If, like me, you think this sucks and want to cancel your subscription go here before November 8, 2003.
...your birthday is November 8, say hoo rah!
Re:How do you guarantee anonymity?
on
Get Paid To Crack?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I know someone who works for the FBI's "Computer Crime" section and honestly i find her intelligence lacking at the very most. She'd buy it.
My cousing works at the FBI and tried to recruit me for that. I was interested until I took the pre-qualification test wizard on their web-page. It asks three questions, the last of which was "Have you smoked marijuana more than three times in your life?"
So I was pretty much out. But frankly, that is the government's loss.
How do you guarantee anonymity?
on
Get Paid To Crack?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The Project guarantees complete anonymity for those that want to participate without pay, or complete privacy protection to those that choose to get paid.
Complete anonymity? An interesting idea. Let's talk about the practical ways you could "guarantee" somebody else's anonymity on the internet while still having the contest? I tried to make a list, but all I came up with pretty much amounted to "Dump all the logs." Which obviously makes it really difficult to study the attack patterns.
Obviously, the best way to remain anonymous is not to break into other people's networks, invited or otherwise. I mean, are they really going to destroy their data if the FBI calls? That would definitely be illegal (and unwise in our current "terrorism-freak-out") and publicly pre-meditated, at that.
If I had the kind of skillset these people are obviously recruiting for, I would be extremely leery of participating in this "competition." But I don't, and would have no interest.
"Lenny! Tell Mr. Burns I went home to work on the contest!"
Don't forget, for the people in the 317 area code, it is a local call, and for those of us with cell phone plans that include unlimited nights and weekends on a national plan, it doesn't cost a thing.;)
I had no idea these people had an office right in my backyard. Forget about calling... How about I show up with a sandwich board and protest for an afternoon?
Sure, it would be kind of stupid, but I could conceivably get on the local news and generate some more (bad) publicity for the telemarketing industry.
s it just me, or does this thing sound exactly like the Cobalt Cube from a few years back? It ran a modified Red Hat, was an "Internet appliance" turn-key box, and did all the fun router/web server/email server/file server stuff with just a simple interface.
Ahh yes... I have one of those... My trusty Sun Cobalt Qube. I run three domains with it over my cable modem...The cpu utilization has never been over like 20% for any extended period. It is quite the little workhorse, at only 450 mhz...
I fail to see how 850mhz is anything but overkill for an linux appliance doing the tasks specified. Then again, when I tell people the qube is only a 450, they get this...look on their face. Like they either don't believe me, or don't believe something that runs at ONLY 450 mhz can possibly get the job done. Perhaps going with a faster processor is simply for ease of marketing?
While I don't really like the idea of someone getting let go for speaking their mind, what's unfair about it? His company clearly has ties to MS, and he jeopardized those ties with his statements. If it were his own company, he could have felt free to say anything about anyone he wanted to, and dealt with the aftermath of his comments on his own. But it was someone elses company... someone who was (yuck) concerned about their business relationship with Microsoft.
I must disagree...
@Stake is supposed to be a security research and consulting firm. How is any research out of this company ever to have even one ounce of credibility again? I realize Mr. Geer's paper was not published as an "official" company report, but they were angry based on the fact that his paper might "appear" to be At Stake's opinion.
So if At Stake is so concerned about ruffling Microsoft's feathers that a report they DIDN'T EVEN WRITE causes the firing of a senior, uber-experienced employee with a vast repository of knowledge to draw on, how do we know their reports aren't already being slanted to avoid offending "partner" Microsoft?
His firing is tantamount to killing the messenger for a message they didn't like. Sorry, but as an employee I resent the idea that if I do something on my own time and dime that offends somebody inside some business partner's corporate structure, I could lose my job. In this economy, that is a pretty chilling statement, President Bush's assinine assertions that "Everything is okay!" aside...
That's why I encourage open source and hiring a maintenance developer over proprietary and perpetual service contracts in every case in my current position. Simply put, we'll pay less (and be more secure) if somebody WE trust is auditing our code and making bugfixes/enhancements.
