I'm not sure this would be unique to.NET. With all compiled languages (java is an interesting exception), the protected members are only protected by the compiler at compile time. There's nothing stopping you from hijacking the vtable in C++ or locating the function entry point in general and then executing directly in whatever manner you prefer. It's all machine code at that point and the CPU doesn't care who executed it or how they got there.
People who rely on protected/private to be a security feature are making a mistake. Its really just an organizational tool offered by the language.
Sure, hardware is complex and today's software is huge, multi-featured, multithreaded, and event-driven and all of these factors make writing good software hard, but I think that the reason we don't see higher quality OS's is simply that the bar isn't set very high by the market leader. We tolerate applications that freeze, computers that need to be rebooted, or crash, etc. That low bar sets consumer expectations and the result is that companies (and programmers) only work to a certain level of reliability - then they work more on more features instead of more work on stability.
You obviously don't have a C corporation. The Schedule C is for sole proprietorships. A corp C is much different and as far as I know, there is no fine manual (FM). Every year, our accountant generates a stack of forms about an inch thick for our corporation C taxes, then gives us about 10 more pages to go with our 1040. We don't use schedule C at all.
That said, this person (with no sales or revenue to speak of) should not have incorporated yet. He should have been a sole prop or LLC. Then he could use the schedule C and he would reasonably have been able to do it himself. IMHO, there's no need to own a corporation unless you are making enough for it to be worth the bother.
This is one of those scientific experiments where we "learn more about ourselves by observing something else." Like how we learn about the earth by looking for pieces of it on the moon or mars. Once we can teach robots to drive, it should be easy to teach cell-phone yapping, pizza eating youths.
As others have pointed out, polarizing filters are so common that there's no security here.
It's like locking your house with a skeleton key.
Why not insert noisy frames between real ones and just synchronize the glasses so that they filter out the garbage frames? Why not just have the screen in the glasses?
This difference is in the constext of discussion of virus infection. My point was just that viri have a tougher time modifying executables because they don't have write access.
The proverbial "most people" don't have executables in their home directory because they don't compile applications. Even if you were installing a compiled app, you would properly install it elsewhere on your filesystem after you built it.
A couple points: 1. Most of the hundreds of millions of windows users are windows users because that's what came with their PC. It was bundled with their PCs because of the heavy handed licensing methods that Microsoft applied to the OEMs. That's not the same as saying that the customers prefer windows.
2. It occurs to me that it's very hard for a virus to propagate in an environment where the user (by default) does not have write permission to the directories - and I'm not talking a "read-only" bit that essentially relies on the honor system. In usermode, I can't infect/damage/usr/bin even if I wanted to. In windows, this could be done, but it's not because it would make installing/removing applications (slightly) more difficult. Well folks, a virus is just another program that you just installed; albiet probably accidentally.
3. Saying Linux has made great strides in a short time is misleading and somewhat deprecating. I've been using it since 1992 (10 years). That predates all win32 platforms (including Winnt and Win9x, to say nothing about XP, etc.). It's a minor bone to pick, but it's made great strides over the entire course of its existence. Even in the beginning, it was purposely built to take advantage of "great strides" that predated it.
4. Users don't have to patch code. Linux package management excels. I know debian best, and apt-get keeps my system secure with nary a recompile. Patching? I could if I wanted to, but I'm too busy being productive on my system.
5. I agree about not calling people who don't use linux morons.
6. You don't even have to run linux, as far as I'm concerned. I have to draw a line at telling the people in the community to get busy and fix the bugs and do a little usablity testing. Where have you been? Did you know that all that happens. How else can you explain this feature-rich reliable, and usable system that I'm typing this on? Independent estimates have estimated that there is over 1 billion dollars of time invested in a typical linux system and it is all given away for free. Be grateful, not pissy.
Reaching way back to Windows 3.1 days: Microsoft called it "Microsoft Windows 3.1 Operating System" right on the front of the box. Of course, it was just a GUI that ran on top of DOS.
Based on that reasoning, KDE and Gnome could be considered operating systems too. They're GUIs that run on top of *nix.
