If you inspect the documentation and write code based on that documentation, you have at least partly disclosed what's in the documentation by embodying it in source code. If the docs are nondisclosable, logic suggests code based on the docs should be.
As I said your code should be available if you choose
If the code embodies none of the information in the documentation... WTF was the point of getting the documentation?
To work around hypothetical patent issue. Know what is required is far better than not knowing that function x is required even if you know you cannot do it as well as the patented version.
Patent protection isn't included. Microsoft disclosed the documentation, but they didn't license or waive patents. If you read the docs and implement a patented algorithm on the basis of those docs, your permission to read the docs doesn't immunize you from patent infringement.
I thought that's what I was saying about patents
Also, patents aren't necessarily the point of a non-disclosable technical specification. Non-patented trade secrets, for instance, might be the reason for non-disclosability. Or simple corporate paranoia.
I agree but in this case I'd think Microsoft would have moved or be in the process of moving every trade secret into a patent ASAP. Normally the trade secrets act would have been the hammer to squash anyone silly enough to somehow get secret Microsoft docs. Since that's maybe gone or mitigated the next thing is to drop a patent on it.
I'll say it again: if you write code based on NDA documents, and the source code is distributable, the information in the NDA document is being disclosed in the form of the source code. And that makes no sense to me.
Let me try this approach. I give you the plans to build my airplane- however every single part is protected by patents. if you take a look at those parts, figure a way to make different parts that perform the same functions and build a plane, on the outside you might say it's a duplicate of mine. On the inside its another beast entirely. Even if you published the plans to your plane, someone else is not going to know how I built my plane. Your plane and mine might have different flight characteristics. it will most certainly not be the same.
what's the point to the documentation not being disclosable?
Talk about pointless legalese...
Not really. The docs themselves might contain patented material. And only your source code might be freely distributable. Even if you had the source code it might not be possible to implement certain features (IE replication notification algorithms) without breaking patents.
I didn't actualy review each and every vulnerability to see how each one manifests. As in the past it wouldn't shock me to find out that one of window critical vulnerabilities is something like you described. I agree that many "critical" vulnerabilities difficult to implement, my point was if you are going to sort thru the issues and see which ones are really critical and which ones aren't you have to do it to both OSes.
IANAL but until someone serves you a subpeona or charges you with a crime there is no evidence to be destroyed. If you had a security camera that taped you downloading a copy of Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, it would be evidence once you were charged with a crime. If you delete the tape that had that action on it before you were charged at absolute best you might be able to be charged with obstruction of justice.
In the case of the CIA there was no congressional investigation or DOJ investigation into torture at the time.
99.99% of the time, these tools are never used, let alone exposed to the outside world.
Note that the same methodology can be applied to many IE/windows vulnerabilities but unless you give those types of issues a pass it's not valid to do the same to another OS.
The newspaper was one of the LAST remaining sources of relatively untainted news.
You found a 21st century newspaper that actually finds and reports the facts as they are (or even close to them)? How can I enter your parallel universe?
ok so if you have a product foo that doesn't interoperate with the product you own (AKA bar) does that mean that product foo has to give you the code to make bar work with it? Personally I think not. As a developer that worked on foo, my protocols are not open for public use. If you want to buy a license- ok I'll think about it but that should be my option. It's also your option to not use foo if a concern is that your users will need to use bar to connect. Unless foo is the only application in the field, in which case you don't have anyone to communicate with! Can you think of a real life example?
I suppose that's would be reasonable if the only way to get the data off was a microsoft API, however I've never heard of a microsoft product that only allowed export to another microsoft box. (I've heard and know of file formats like that but that's a whole 'nother ballgame)
If microsoft is not acceptable then why is the EU so hot to get microsoft to open their APIs? Perhaps they want to communicate to microsoft servers because they are acceptable. Perhaps MS Office is so popular because it's acceptable.
Well everybody - except Microsoft of course - knows that the GUI don't have to be in the kernel.
What should be in the kernel is the code for handling the hardware and give those resources to programs in a secure way. Nothing more nothing less.
offtopic but...
This is the same argument that's been going on for the last, what, 30 years or so. Should the kernel provided a minumum of features and let the programmer have at it or should it provide a full set of features. I would think that by now folks would have realized that the market has declared the latter to be the design of choice.
The problem isn't the system, we have alternative candidates and folks that would, if elected, fight these sorts of things. The problem is that the voting public is either too bent on their own greed/liberal socialistic ethics ("our guy brought home our share of federal money he's great) or uncaring to see what their legislators are up to and think that they are doing a great job because the legislators said so.
I always find it amusing when anti-creationists claim creationism wants to call itself science(it doesn't) and at the same time turns "science" into a religion.