Proprietary is great if you're doing something where you'll never need to customize anything, or do anything slightly outside the norm (or you just don't care if it works.) BUT, if you're like most businesses, you probably have some weird process that doesn't fit some package you're paying for, and you have in turn come up with a workaround. This may or may not achieve the same goal as a well-written, configurable software package would have, but you don't really know until there's a problem some day.
So you are saying you take the patches for apache/mysql as perfect? No reason to test it? But you seem to have to test the MS patches because they could be harmful? What a fucking hypocrit.
Nope. I, of course, test rigorously in both environments. It is simply easier to test apache/mysql patches because there are far fewer patches TO TEST for apache/mysql/php than come out for our MS environment. Since I maintain both (MS at work, linux stuff at home,) I think I'm in a pretty good position to compare and contrast.
Not a hypocrite (note correct spelling,) simply guilty of not explaining the painfully obvious to somebody whose only "qualifications" would seem to be an MCSE and three months on the help desk. What's the matter, pissed that you can't ACTUALLY earn $60,000 with no experience and an MCSE?
You wouldn't happen to be from a rural, or at least still somewhat countrified, part of the south-eastern US would you? I've heard this sort of abomination uttered more times than I can count in the last couple of years.
No, I wouldn't happen to be from that part of the world... Please try applying a different stereotype.
Shakespeare is lucky he's dead.
Shakespeare knew a language was a living thing, that chaned according to the needs of its users... Try as I might, I've picked up an Indiana accent since moving to Indianapolis... "TO BE" is a phrase that many people don't use/need here. It doesn't make you superior to me, or any of my neighbors. I certainly hope you can still sleep at night after this revelation.
Certainly one can interpret - or at least phrase - it in many different ways. Some important questions:
What about those 5%? What did they dislike about Linux, why did they switch (back?) to Windows? - We need to get in touch with folks who switched from Linux to Windows and ask them these questions.
In our case, we switched our Samba servers over to Windows 2000 about 18 months ago because a new CIO was installed, and he commanded from the ivory tower that we would be all Microsoft within one year from his start date. No, we aren't using 2003--yet. But it seems conceivable to me that other companies are in similar situations... Their linux machines run great, like toy cars on Christmas morning, but somebody somewhere in authority gets a pitch from an MS salesman, and the next thing you know, bye-bye Samba and Apache, hello IIS and Windows 2003 file servers. (Ugh!)
So in our case, it was an arbitrary decision by somebody higher up. We never had ANY problems with the Samba servers, but because he used to work at Microsoft (in Redmond, y'all!) it was done.
Or perhaps they decided they wanted to re-write their whole web-site in ASP.net. I know a job I applied for recently was mine until we started talking about their web-site, and I recommended they not go ASP but implement their new site in HTML/PHP on apache using a low-cost database like mysql or postgres. As a one-man band, I would prefer to spend my time patching the parts of apache/php/mysql that need patched, rather than having to test and verify the twice per afternoon stuff that has been out from MS lately.
MO buying 6 drives and not running RAID 5 is really dumb.
Or a RAID 0+1 arrangement with three drives per volume. In this case, we would still be talking two ~500 gb volumes, which is quite impressive of its own volition. Honestly, how many of you could even get to 75% on a 1 TB volume anyway?
Or, if you just want to act silly you could build two and mirror them...
There is obviously a lot of heated arguments here with a surprising lack of scientific objectivity or hand-on knowledge, two things that we usually came to expect from the Slashdot crowd.
I love the fact that your sarcasm was modded "Insightful." Hey man, I get you...
...is there any substance not lethal in high enough doses? Btw, the "contains toxic chemicals" part merely restates the first part - the very definition of toxic is what is harmful to people.
I imagine even water is outlawed under this law, after all you can drown from it. Polluted water at least. Nevermind air, which is definately lethal if injected into the bloodstream.
Actually, you can directly die from an "overdose" of water, too, by ingesting too much.
