It was my understanding that the whole master key security concept was a flawed one. And could leave applications vulnerable to attacks if a person gained the ability to execute instructions on a remote computer they could execute all instructions on a remote computer (i.e. any one of the 5^10 outlook viruses) A safer, smarter concept would be a capabilities based system where the user/application is granted rights per role.
It seems that this system is locking a computer into a single point of failure, so if a malevolent application was allowed it, it could do anything, taking advantage of the fact that the user assumed his box was safe and could therefore store all of his CC#'s and other valuable information.
So in Short, what is MS doing to combat the possble worldwide abuse of users' computers by jacking a trusted key, or bypassing the main security checkpoint?
Quite simply what ties the bulk of the world to MS products is ignorance. They assume that they won't be able to work with another OS, and if it breaks, won't be able to fix it. But modern universities are churning out CS and computer savvy students at an alarming rate. The bulk of which were trained on *nix. They have the power to completely avoid MS and would rather be on open source software where if something breaks they can fix it.
This is something be concerned about, for MS to have their way they will have to stem the tide of the hacker culture by cutting off its source: Education.
On a side note, Waterloo has always been in corporations' pockets, they have pimped out their CS students as slave labor for many different companies' projects.
"- it's GPLed which means that the code is of higher quality than those other OSs. "
I.. I.. ugh.
"he probably comes from some crazy South American country, and they're always fighting for the cause (ie Communism). Using the product of a communist nation is a sure way to stick it to M$$!!!~"
I didn't see any sarcasm tags encapsulating your statements, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope that they were filtered out in the conversion to HTML. If there were none, I sure hope/. comes up with a filter for idiotic rambling.
I think I'd rather see a decent implimentation that tricks the OS into thinking that 2 processors is 1 processor. So you don't have to have mutli-threaded/process code in order to gain performance from multiple procs.
just a thought.
stdcallsign
ROFL, or at least hope the on/off button isn't on that part that goes in your pocket.
"Oooh, Dual 1.7ghz procs and 1.2gb of Ra-*blink* dammit! not again!"
Trying to sound as unbiased as possible:
I would have to say that C++ would most closely match your requirements. To make it match more closely. Use C++ builder which has Cross-Platform support for Win32 and Linux. It also has a very advanced IDE and API for Rapid application development including extremely quick creation of GUI's. It also has a great event handling framework.
Slashdot Mirror
It was my understanding that the whole master key security concept was a flawed one. And could leave applications vulnerable to attacks if a person gained the ability to execute instructions on a remote computer they could execute all instructions on a remote computer (i.e. any one of the 5^10 outlook viruses) A safer, smarter concept would be a capabilities based system where the user/application is granted rights per role.
It seems that this system is locking a computer into a single point of failure, so if a malevolent application was allowed it, it could do anything, taking advantage of the fact that the user assumed his box was safe and could therefore store all of his CC#'s and other valuable information.
So in Short, what is MS doing to combat the possble worldwide abuse of users' computers by jacking a trusted key, or bypassing the main security checkpoint?
stdcallsign
Quite simply what ties the bulk of the world to MS products is ignorance. They assume that they won't be able to work with another OS, and if it breaks, won't be able to fix it. But modern universities are churning out CS and computer savvy students at an alarming rate. The bulk of which were trained on *nix. They have the power to completely avoid MS and would rather be on open source software where if something breaks they can fix it.
This is something be concerned about, for MS to have their way they will have to stem the tide of the hacker culture by cutting off its source: Education.
On a side note, Waterloo has always been in corporations' pockets, they have pimped out their CS students as slave labor for many different companies' projects.
Lan Rover
"- it's GPLed which means that the code is of higher quality than those other OSs. "
/. comes up with a filter for idiotic rambling.
I.. I.. ugh.
"he probably comes from some crazy South American country, and they're always fighting for the cause (ie Communism). Using the product of a communist nation is a sure way to stick it to M$$!!!~"
I didn't see any sarcasm tags encapsulating your statements, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope that they were filtered out in the conversion to HTML. If there were none, I sure hope
stdcallsign
I think I'd rather see a decent implimentation that tricks the OS into thinking that 2 processors is 1 processor. So you don't have to have mutli-threaded/process code in order to gain performance from multiple procs. just a thought. stdcallsign
ROFL, or at least hope the on/off button isn't on that part that goes in your pocket.
"Oooh, Dual 1.7ghz procs and 1.2gb of Ra-*blink* dammit! not again!"
stdcallsign
Trying to sound as unbiased as possible: I would have to say that C++ would most closely match your requirements. To make it match more closely. Use C++ builder which has Cross-Platform support for Win32 and Linux. It also has a very advanced IDE and API for Rapid application development including extremely quick creation of GUI's. It also has a great event handling framework.
stdcallsign