Plus, any disaster of hurricane katrina's level will undoubtedly overtax the network bandwidth anyway and most calls will fail.
I don't think that point can be stressed enough. I'd rather see the FCC mandate more bandwidth so that during the first few hours of an emergency at most calls go out rather than the situtation they have mandated which is that the tower will be running without any likelyhood that the calls you need to make will go through.
OLPC isn't about computers, it's about high-quality education on the cheap."
If it's about cheap high-quality education then they should try them in the US where kids graduate without being able to read or do basic math before foisting them on an unsuspecting third world nation. I suspect the results will be less than stellar.
However which is more useful in a country without internet access, an OLPC or the equivalent cost in books? For centuries now books have also taught those things, so it isn't increased capability with having an OLPC. I like the idea of OLPC but I'm not sure that now is the time for it.
Not quite the only differnece as the only ones that does not have to be double natted are dataconnect unlimited and pers. unlimited. This can play havok with vpn connections.
As a person that purchasd a PDA phone when ATT was cingular I can attest that I am still engaged in arguments with ATT over getting internet access turned back on on my phone (it's almost a year now with my 8525). The phone was preconfigured but once the takeover took place many folks inmy situation were stranded in data access land. There are lots of places on the net to tell you how to get back to the original isp.cingular APN however it's got to be enabled by ATT for access (which they automatically disabled if they thought you didn't need it even if you pay for it)
Outside the world of free market utopianism, not all markets are identical. Sometimes the only way to force competition is through regulation. And anyone who favors free markets over real competition has become so immersed in free market dogma that they've forgotten why markets are beneficial in the first place.
As a real life example take a look at verizon running out of new england as fast as possible after deploying fiber to all the urban areas. Since there is no regulation if you live in a rural area and the sale to farpoint goes thru you'll get either 256k DSL or comcast (if you have comcast available). Verizon is perfectly willing to sell the areas they own and no-one wants to pick it up due to the last mile costs. In addition part of the revenue picked up by deploying fiber is the ability to sell TV service. Since every town negotiates its own service comcast has been able to monopolize the cable service in that town so that noone else can offer it, also making fiber deployment unattractive.
Well, gee, why would anyone care about that minor difference in a democracy?
You've convinced me, a republican form of government is a complete waste of time since in your opinion constituents have no ability whatsoever to make their voices heard through any means.
Huh? I haven't put forth the notion that constituents can't be heard, what I have said is that there is absolutely no responsibility on the part of the representative to act on it.
We should all lose the right to vote, and simply trust that our representatives will have our best interest at heart!
To be technically correct voting is a privilege extended to just about everyone but it is a privilege (which is why felons can't vote). You do bring up an excellent point. In our form of government we do have to trust that our reps are looking out for the interests of the country. The only ones that can remove a congressman is congress. This is why (IMHO) it's far more important to measure the character of a candidate along with his views.
If she's not representing their interests what's she doing there? Is she evaluating whether or not DC should be merged back into the state? Who pays her salary? (The federal goverment). Google H.R. 733,DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BUDGET AUTONOMY ACT OF 2007 to see how they are trying to get the ability to spend the tax money they collect (essentially folks that live in DC pay a "state" federal tax as well as regular federal tax).
I think you're agreeing with me. When there is competition you can complain and it means something. When they have the monopoly you're cooked. BTW check your TOS before you go checking your connection. I'm not sure if the EFF tool fits the description but...
N. Customer will not use or distribute tools designed or used for compromising security, such as password guessing programs, decoders, password gatherers, analyzers, cracking tools, packet sniffers, encryption circumvention devices, or Trojan Horse programs. Network probing or port scanning tools are only permitted when used in conjunction with a residential home network, or if explicitly authorized by the destination host and/or network. Unauthorized port scanning, for any reason, is strictly prohibited.
WTF? They may have "people looking out for them" (though they would argue otherwise), but they don't have representation. Representation requires that you actually have some responsibility to the people you're representing -- nobody in Congress with power has to answer to the residents of DC on election day.
First in the form of government we have, no elected official has any official responsibility whatsoever to the people that elected him. His job is to make the best decisions he can based on the needs of the country and his state. This follows on down to the state level as well. For example in MA the people passed a ballot initiative to lower the tax rate. It was ignored. They passed a constitutional amendment against judicially enacted gay marriage. By law the congress had to vote on it. It wasn't until they were threatened with federal lawsuits for not following their own constitution that they formed a constitutional convention (as required by law) by immediately adjourned- thus avoiding having to take a stand. At the federal level democrats were elected with the promise that they would end the war. I've been there and I'm still saw an awful lot a soldiers and marines. Your recourse in situations like this where you disagree with your representation is to not re-elect them.
