assuming they find a privilege escalation bug to get them that far
that's sort of what i was getting at... they patch and bolt things on that they hope will improve security, but privelige escalation is the root cause of the problem... linux doesn't need protection for the hosts file because most programs just can't write to it (file permissions are the security measure, and they work), but i'm pretty sure most linux servers are protected from interweb nasties using iptables rather than hosts... the only thing i use hosts for is to access the web server on my lan because my router doesn't have loopback
i guess microsoft would probably still botch iptables up as well... if malware can overwrite hosts it can overwrite an iptables script too, as well as pretty much anything else on the system... yeah they should really improve filesystem permissions to actually protect system files rather than just as a gimmick (ACLs)
if a process has permission to write to the hosts file
that question is the problem with windows security in general...
the answer is that unless it is required for windows to run, or unless the user logs in as administrator with a password that is at least 6 characters long and consciously executes such process, it shouldn't have such permission.... ever....... full stop
the real problem is that for malware to be able to corrupt the hosts file it would also require admin priveliges... how the hell does malware get admin priveliges? maybe its the bullshit click through privelige escalation where users just click "allow" without having any idea or even caring what it means...
schnier has a name for these kinds of garbage security measures (including "protection" of the hosts file)... "security theater"
this is some funny shit... apk is a douche, but its funny getting him wound up (hey at least he seems to despise metro; that's the first ounce i've ever read from him since... well... ever)
...just rip off iptables and be done with it already... wtf is this "protecting the hosts file" bullshit (pointless if root/admin priveliges are required to modify it in the first place)?...and haven't they yet realised that "windows defender" is an oxymoron?
look at the tablet market now... apple must now sue or die in the tablet market just to compete... being different only works for so long, and there are too many copycat companies in too many different countries for apple to maintain any kind of stranglehold
win xp initial release only stopped working for me when programs that i needed started coming out that required sp2... the intitial release of the OS itself was ok
all the good programmers at microsoft left... the new breed of microsoft programmers aren't up to making windowed programs yet... give them a bit of time to catch up
microsoft would sell more server operating systems if they rebranded and marketed "ms-dos 6.22" as "ms-dos 2012"... maybe with a few extra utilities thrown in
the slogan could be something like "no pesky dialog boxes!"
what business really gives a fuck about its customers after payment is made? customer support is a legal requirement... and a limited requirement at that... if it was merely a moral obligation there would be none at all
until we can plug into the matrix... then we will control things by talking on the phone and getting the person on the other end to type on a keyboard:)
Slashdot Mirror
only for apple fanbois
assuming they find a privilege escalation bug to get them that far
that's sort of what i was getting at... they patch and bolt things on that they hope will improve security, but privelige escalation is the root cause of the problem... linux doesn't need protection for the hosts file because most programs just can't write to it (file permissions are the security measure, and they work), but i'm pretty sure most linux servers are protected from interweb nasties using iptables rather than hosts... the only thing i use hosts for is to access the web server on my lan because my router doesn't have loopback
i guess microsoft would probably still botch iptables up as well... if malware can overwrite hosts it can overwrite an iptables script too, as well as pretty much anything else on the system... yeah they should really improve filesystem permissions to actually protect system files rather than just as a gimmick (ACLs)
retard
or just sticky tape an antenna to it
or maybe BPL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_over_power_lines
i'm sorry i couldn't understand you with your mom's cock in your mouth
how original
if a process has permission to write to the hosts file
that question is the problem with windows security in general...
the answer is that unless it is required for windows to run, or unless the user logs in as administrator with a password that is at least 6 characters long and consciously executes such process, it shouldn't have such permission.... ever....... full stop
the real problem is that for malware to be able to corrupt the hosts file it would also require admin priveliges... how the hell does malware get admin priveliges? maybe its the bullshit click through privelige escalation where users just click "allow" without having any idea or even caring what it means...
schnier has a name for these kinds of garbage security measures (including "protection" of the hosts file)... "security theater"
you wrote the book on how to be a homo
is that you bill o'rielly?
this is some funny shit... apk is a douche, but its funny getting him wound up (hey at least he seems to despise metro; that's the first ounce i've ever read from him since... well... ever)
...just rip off iptables and be done with it already... wtf is this "protecting the hosts file" bullshit (pointless if root/admin priveliges are required to modify it in the first place)? ...and haven't they yet realised that "windows defender" is an oxymoron?
look at the tablet market now... apple must now sue or die in the tablet market just to compete... being different only works for so long, and there are too many copycat companies in too many different countries for apple to maintain any kind of stranglehold
win xp initial release only stopped working for me when programs that i needed started coming out that required sp2... the intitial release of the OS itself was ok
Windows CEMENT
i still develop win32 programs that use ini files.... fuck the registry
all the good programmers at microsoft left... the new breed of microsoft programmers aren't up to making windowed programs yet... give them a bit of time to catch up
microsoft would sell more server operating systems if they rebranded and marketed "ms-dos 6.22" as "ms-dos 2012"... maybe with a few extra utilities thrown in
the slogan could be something like "no pesky dialog boxes!"
don't say that you'll offend the shills who just can't comprehend that linux could possibly survive without marketshare
they'll sell a fuck load of win8 boxes with option to roll back to win7
what business really gives a fuck about its customers after payment is made? customer support is a legal requirement... and a limited requirement at that... if it was merely a moral obligation there would be none at all
until we can plug into the matrix... then we will control things by talking on the phone and getting the person on the other end to type on a keyboard :)
Anyone who develops a metro application
oh, you mean microsoft and its pet autodesk
i know i won't be developing metro apps... anyone with an ounce of sanity would know there's more money in itunes and google play
maybe google should start bullying (throwing money at) oems into supplying with chromeos or android
reason for apparent vista "success" - rollback to winxp