It's wrong, but they're using the term consistently. Perhaps they have some adgenda to redefine the term "operating system".
I think where we all got off track because they used the wrong term. They mean that PCs using this technology will be more like "instant on"
They just mean that the nonvolitile ram will save you from having to go through the boot sequence to recreate the state of the machine before you turned it off
Of course, just like current machines returning from standby, it will have to reinitialize the devices, but that would be some time savings
GNU/Linux is the #2 web serving operating system on the public Internet (counting by IP address), according to a study surveying March and June 2001
GNU/Linux is the #1 server operating system on the public Internet (counting by domain name), according to a 1999 survey of primarily European and educational sites.
GNU/Linux is the #2 server operating system sold in 1999 and 2000, and is the fastest-growing.
Even taking the statistics most favorable to Microsoft, they had almost twice as many IPs on the public internet than Linux did in 1999. However, during that same period, there were many more than twice as many expoits, viruses, etc. that attacked windows vs unix.
Linux has far too many installations on the public internet to be dismissed as too rare to interest hackers.
Slashdot Mirror
or... rim sco oft
I'm not sure this would be unique to .NET. With all compiled languages (java is an interesting exception), the protected members are only protected by the compiler at compile time. There's nothing stopping you from hijacking the vtable in C++ or locating the function entry point in general and then executing directly in whatever manner you prefer. It's all machine code at that point and the CPU doesn't care who executed it or how they got there.
People who rely on protected/private to be a security feature are making a mistake. Its really just an organizational tool offered by the language.
Sure, hardware is complex and today's software is huge, multi-featured, multithreaded, and event-driven and all of these factors make writing good software hard, but I think that the reason we don't see higher quality OS's is simply that the bar isn't set very high by the market leader. We tolerate applications that freeze, computers that need to be rebooted, or crash, etc. That low bar sets consumer expectations and the result is that companies (and programmers) only work to a certain level of reliability - then they work more on more features instead of more work on stability.
Oh, yeah? Then who wrote linux, if you're so smart.
Or, better yet, every fifth time you run a utility it should quiz you for the author's name. If you don't know the answer, then it refuses to run.
That will get people to learn author's names.
You obviously don't have a C corporation. The Schedule C is for sole proprietorships. A corp C is much different and as far as I know, there is no fine manual (FM). Every year, our accountant generates a stack of forms about an inch thick for our corporation C taxes, then gives us about 10 more pages to go with our 1040. We don't use schedule C at all.
That said, this person (with no sales or revenue to speak of) should not have incorporated yet. He should have been a sole prop or LLC. Then he could use the schedule C and he would reasonably have been able to do it himself. IMHO, there's no need to own a corporation unless you are making enough for it to be worth the bother.
Gotta love the tax system! No, really, you gotta!
This is one of those scientific experiments where we "learn more about ourselves by observing something else." Like how we learn about the earth by looking for pieces of it on the moon or mars. Once we can teach robots to drive, it should be easy to teach cell-phone yapping, pizza eating youths.
If they're so bored, why not use the old fashioned way of making babies?
Cloning isn't necessarty.
John, is that you? I've been trying to call, but your number doesn't work anymore...
As others have pointed out, polarizing filters are so common that there's no security here.
It's like locking your house with a skeleton key.
Why not insert noisy frames between real ones and just synchronize the glasses so that they filter out the garbage frames? Why not just have the screen in the glasses?
The only thing I can come up with is that it's 31*31*61. (Obviously not a coincidence)
16 bit color would be 32*32*64.
12 bit color would be 16*16*16.
When they refer to color combinations, they can't be possible color values for adjacent pixels - that would be a huge number.
Any ideas?
Yeah, I'll second that.
Somewhere, somebody must be doing research on 100 foot eyeballs looking up at the sky in the desert.
I mean, what's government spending for if not for projects like that.
(Actually, I feel like those 100 ft eyes are looking down at me)
but, why would I want to attach an ATX motherboard through the parallel port and use it as a disk drive?
I mean, what kind of crazy disk would a motherboard be?