So if congress decides that residents of your state have to pay double taxes what can you do about it? Your representatives can be outraged all they want but they've been outvoted. DC has exactly the same situation. Come election day you can vote out the old guys and send in the new ones- just like DC. the only difference is that the rep from DC doesn't get to vote- only to voice the opinion of the folks he represents.
They could vote to boil the whole city in oil and the residents wouldn't have any recourse but protest. Congress can vote to raise their taxes through the roof, and nobody in DC can do anything about it.
The only motivation anyone in Congress would have to "look out for" DC's interests is altruism (lol) and concern that if they do something too horrible they'll get killed on their way to work during the few months they spend four days a week in town.
Actually they have the on recourse almost no-one else has easy access to- MOVE. DC is a city that no one has to live in. It's convenient I'm sure but from day 1 was planned to be simply federal buildings. You can argue that they do not have equal representation but since their city is funded and managed by the federal government itself how much more power do they need. If they don't like the tax rate there- leave. There is no non appointed job in DC that you cannot get in any other city in America, and since you can walk into a state in about 3 hours if you had to, you don't even need a car.
Slashdot Mirror
As I said your code should be available if you choose
To work around hypothetical patent issue. Know what is required is far better than not knowing that function x is required even if you know you cannot do it as well as the patented version.
I thought that's what I was saying about patents
I agree but in this case I'd think Microsoft would have moved or be in the process of moving every trade secret into a patent ASAP. Normally the trade secrets act would have been the hammer to squash anyone silly enough to somehow get secret Microsoft docs. Since that's maybe gone or mitigated the next thing is to drop a patent on it.
Let me try this approach. I give you the plans to build my airplane- however every single part is protected by patents. if you take a look at those parts, figure a way to make different parts that perform the same functions and build a plane, on the outside you might say it's a duplicate of mine. On the inside its another beast entirely. Even if you published the plans to your plane, someone else is not going to know how I built my plane. Your plane and mine might have different flight characteristics. it will most certainly not be the same.
Not really. The docs themselves might contain patented material. And only your source code might be freely distributable. Even if you had the source code it might not be possible to implement certain features (IE replication notification algorithms) without breaking patents.
huh? How does that work?
I didn't actualy review each and every vulnerability to see how each one manifests. As in the past it wouldn't shock me to find out that one of window critical vulnerabilities is something like you described. I agree that many "critical" vulnerabilities difficult to implement, my point was if you are going to sort thru the issues and see which ones are really critical and which ones aren't you have to do it to both OSes.
IANAL but until someone serves you a subpeona or charges you with a crime there is no evidence to be destroyed. If you had a security camera that taped you downloading a copy of Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, it would be evidence once you were charged with a crime. If you delete the tape that had that action on it before you were charged at absolute best you might be able to be charged with obstruction of justice.
In the case of the CIA there was no congressional investigation or DOJ investigation into torture at the time.
You found a 21st century newspaper that actually finds and reports the facts as they are (or even close to them)? How can I enter your parallel universe?
ok so if you have a product foo that doesn't interoperate with the product you own (AKA bar) does that mean that product foo has to give you the code to make bar work with it? Personally I think not. As a developer that worked on foo, my protocols are not open for public use. If you want to buy a license- ok I'll think about it but that should be my option. It's also your option to not use foo if a concern is that your users will need to use bar to connect. Unless foo is the only application in the field, in which case you don't have anyone to communicate with! Can you think of a real life example?
I suppose that's would be reasonable if the only way to get the data off was a microsoft API, however I've never heard of a microsoft product that only allowed export to another microsoft box. (I've heard and know of file formats like that but that's a whole 'nother ballgame)
If microsoft is not acceptable then why is the EU so hot to get microsoft to open their APIs? Perhaps they want to communicate to microsoft servers because they are acceptable. Perhaps MS Office is so popular because it's acceptable.
offtopic but...
This is the same argument that's been going on for the last, what, 30 years or so. Should the kernel provided a minumum of features and let the programmer have at it or should it provide a full set of features. I would think that by now folks would have realized that the market has declared the latter to be the design of choice.
The problem isn't the system, we have alternative candidates and folks that would, if elected, fight these sorts of things. The problem is that the voting public is either too bent on their own greed/liberal socialistic ethics ("our guy brought home our share of federal money he's great) or uncaring to see what their legislators are up to and think that they are doing a great job because the legislators said so.
I always find it amusing when anti-creationists claim creationism wants to call itself science(it doesn't) and at the same time turns "science" into a religion.