This is the kind of dangerous thinking that brings abortion clinic bombings, the ongoing fighting between northern and southern Ireland, the danger in the Middle East, and countless other bloodbaths.
It is too bad Slashdot doesn't have a -1, Shill moderation... I would use it on you.
I mean, to compare a grass-roots protest of an organizations business tactics to the senseless slaughter of thousands of civillians is the sort of logical leap that only a maniac (or a shill) could make. Dude, get a clue. Telemarketers are leeches on society. The list of people that telemarketing benefits is very short, and consumers are most definitely not on it. I get the feeling, though, that if I could check the payroll/stockholder's list of all the telemarketing firms everywhere that I would eventually stumble across your name.
The function of a telemarketer is to sell products at inflated prices to impulse buyers. If you ever find yourself listening to a telemarketer spiel and thinking "This sounds useful" hang up immediately, and Google for the same product. Odds are pretty good you will find something better, cheaper, or both without looking too hard.
That is the whole purpose of telemarketing: To push overpriced products onto people who are dumb/suggestible enough to buy something from a stranger who called them randomly on the phone. How do you know it isn't somebody playing a prank? Or collecting CC#'s for fraud purposes?
While I understand this doesn't mean ALL telemarketers are evil lawbreakers, I do know that all telemarketers are ANNOYING and are selling things that a careful shopper could get much more cheaply by doing a tiny amount of research.
If they're so poor as to be living in welfare housing, why do they have a COMPUTER and INTERNET ACCESS? Or are we giving that away with the free food/shelter/check these days, too? Just wondering. I'd hope that if someone were that broke, they'd focus their priorities (read: "budget") a little better.
How do you know the machine wasn't a gift from a wealthy relative or a hand-me-down from a friend? Also, many apartment complexes offer built-in internet access these days. How do you know they don't live in one? Section 8 housing is in all sorts of unexpected places these days, now that the government got smart and stopped putting 1000 low-income people in one building, but rather one or two in 500 buildings. My complex offers free internet access, and also have section 8 units. Crab crab all you want, but a computer as a tool is no more an extravegance than a screwdriver or power-drill. After all, shouldn't the mom be able to create a resume to get a job with?
To put it another way, your assumption that all the people using computers are wealthy is quite erroneous.
Toss a webpage up that says: "We detected MSblaster on you machine, please goto to microsoft wupport, and download the appropriet patch"
I think this is a brilliant world. Unfortunately, there are already some sleazy companies who have pop-up ads that say the same thing. (ie. "You're infected with MSBlaster, patch your machine, then protect yourself permanently with (whatever the company's product is called.)"
You could also exploit a common NT hole by sending an NTMESSENGER message to them. (ie. "Message from Root@yourdomain.com: Your machine has been infected with a virus, please visit Windows Update to apply the patch ASAP.)...But of course that would probably not have much in the way of positive effect, and would annoy plenty of people as well.
Thanks for the tip...I've found my toilet reading for the next day or two! It looks promising though. Of course, lots of things from MS look promising until you try and test them, so my hopes aren't up TOO high.
Crap! That means I have to touch every machine in the enterprise--again! Just two weeks after "touching 'em all" (not in the baseball sense) from the last round of worm patches.
How I long for the old days of Novell... Ah...take me away!
It's big, the fan configuration will make it extrordinarily loud, and it's built to cater to the end user, not to the embedded machine market.
Have you ever seen/touched/heard a real live G5? The fans go on and off as-needed--all the fans don't run full bore at all times. Sure, there'll be some noise, but ultimately, not an unbearable amount. (Unlike our AMD core server units we've purchased... Those sound like propeller aircraft taking off.)
Can we add companies to the list that use door-to-door salesmen who still insist on knocking on my door despite the No Soliciting and No Trespassing signs?
We have a real problem with trespassing solicitors at my apartment complex. Our entire complex is a piece of private property, no publicly owned streets or sidewalks in it. We don't allow any salesmen on the grounds, and have four dozen clearly labelled signs that say NO SOLICITING. So a non-resident walking around ringing doorbells to solicit is definitely trespassing.
