It probably won't receive the amount of funding sufficient to provide a real 24/7 broadcast. You'll probably see a few hours of new programming each week that is supplemented primarily by news from last month.
Bull. Good software is designed to be more reliable. Only give access that a module needs to do the job. Block access to things that you don't need.
An intelligent, proactive design prevents vulnerabilities in the first place, and mitigates them if they occur. Windows has so many design flaws, it looks like Swiss cheese.
As I've mentioned here, I'm not an apologist. If somebody deployed Microsoft Windows in an absolutely mission critical environment, I'd suspect that they were more than a little masochistic. I'm especially critical of the time required by Microsoft to repair a fairly trivial exploit, especially those that are present in widely deployed "free" products like Internet Explorer.
You're right about good software, too. What happens, however, if a crafty individual discovers a vulnerability in the hypothetical module that restricts access to other modules? That would immediately compromise your entire design.
While I will obviously agree that Windows is substantially less secure than most other operating systems (*BSD, Linux, et al.), it only takes one crucial 0-day vulnerability to compromise a working system.
Windows has so many design flaws, it looks like Swiss cheese.
For legal reasons, I've chosen not to download or review the source code that is available for retrieval online. Therefore, if you've happened to stumble upon it, I'll take your word for that.;-)
No, it would still depend on the obviousness of the exploit used.
I'm not a Microsoft apologist. I never deploy Windows. I despise many of their tactics. I prefer a Unix-based operating system.
That said, let's face it: A 0-day exploit can affect any operating system, no matter how secure we might consider it. That includes every clone and variant of Unix available today.
As a programmer, you can take every precaution and still encounter a blatantly obvious -- to your critics, at least -- compromise. Although it really isn't a valid comparison, I'll cite the design problem that was eventually fixed in our beloved PHP interpreter. The end-user was once allowed to manipulate server-side variables, and that was sometimes an absolute nightmare to work around.
If such an obvious vulnerability were present in an ASP interpreter, we'd chuckle together and continue bashing the developers (developers, developers!) at Microsoft. I'll admit that it's often very funny to do so, but I'm ultimately afraid that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones -- even if our glass house is reinforced.;-)
Can MS really be held at fault when illegal usage of the OS results in a huge failure of the Internet?
I'll bite. Microsoft can only repair the vulnerabilities that they have been made aware of. If somebody uses a 0-day exploit to craft a worm, then I don't believe Microsoft can really be held accountable. That is like blaming the manufacturer of a safe for being susceptible to a heretofore undisclosed method of safe cracking.
If it is a vulnerability that they've known about for months, however, not unlike many of those that affect Internet Explorer, then that should probably be considered a different story.
Despite the accusations of trolling that you've received, however, I believe that you were right to distinguish an ethical responsibility from a legal one.
For those of you that don't live in Houston, KPRC has less journalistic integrity than The Sun. They are notorious for their melodramatic rating stunts.
will put MS into direct competition with its hardware OEM customers.
And, once Microsoft begins to gradually dominate that market, their positions might become similar to that of a Wal-Mart supplier. Their business models will change as they begin to provide manufacturing services for Microsoft.
Q. When does the DPM beta expire? A. The Data Protection Manager software expires 270 days after installation.
That is, in my opinion, extremely dangerous. As we are all aware, most properly configured servers can be left practically unattended for extended durations. We're also aware that system administrators often commit horrible -- albeit accidental -- decisions in a pinch. So, they will be installing an "easy backup" application, potentially in a mission critical environment, that will expire at a predefined date.
Good one, Microsoft. I hope that there aren't any drive failures after your product has expired.
Of course the film is going to be PG-13... because only people above the age of 13 will be able to truly appreciate Jar Jar's evisceration.
I can imagine it now. Darth Vader ripping that demon Jamaican dinosaur Wino from limb to limb. With each limb being severed, hearing the beast shouting out, "Meesa in Pain! Meesa in Pain!" Vader points his finger, and throws the battered, lifeless carcass against the wall.
Half of the Star Wars demographic is probably composed of six-year-olds who are still amused by sadistically removing the legs from an insect. They'll appreciate that scene even more than you will.;-)
It's all right. They can still enjoy licensing Microsoft SQL Server, among other required back end products, while receiving the benefits of positive press.
You have the wrong perspective. Slashdot stories are more like a fine Merlot than leftover potato chips. They don't produce stories with class like this anymore!
Why would Microsoft elect to support OASIS? If support for their proprietary formats were no longer a necessity, then Office would become increasingly obscure.
On the other hand, perhaps they might adopt a proprietary variant of the OASIS format. No intelligent businessman, however, would jeopardize his "bread and butter" product in order to satisfy a competitor.
I was actually expecting this. Firefox is an immature fork. One vulnerability eliminated is one less to be discovered later. It is inconvenient now, but should expedite relative maturity in the base. I am, however, still awaiting an automatic update for my installation of Firefox 1.0...;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Humor often serves as a pacifier for those who might otherwise panic. We turn to humor in order to avoid a descension into hysteria.
That said, it's often difficult to separate distasteful from tasteful humor in a time of crisis, especially on a "written" medium such as this one.
It probably won't receive the amount of funding sufficient to provide a real 24/7 broadcast. You'll probably see a few hours of new programming each week that is supplemented primarily by news from last month.
;-)
Wait, maybe we should call it Slashdot TV.
Within the next year they will begin delivering a video streaming service that will carry Internet security news 24 hours a day, seven days a week
Seen on a job availability notice for this project:
ANCHOR PREREQUISITES
- Ability to fluently read and speak '1337' while broadcasting
Bull. Good software is designed to be more reliable. Only give access that a module needs to do the job. Block access to things that you don't need.