This difference is in the constext of discussion of virus infection. My point was just that viri have a tougher time modifying executables because they don't have write access.
The proverbial "most people" don't have executables in their home directory because they don't compile applications. Even if you were installing a compiled app, you would properly install it elsewhere on your filesystem after you built it.
A couple points:
/usr/bin even if I wanted to. In windows, this could be done, but it's not because it would make installing/removing applications (slightly) more difficult. Well folks, a virus is just another program that you just installed; albiet probably accidentally.
1. Most of the hundreds of millions of windows users are windows users because that's what came with their PC. It was bundled with their PCs because of the heavy handed licensing methods that Microsoft applied to the OEMs. That's not the same as saying that the customers prefer windows.
2. It occurs to me that it's very hard for a virus to propagate in an environment where the user (by default) does not have write permission to the directories - and I'm not talking a "read-only" bit that essentially relies on the honor system. In usermode, I can't infect/damage
3. Saying Linux has made great strides in a short time is misleading and somewhat deprecating. I've been using it since 1992 (10 years). That predates all win32 platforms (including Winnt and Win9x, to say nothing about XP, etc.). It's a minor bone to pick, but it's made great strides over the entire course of its existence. Even in the beginning, it was purposely built to take advantage of "great strides" that predated it.
4. Users don't have to patch code. Linux package management excels. I know debian best, and apt-get keeps my system secure with nary a recompile. Patching? I could if I wanted to, but I'm too busy being productive on my system.
5. I agree about not calling people who don't use linux morons.
6. You don't even have to run linux, as far as I'm concerned. I have to draw a line at telling the people in the community to get busy and fix the bugs and do a little usablity testing. Where have you been? Did you know that all that happens. How else can you explain this feature-rich reliable, and usable system that I'm typing this on? Independent estimates have estimated that there is over 1 billion dollars of time invested in a typical linux system and it is all given away for free. Be grateful, not pissy.
$ rm -f -r / /: Permission denied
rm:
I can't even get the unix virus! I'm such a luser.
I want a beowulf cluster of those.
Aren't we famous as a group for not maintaining independence in our professional judgement, or does this exclude the historical jihads such as:
VI or Emacs
Emacs or Xemacs
IDE or Basic Editor (Hmm, a trend)
Command Line or GUI
BSD or GPL
Windows or bend over (which would you prefer?)
Reaching way back to Windows 3.1 days: Microsoft called it "Microsoft Windows 3.1 Operating System" right on the front of the box. Of course, it was just a GUI that ran on top of DOS.
Based on that reasoning, KDE and Gnome could be considered operating systems too. They're GUIs that run on top of *nix.
It's wrong, but they're using the term consistently. Perhaps they have some adgenda to redefine the term "operating system".
Can't we just give the poor guy a little privacy?
That's all he wants.
Star Office 6 downloads.
But don't let all subscribers have it.
I think where we all got off track because they used the wrong term. They mean that PCs using this technology will be more like "instant on"
They just mean that the nonvolitile ram will save you from having to go through the boot sequence to recreate the state of the machine before you turned it off
Of course, just like current machines returning from standby, it will have to reinitialize the devices, but that would be some time savings
And make it play voices that tell me to do things?
I think Rik's discovered a good new way to karma-whore.
/.
1. Write a VM.
2. Get a fine article written about your work
3. Have somebody post the article on
4. Post. Post. Post.
Rik's put in at least 3 comments in this tree and they're all being mod'ed up.
I'd better start on my own VM!
(Or, I'll write a reverse disk-sector mapper)
Actually, there aren't SO MANY MORE windows servers on the internet than *nix boxes.
Please see this fine article http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/13/124025 7&mode=thread which tries to compare the number of windows systems vs unix systems on the internet.
Here are a couple of their conclusions:
Even taking the statistics most favorable to Microsoft, they had almost twice as many IPs on the public internet than Linux did in 1999. However, during that same period, there were many more than twice as many expoits, viruses, etc. that attacked windows vs unix.
Linux has far too many installations on the public internet to be dismissed as too rare to interest hackers.