Last summer, I had a guy get kind of pushy with me when I told him he was trespassing and would have to leave. After he continued pitching me after I asked him to leave, I told him he should start walking, or I was calling 9-1-1, and he actually tried to force his way into my apartment! Luckily, my Louisville Slugger (the finest home defense weapon known to man) convinced him that my home wasn't a place he wanted to be.
We're moving to a gated community (with an armed guard) next month because of this incident... Now that I live with my girlfriend, I just can't risk a force-in from some 'hood rat who wants to rip us off. Until then, she knows where my gun is, and has been trained how to use it when I'm not home. I would feel sorry for somebody who tried it with her home alone, because they will probably end up with a.45 between the eyes, instead of just a couple broken ribs, like I gave the guy who tried to force-in on me.
I checked the MS article your Google search returned, but I think perhaps you're being a little disingenuous. Read this part (shoe-horned in at the very bottom of the page):
Internet Explorer 6 is preinstalled by default in all versions of Windows XP. To provide computer manufacturers greater flexibility in configuring desktop versions of Windows XP, Microsoft has made it possible for OEMs, administrators, and users to remove user access to Internet Explorer while leaving the Internet Explorer code intact and fully functional to ensure the functionality of programs and operating system functions that rely on it. For example, Windows XP supports an "IEAccess=off" switch in the Unattend.txt file, and Internet Explorer has been added to the Add/Remove Windows Components section of the Add/Remove Programs tool in Control Panel.
Since UNATTEND.TXT is the config file for an unattended installation of Windows, this is not really an uninstallation procedure so much as a way to keep a user from invoking Internet Explorer in a NEW Windows install. If you have a Windows XP machine that you bought pre-loaded with XP, the only way to take advantage of this is to re-install Windows. (And what do you want to bet MS has some language in their OEM deals that says any OEM actually using this switch will be sacrificed to satan.)
Not a very helpful feature for those of us who would like to be rid of it without starting from scratch.
Further, since the code is "Fully functional" you can assume any exploits in the IE code will also be "fully functional" whether you set this switch at setup or not.
Slightly OT, but the same guy's site has a (slightly outdated, but still a good argument) page about why the War on Drugs is a failure. Good read, especially in light of my state's recent decision to flout the Supreme Court's ruling that "Narcotics Checkpoints" are illegal and unconstitutional invasion of people's 4th amendment rights. Even though they're patently illegal, Marion County Indiana is having them on average of once a week for the rest of the summer. The Indiana Civil Liberties Union is already suing, and you know our Drug-Warrior/Sherriff will waste millions defending his actions, (millions of tax dollars, of course) then complain when his department has to cut budget mid-year because of the money he is wasting on lawyers.
Bart: "We're headed for the sun!" Tom Arnold: "Yeah, ain't that a kick in the pants? I mean, my movies were terrible, but its not like I tied people up and made them watch--And I could have too! Because I'm a big guy and I'm good with knots."
1 Freedom to use. A GPL licensed program can be used for any purpose whatsoever.
...
What you are proposing is breaking the 1st freedom; it is not because they claim the GPL is invalid that we believe so and should break it.
I think I get your point, that Copyright holder's retracting their license on Samba et al. would be antethical to the ideals of the Free Software community. While this could be true, is it not also against our interests to simply lie back and take this sort of abuse without a fight?
I certainly support the right of free use, and nobody is suggesting SCO should be somehow enjoined from using old versions of Samba, Apache, etc BUT it is suicidal for us to continue giving SCO free labor which they sell to their customers to finance a lawsuit to destroy the beauty and utility of one of humanit's greatest (non-profit) community initiatives ever. Consider how amazing the Linux kernel/family of software is... It mostly exists because a few people with some spare time wanted it to. There are people involved in for-profit development on open source apps, and nobody begrudges them that success, but mainly it is a volunteer effort.