;-)
An intelligent, proactive design prevents vulnerabilities in the first place, and mitigates them if they occur. Windows has so many design flaws, it looks like Swiss cheese.
As I've mentioned here, I'm not an apologist. If somebody deployed Microsoft Windows in an absolutely mission critical environment, I'd suspect that they were more than a little masochistic. I'm especially critical of the time required by Microsoft to repair a fairly trivial exploit, especially those that are present in widely deployed "free" products like Internet Explorer.
You're right about good software, too. What happens, however, if a crafty individual discovers a vulnerability in the hypothetical module that restricts access to other modules? That would immediately compromise your entire design.
While I will obviously agree that Windows is substantially less secure than most other operating systems (*BSD, Linux, et al.), it only takes one crucial 0-day vulnerability to compromise a working system.
Windows has so many design flaws, it looks like Swiss cheese.
For legal reasons, I've chosen not to download or review the source code that is available for retrieval online. Therefore, if you've happened to stumble upon it, I'll take your word for that.
No, it would still depend on the obviousness of the exploit used.
;-)
I'm not a Microsoft apologist. I never deploy Windows. I despise many of their tactics. I prefer a Unix-based operating system.
That said, let's face it: A 0-day exploit can affect any operating system, no matter how secure we might consider it. That includes every clone and variant of Unix available today.
As a programmer, you can take every precaution and still encounter a blatantly obvious -- to your critics, at least -- compromise. Although it really isn't a valid comparison, I'll cite the design problem that was eventually fixed in our beloved PHP interpreter. The end-user was once allowed to manipulate server-side variables, and that was sometimes an absolute nightmare to work around.
If such an obvious vulnerability were present in an ASP interpreter, we'd chuckle together and continue bashing the developers (developers, developers!) at Microsoft. I'll admit that it's often very funny to do so, but I'm ultimately afraid that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones -- even if our glass house is reinforced.
Can MS really be held at fault when illegal usage of the OS results in a huge failure of the Internet?
I'll bite. Microsoft can only repair the vulnerabilities that they have been made aware of. If somebody uses a 0-day exploit to craft a worm, then I don't believe Microsoft can really be held accountable. That is like blaming the manufacturer of a safe for being susceptible to a heretofore undisclosed method of safe cracking.
If it is a vulnerability that they've known about for months, however, not unlike many of those that affect Internet Explorer, then that should probably be considered a different story.
Despite the accusations of trolling that you've received, however, I believe that you were right to distinguish an ethical responsibility from a legal one.
For those of you that don't live in Houston, KPRC has less journalistic integrity than The Sun. They are notorious for their melodramatic rating stunts.
The term might be. Eventually, we'll once again refer to them as "journals."
From this point forward, no Terminator references will be permitted. ;-)
Now I can toast two pieces of bread at once.
-1, Welcome to 2001.
Or, better yet, a PlayStation 2?
This message was immediately received by Cellphedia by SMS:
who iz rolex pickapal n y iz he on slashdot lol lmao
will put MS into direct competition with its hardware OEM customers.
And, once Microsoft begins to gradually dominate that market, their positions might become similar to that of a Wal-Mart supplier. Their business models will change as they begin to provide manufacturing services for Microsoft.
Q. When does the DPM beta expire?
A. The Data Protection Manager software expires 270 days after installation.
That is, in my opinion, extremely dangerous. As we are all aware, most properly configured servers can be left practically unattended for extended durations. We're also aware that system administrators often commit horrible -- albeit accidental -- decisions in a pinch. So, they will be installing an "easy backup" application, potentially in a mission critical environment, that will expire at a predefined date.
Good one, Microsoft. I hope that there aren't any drive failures after your product has expired.
Twice.
Hey, moderators, the parent is not a troll. Stop using the new Red Hat "Curveball" theme; it's distorting your intelligence. :-(
Colonel Panic: Not just a reaction to incorrect artillery coordinates anymore!
Of course the film is going to be PG-13... because only people above the age of 13 will be able to truly appreciate Jar Jar's evisceration.
;-)
I can imagine it now. Darth Vader ripping that demon Jamaican dinosaur Wino from limb to limb. With each limb being severed, hearing the beast shouting out, "Meesa in Pain! Meesa in Pain!" Vader points his finger, and throws the battered, lifeless carcass against the wall.
Half of the Star Wars demographic is probably composed of six-year-olds who are still amused by sadistically removing the legs from an insect. They'll appreciate that scene even more than you will.
It's all right. They can still enjoy licensing Microsoft SQL Server, among other required back end products, while receiving the benefits of positive press.
So, any bets as to which pornographer Sony will be suing first? ;-)
You have the wrong perspective. Slashdot stories are more like a fine Merlot than leftover potato chips. They don't produce stories with class like this anymore!
Store procedures. Triggers. Views. It's like it'll be a real DB!
So, the Slashdot editor, whose own Web site uses MySQL, is actively trolling other MySQL users in the article summary? Hilarious!
Why would Microsoft elect to support OASIS? If support for their proprietary formats were no longer a necessity, then Office would become increasingly obscure.
On the other hand, perhaps they might adopt a proprietary variant of the OASIS format. No intelligent businessman, however, would jeopardize his "bread and butter" product in order to satisfy a competitor.
Look, everybody, it's Jack Valenti on Slashdot!
I was actually expecting this. Firefox is an immature fork. One vulnerability eliminated is one less to be discovered later. It is inconvenient now, but should expedite relative maturity in the base. I am, however, still awaiting an automatic update for my installation of Firefox 1.0... ;-)