I don't think that point can be stressed enough. I'd rather see the FCC mandate more bandwidth so that during the first few hours of an emergency at most calls go out rather than the situtation they have mandated which is that the tower will be running without any likelyhood that the calls you need to make will go through.
it all depends on if they have user accessibility laws like MA does. If they do ODF is sunk there too.
If it's about cheap high-quality education then they should try them in the US where kids graduate without being able to read or do basic math before foisting them on an unsuspecting third world nation. I suspect the results will be less than stellar.
However which is more useful in a country without internet access, an OLPC or the equivalent cost in books? For centuries now books have also taught those things, so it isn't increased capability with having an OLPC. I like the idea of OLPC but I'm not sure that now is the time for it.
Not quite the only differnece as the only ones that does not have to be double natted are dataconnect unlimited and pers. unlimited. This can play havok with vpn connections.
As a person that purchasd a PDA phone when ATT was cingular I can attest that I am still engaged in arguments with ATT over getting internet access turned back on on my phone (it's almost a year now with my 8525). The phone was preconfigured but once the takeover took place many folks inmy situation were stranded in data access land. There are lots of places on the net to tell you how to get back to the original isp.cingular APN however it's got to be enabled by ATT for access (which they automatically disabled if they thought you didn't need it even if you pay for it)
Its also usefull to call your congress critter as well to get theor position and to let them know what yours is.
As a real life example take a look at verizon running out of new england as fast as possible after deploying fiber to all the urban areas. Since there is no regulation if you live in a rural area and the sale to farpoint goes thru you'll get either 256k DSL or comcast (if you have comcast available). Verizon is perfectly willing to sell the areas they own and no-one wants to pick it up due to the last mile costs. In addition part of the revenue picked up by deploying fiber is the ability to sell TV service. Since every town negotiates its own service comcast has been able to monopolize the cable service in that town so that noone else can offer it, also making fiber deployment unattractive.
To be technically correct voting is a privilege extended to just about everyone but it is a privilege (which is why felons can't vote). You do bring up an excellent point. In our form of government we do have to trust that our reps are looking out for the interests of the country. The only ones that can remove a congressman is congress. This is why (IMHO) it's far more important to measure the character of a candidate along with his views.
If she's not representing their interests what's she doing there? Is she evaluating whether or not DC should be merged back into the state? Who pays her salary? (The federal goverment). Google H.R. 733,DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BUDGET AUTONOMY ACT OF 2007 to see how they are trying to get the ability to spend the tax money they collect (essentially folks that live in DC pay a "state" federal tax as well as regular federal tax).
I think you're agreeing with me. When there is competition you can complain and it means something. When they have the monopoly you're cooked. BTW check your TOS before you go checking your connection. I'm not sure if the EFF tool fits the description but...
from http://www1.wowway.com/wow/wow.aspx?ConIdent=28&RCView=False&TermID=2
N. Customer will not use or distribute tools designed or used for compromising security, such as password guessing programs, decoders, password gatherers, analyzers, cracking tools, packet sniffers, encryption circumvention devices, or Trojan Horse programs. Network probing or port scanning tools are only permitted when used in conjunction with a residential home network, or if explicitly authorized by the destination host and/or network. Unauthorized port scanning, for any reason, is strictly prohibited.
First in the form of government we have, no elected official has any official responsibility whatsoever to the people that elected him. His job is to make the best decisions he can based on the needs of the country and his state. This follows on down to the state level as well. For example in MA the people passed a ballot initiative to lower the tax rate. It was ignored. They passed a constitutional amendment against judicially enacted gay marriage. By law the congress had to vote on it. It wasn't until they were threatened with federal lawsuits for not following their own constitution that they formed a constitutional convention (as required by law) by immediately adjourned- thus avoiding having to take a stand. At the federal level democrats were elected with the promise that they would end the war. I've been there and I'm still saw an awful lot a soldiers and marines. Your recourse in situations like this where you disagree with your representation is to not re-elect them.
So if congress decides that residents of your state have to pay double taxes what can you do about it? Your representatives can be outraged all they want but they've been outvoted. DC has exactly the same situation. Come election day you can vote out the old guys and send in the new ones- just like DC. the only difference is that the rep from DC doesn't get to vote- only to voice the opinion of the folks he represents.
Actually they have the on recourse almost no-one else has easy access to- MOVE. DC is a city that no one has to live in. It's convenient I'm sure but from day 1 was planned to be simply federal buildings. You can argue that they do not have equal representation but since their city is funded and managed by the federal government itself how much more power do they need. If they don't like the tax rate there- leave. There is no non appointed job in DC that you cannot get in any other city in America, and since you can walk into a state in about 3 hours if you had to, you don't even need a car.