user is not going to care about how computer security should work and whatnot, they just want to use this fancy cool-looking email to go to their friend/significant other/(whatever they call them these days). This guy is a criminal, stole information, and then may or may not have used i for personal gain, although it sounds like he did. The guy is at fault, not the users. Don't blame the sheep for getting eaten by the wolf, blame the wolf for eating the sheep.
Perhaps some of the resources being spent on upgrading and adding security software should be rerouted. Does anyone else think it may be important to find the root cause of these, ie the people who create them. Rather than hype up just security, is anyone chasing after the culprits? If they are funded by a foreign gov't, things like this can be seen as equal to an attack, which in turn means an act of war. If they are merely foreigners, the host country should be tracking them down. If they are a bunch of pimply faced script kiddies, the FBI should be banging down their door. Point being, all the resources should not just be going into increasing security, but also going after those who cause these problems. I suppose eliminating the internet is their end goal, but we cannot allow that to happen in this day and age. I am not a big fan of the "rat out your neighbor" approach to things (sounds like McCarthism), but where is the line drawn for allowing this to happen or actively seeking out those who try to destroy the net. Destroying the net sounds overboard, but I don't see any alternative phrases to describe what people who cause such viruses is.
No one is seriously claiming this is an act of terrorism, no reason to jump on the anti-government bandwagon again. Al-qaeda has no operatives on the International Space Station or the moon...at least as far as I know. The odds of taking out the equivalent of a ballistic missle is pretty slim. It was simply a technical failure with disastrous results. The most unfortunate part is, due to the mentality of many people, I foresee parts being sold on ebay in no time by some money-seeking texans. Nothing like another tragedy to place dollar signs in people's eyes...
My settings on my Win98 box are on default. This Xupiter thing still installed, no warning, no options to not install. This much be a breach of privacy, no company has the right to use any of my computers as their personal playground. Try getting rid of the thing, it's a beast.
Do I have feed this geek? Do their laundry? Hope not...I debate if some of the geeks who spend all the hours of the day posting on /. wash their clothes ( and themselves ). On a serious note, I think it is a great idea. The open source world could certainly use some more programmers, this appears to be a good way of obtaining them. Nothing like having a young padowan learner...
I think what people fail to realize is that no .mil address contains classified or otherwise "cool" information. So you can find out what units exist in the military? I can do that by going to any bar near a base. Something about drunk service members make them very talkative. Considering all the antimilitary rhetoric I see in many of these posts, how many of you would really *want* a .mil domain? If you are against the concept of a military, it seems silly to want a domain that advertises for them merely by the suffix. On a side note (and a bit offtopic), I venture to say that the military is not at fault for political decisions, the politicians are. Blame the person, not the tool.
I do not believe the people responsible for such attacks realize they are being self-destructive. The only end goal of such actions is not to increase security-mindedness in the computer world, but rather scare the normal users, the public, from ever touching the Net. Without the users, companies will be stretched to find the cash to keep up the backbone structure and I am sure it would fall apart. The media hypes anything that is detrimental to the public, including viruses, DDoS attacks, etc. This does nothing but a) scare users off the net 2) make the Net look bad to the public. So are all these kids out there pulling stunts going ahead with the goal of destroying the Net in mind? Even though that seems to be all they know? Interesting, work to destroy the only thing you know. Perhaps I should start a crusade to physically destroy computers too? My actions would teach people they do not *require* their computers to survive right? Just like taking down sites will serve to show people security vulnerabilities?
So all the overweight types who claim they have no time nor desire for exercise will have a motivational shift? Will the next generation of geeks be in shape and well-desired by women? And I thought this was a sign of the apocalypse...
And I thought only Apple cared about the look. Cases need handles and easy accessibility, not new designs. How are all the SCSI and IDE cables going to fit in this thing?
If this person is in the USAF, I might be surprised. Solaris and Linux are used for the sensitive stuff. NT is used because sysadmins go through a 5 month tech school and it is easier to use. Easier to train an 18 year old with no computer background on how to admin an NT file server for a bunch of users...
What are you talking about? Out here in flyboy land we still have NT servers. Upgrading all the workstations to Win2000...but budgets are budgets. You all made of money or something?
Does this mean the industry is going to attempt to sue every company that produces file-sharing software? That could be the largest lawsuit in history. I do not believe the music industry realizes the hole they are digging themselves into. Their lawsuits are only applicable in the U.S. anyway so it appears to be a lost cause for them. Perhaps new groups should not bother with producers and labels?
Not often I see an article promoting regulation and government influence in the computer industry. This will serve to do nothing more than raise the price of computer repair. Many certified techs are nothing more than drones turned out of a factory. I trust some 14 year olds long before some of these production line techs with no knowledge but a certificate. Does that mean we will start requiring software engineers to have undergrad degrees posted on their cubicles? Perhaps all IT execs should have Masters and/or PhD's? If you want only a certified tech to work on your computer, you can always be sure to request one. Then again, if you are reading slashdot, should you need a tech?
I see one reason why Linux is cheaper...they don't come out with a new version every 2 years that you must buy to be legal. At least new kernels can be downloaded and recompiled. I still run Windows 98 for my dualboot...but I know soon enough my games won't run on 98 and I will be forced to upgrade again. Upgrading is fine, but not when it costs so much.