Slashdot Mirror
My cousing works at the FBI and tried to recruit me for that. I was interested until I took the pre-qualification test wizard on their web-page. It asks three questions, the last of which was "Have you smoked marijuana more than three times in your life?"
So I was pretty much out. But frankly, that is the government's loss.
Complete anonymity? An interesting idea. Let's talk about the practical ways you could "guarantee" somebody else's anonymity on the internet while still having the contest? I tried to make a list, but all I came up with pretty much amounted to "Dump all the logs." Which obviously makes it really difficult to study the attack patterns.
Obviously, the best way to remain anonymous is not to break into other people's networks, invited or otherwise. I mean, are they really going to destroy their data if the FBI calls? That would definitely be illegal (and unwise in our current "terrorism-freak-out") and publicly pre-meditated, at that.
If I had the kind of skillset these people are obviously recruiting for, I would be extremely leery of participating in this "competition." But I don't, and would have no interest.
"Lenny! Tell Mr. Burns I went home to work on the contest!"
I had no idea these people had an office right in my backyard. Forget about calling... How about I show up with a sandwich board and protest for an afternoon?
Sure, it would be kind of stupid, but I could conceivably get on the local news and generate some more (bad) publicity for the telemarketing industry.
Ahh yes... I have one of those... My trusty Sun Cobalt Qube. I run three domains with it over my cable modem...The cpu utilization has never been over like 20% for any extended period. It is quite the little workhorse, at only 450 mhz...
I fail to see how 850mhz is anything but overkill for an linux appliance doing the tasks specified. Then again, when I tell people the qube is only a 450, they get this...look on their face. Like they either don't believe me, or don't believe something that runs at ONLY 450 mhz can possibly get the job done. Perhaps going with a faster processor is simply for ease of marketing?
I must disagree...
@Stake is supposed to be a security research and consulting firm. How is any research out of this company ever to have even one ounce of credibility again? I realize Mr. Geer's paper was not published as an "official" company report, but they were angry based on the fact that his paper might "appear" to be At Stake's opinion.
So if At Stake is so concerned about ruffling Microsoft's feathers that a report they DIDN'T EVEN WRITE causes the firing of a senior, uber-experienced employee with a vast repository of knowledge to draw on, how do we know their reports aren't already being slanted to avoid offending "partner" Microsoft?
His firing is tantamount to killing the messenger for a message they didn't like. Sorry, but as an employee I resent the idea that if I do something on my own time and dime that offends somebody inside some business partner's corporate structure, I could lose my job. In this economy, that is a pretty chilling statement, President Bush's assinine assertions that "Everything is okay!" aside...
That's why I encourage open source and hiring a maintenance developer over proprietary and perpetual service contracts in every case in my current position. Simply put, we'll pay less (and be more secure) if somebody WE trust is auditing our code and making bugfixes/enhancements.
Proprietary is great if you're doing something where you'll never need to customize anything, or do anything slightly outside the norm (or you just don't care if it works.) BUT, if you're like most businesses, you probably have some weird process that doesn't fit some package you're paying for, and you have in turn come up with a workaround. This may or may not achieve the same goal as a well-written, configurable software package would have, but you don't really know until there's a problem some day.
Nope. I, of course, test rigorously in both environments. It is simply easier to test apache/mysql patches because there are far fewer patches TO TEST for apache/mysql/php than come out for our MS environment. Since I maintain both (MS at work, linux stuff at home,) I think I'm in a pretty good position to compare and contrast.
Not a hypocrite (note correct spelling,) simply guilty of not explaining the painfully obvious to somebody whose only "qualifications" would seem to be an MCSE and three months on the help desk. What's the matter, pissed that you can't ACTUALLY earn $60,000 with no experience and an MCSE?
But thanks for playing.
No, I wouldn't happen to be from that part of the world... Please try applying a different stereotype.
Shakespeare knew a language was a living thing, that chaned according to the needs of its users... Try as I might, I've picked up an Indiana accent since moving to Indianapolis... "TO BE" is a phrase that many people don't use/need here. It doesn't make you superior to me, or any of my neighbors. I certainly hope you can still sleep at night after this revelation.
In our case, we switched our Samba servers over to Windows 2000 about 18 months ago because a new CIO was installed, and he commanded from the ivory tower that we would be all Microsoft within one year from his start date. No, we aren't using 2003--yet. But it seems conceivable to me that other companies are in similar situations... Their linux machines run great, like toy cars on Christmas morning, but somebody somewhere in authority gets a pitch from an MS salesman, and the next thing you know, bye-bye Samba and Apache, hello IIS and Windows 2003 file servers. (Ugh!)
So in our case, it was an arbitrary decision by somebody higher up. We never had ANY problems with the Samba servers, but because he used to work at Microsoft (in Redmond, y'all!) it was done.
Or perhaps they decided they wanted to re-write their whole web-site in ASP.net. I know a job I applied for recently was mine until we started talking about their web-site, and I recommended they not go ASP but implement their new site in HTML/PHP on apache using a low-cost database like mysql or postgres. As a one-man band, I would prefer to spend my time patching the parts of apache/php/mysql that need patched, rather than having to test and verify the twice per afternoon stuff that has been out from MS lately.
Or a RAID 0+1 arrangement with three drives per volume. In this case, we would still be talking two ~500 gb volumes, which is quite impressive of its own volition. Honestly, how many of you could even get to 75% on a 1 TB volume anyway?
Or, if you just want to act silly you could build two and mirror them...
I love the fact that your sarcasm was modded "Insightful." Hey man, I get you...
Actually, you can directly die from an "overdose" of water, too, by ingesting too much.
Check out these stories about hyponatraemic encephalopathy. It sounds like it is a really unpleasant condition to be in...
It is too bad Slashdot doesn't have a -1, Shill moderation... I would use it on you.
I mean, to compare a grass-roots protest of an organizations business tactics to the senseless slaughter of thousands of civillians is the sort of logical leap that only a maniac (or a shill) could make. Dude, get a clue. Telemarketers are leeches on society. The list of people that telemarketing benefits is very short, and consumers are most definitely not on it. I get the feeling, though, that if I could check the payroll/stockholder's list of all the telemarketing firms everywhere that I would eventually stumble across your name.
The function of a telemarketer is to sell products at inflated prices to impulse buyers. If you ever find yourself listening to a telemarketer spiel and thinking "This sounds useful" hang up immediately, and Google for the same product. Odds are pretty good you will find something better, cheaper, or both without looking too hard.
That is the whole purpose of telemarketing: To push overpriced products onto people who are dumb/suggestible enough to buy something from a stranger who called them randomly on the phone. How do you know it isn't somebody playing a prank? Or collecting CC#'s for fraud purposes?
While I understand this doesn't mean ALL telemarketers are evil lawbreakers, I do know that all telemarketers are ANNOYING and are selling things that a careful shopper could get much more cheaply by doing a tiny amount of research.
How do you know the machine wasn't a gift from a wealthy relative or a hand-me-down from a friend? Also, many apartment complexes offer built-in internet access these days. How do you know they don't live in one? Section 8 housing is in all sorts of unexpected places these days, now that the government got smart and stopped putting 1000 low-income people in one building, but rather one or two in 500 buildings. My complex offers free internet access, and also have section 8 units. Crab crab all you want, but a computer as a tool is no more an extravegance than a screwdriver or power-drill. After all, shouldn't the mom be able to create a resume to get a job with?
To put it another way, your assumption that all the people using computers are wealthy is quite erroneous.
I think this is a brilliant world. Unfortunately, there are already some sleazy companies who have pop-up ads that say the same thing. (ie. "You're infected with MSBlaster, patch your machine, then protect yourself permanently with (whatever the company's product is called.)"
You could also exploit a common NT hole by sending an NTMESSENGER message to them. (ie. "Message from Root@yourdomain.com: Your machine has been infected with a virus, please visit Windows Update to apply the patch ASAP.)
Thanks for the tip...I've found my toilet reading for the next day or two! It looks promising though. Of course, lots of things from MS look promising until you try and test them, so my hopes aren't up TOO high.
Crap! That means I have to touch every machine in the enterprise--again! Just two weeks after "touching 'em all" (not in the baseball sense) from the last round of worm patches.
How I long for the old days of Novell... Ah...take me away!
Have you ever seen/touched/heard a real live G5? The fans go on and off as-needed--all the fans don't run full bore at all times. Sure, there'll be some noise, but ultimately, not an unbearable amount. (Unlike our AMD core server units we've purchased... Those sound like propeller aircraft taking off.)
We have a real problem with trespassing solicitors at my apartment complex. Our entire complex is a piece of private property, no publicly owned streets or sidewalks in it. We don't allow any salesmen on the grounds, and have four dozen clearly labelled signs that say NO SOLICITING. So a non-resident walking around ringing doorbells to solicit is definitely trespassing.
Last summer, I had a guy get kind of pushy with me when I told him he was trespassing and would have to leave. After he continued pitching me after I asked him to leave, I told him he should start walking, or I was calling 9-1-1, and he actually tried to force his way into my apartment! Luckily, my Louisville Slugger (the finest home defense weapon known to man) convinced him that my home wasn't a place he wanted to be.
We're moving to a gated community (with an armed guard) next month because of this incident... Now that I live with my girlfriend, I just can't risk a force-in from some 'hood rat who wants to rip us off. Until then, she knows where my gun is, and has been trained how to use it when I'm not home. I would feel sorry for somebody who tried it with her home alone, because they will probably end up with a
Since UNATTEND.TXT is the config file for an unattended installation of Windows, this is not really an uninstallation procedure so much as a way to keep a user from invoking Internet Explorer in a NEW Windows install. If you have a Windows XP machine that you bought pre-loaded with XP, the only way to take advantage of this is to re-install Windows. (And what do you want to bet MS has some language in their OEM deals that says any OEM actually using this switch will be sacrificed to satan.)
Not a very helpful feature for those of us who would like to be rid of it without starting from scratch.
Further, since the code is "Fully functional" you can assume any exploits in the IE code will also be "fully functional" whether you set this switch at setup or not.
Slightly OT, but the same guy's site has a (slightly outdated, but still a good argument) page about why the War on Drugs is a failure. Good read, especially in light of my state's recent decision to flout the Supreme Court's ruling that "Narcotics Checkpoints" are illegal and unconstitutional invasion of people's 4th amendment rights. Even though they're patently illegal, Marion County Indiana is having them on average of once a week for the rest of the summer. The Indiana Civil Liberties Union is already suing, and you know our Drug-Warrior/Sherriff will waste millions defending his actions, (millions of tax dollars, of course) then complain when his department has to cut budget mid-year because of the money he is wasting on lawyers.
...On a related note, I'm "preparing" to nail Shakira.
Bart: "We're headed for the sun!"
Tom Arnold: "Yeah, ain't that a kick in the pants? I mean, my movies were terrible, but its not like I tied people up and made them watch--And I could have too! Because I'm a big guy and I'm good with knots."
I think I get your point, that Copyright holder's retracting their license on Samba et al. would be antethical to the ideals of the Free Software community. While this could be true, is it not also against our interests to simply lie back and take this sort of abuse without a fight?
I certainly support the right of free use, and nobody is suggesting SCO should be somehow enjoined from using old versions of Samba, Apache, etc BUT it is suicidal for us to continue giving SCO free labor which they sell to their customers to finance a lawsuit to destroy the beauty and utility of one of humanit's greatest (non-profit) community initiatives ever. Consider how amazing the Linux kernel/family of software is... It mostly exists because a few people with some spare time wanted it to. There are people involved in for-profit development on open source apps, and nobody begrudges them that success, but mainly it is a volunteer effort.