Wrong. Windows XP offers both Remote Desktop and Remote Assistance.
...and just how are these classed as shells exactly? Have you even used Linux? (Do you even know what a shell is??)
Windows needs it's GUI to be most effective
Wrong again, WMIC.
Ah where to even begin with this one. Firstly you just said I was "wrong" in saying that windows effectively has no remote shell, then claim that a GUI is a shell(?!) and now you are claiming that I am "wrong" for stating the FACT (hint) that Windows needs it's GUI to be most effective? I suppose people are going to be using the special undocumented WMI access to Word or Solitaire now are they? Hello! For me to be "wrong" here means that "Windows machines are most effective from remote access to WMI". Hmm. Good luck attempting to argue that point anywhere.
The fundamental difference between linux and windows is FUNDAMENTALS, and not related to how one accesses the fundamentals.
I use psexec (and the other excellent pstools) a lot and this question has come up before - Sysinternals give away the source, and they would be wonderful to have on Linux, but I've yet to see them ported.
Well, it's only a local exploit for one thing, so good like getting rampant Blaster style viruses based on it..
You neglect to take into account the fundamental differences between Windows and Linux. For starters, one is very much more likely to have remote shell access to Linux systems than Windows, as Windows effectively has no remote shell (Yes, I know about Windows 2000 telnet service, which nobody uses) and if it did, what would average users do with it? Windows needs it's GUI to be most effective. Many Linux systems at a school say, may give shell access by default to users with accounts on the system.
Second is the fact this code could feasibly be combined with other remote exploits to result in a remote root.
This is a serious exploit. And I have to agree with the parent - if this were for Windows Servers, the sky would be falling on/.
Let me guess - the people with the "defect" are all christian nutt..er.. fundamentalists?
Wonder how long it will be before one of the nutters latches on to this story.
Wonder how long after that before research is done into the feasibility of using a retro virus to rewrite the DNA of HIV+ people to include the "immune" gene, thus curing them.
Oh no wait - it's god that makes people infected because they are gay isn't it? Silly old science - how could it possibly be right. Lets burn all the books while we are at it.
I had a 75GXP drive which failed and lost me nearly 75Gb of data. I joined the class action lawsuit but nothing really came of that.
I have had many many specifically IBM drives fail both at home and at work. At work we have many in RAID arrays and they drop like flies. We replace them with any other make but IBM. As I write I have an IBM 40Gb waiting for me to get around to returning it under warranty for a replacement.
My advice based on much personal and professional experience is to avoid IBM drives like the plague.
I'd settle for a Hitachi (IBM) drive that simply worked for longer than a month or two. A long time ago if you wanted a uber reliable drive you sprung the extra cash for an IBM knowing it would be worth it because it would be more reliable.
Cut to IBM selling off their US manufacturing and moving everything to the middle east and reliability going through the floor. Then Hitachi bought the drive division out.
IBM/Hitachi drives are cheaper than the alternatives. There is a reason for this; they are shit. Avoid like the plague.
Of course it's just a coincidence - they just thought they would clean up all the old records by destroying lots of them. Nothing to see here, move along.
Instead of donating money to people violating the law, why not just buy the software/product in the first place?
Firstly, the above text from the parent is not a troll or flamebait, it is a valid question.
Secondly, lets see - site obviously offering pirated material for free... people downloading said material because they are either too tight to pay for it, adhere to the "why pay for it if it's free" mind set, or simply can't afford it (...yet can evidently afford high speed net links).
..and the site is seriously expecting these people to cough up cash to fight a court case against the MPAA?
Ok so they say they have $8k in donations right now? How much of that is going to turn out to be from stolen credit cards? (And one wonders is it a truthful amount).
Quite simple. Firstly you give your users Firefox to stop the spyware problem.
Now, for the external IE only applications, you create them as applications in Citrix and give each an icon on the user's desktop. If the user wants to use one of the external apps, they click the app icon which will launch a Citrix'ified IE window with the app in it. Obviously configure the Citrix IE to remove the address bar.
Evidently you have never managed a network with average users. Seriously - I know it's that simple, you know it's that simple, and users will swear blind that they will follow your advice, yet they clearly won't.
For example, your users will tell you that they would never surf for pr0n and so on.
Your proxy logs WILL show that pr0n surfing has gone on.
Noone admits to it. Obviously the logs must be wrong huh?
Time and time again it is proven that asking users to do (or rather, not to do) things is a waste of time. A large chunk of being responsible for network security involves dealing with this problem.
okey I had remove the logo and the software completely.
And with that single line I had won. I checked his site and all references to our software were gone.
Boy that really showed him! I'm sorry but I don't think emailing someone and asking them to remove the software "otherwise you will complain to the hosting company" quite constitutes the phrase "steps it took to bring him down". I was hoping for a story of how you chartered a private bounty hunting squad of ex-navy SEALs and pursued him through the jungle while your software was tied to a site under threat of being sold - hell it would have been nice if he'd been sued for $50 but asking him to remove it? Come on - more like "steps it took to send an email asking him to remove it" may be more appropriate!
Slashdot Mirror
Semantics.
...and this is related to quite clearly referring to a CLI with the phrase "remote shell" how exactly?
Semantics.
Well IIRC it says in most flavours of the bible regarding entrance into "heaven" that only men "undefiled by women" may enter.
Now I don't know about you, but I see a loophole there for gay men...
as Windows effectively has no remote shell
...and just how are these classed as shells exactly? Have you even used Linux? (Do you even know what a shell is??)
Wrong. Windows XP offers both Remote Desktop and Remote Assistance.
Windows needs it's GUI to be most effective
Wrong again, WMIC.
Ah where to even begin with this one. Firstly you just said I was "wrong" in saying that windows effectively has no remote shell, then claim that a GUI is a shell(?!) and now you are claiming that I am "wrong" for stating the FACT (hint) that Windows needs it's GUI to be most effective? I suppose people are going to be using the special undocumented WMI access to Word or Solitaire now are they? Hello! For me to be "wrong" here means that "Windows machines are most effective from remote access to WMI". Hmm. Good luck attempting to argue that point anywhere.
The fundamental difference between linux and windows is FUNDAMENTALS, and not related to how one accesses the fundamentals.
That makes absolutely no sense.
I use psexec (and the other excellent pstools) a lot and this question has come up before - Sysinternals give away the source, and they would be wonderful to have on Linux, but I've yet to see them ported.
Well, it's only a local exploit for one thing, so good like getting rampant Blaster style viruses based on it..
/.
You neglect to take into account the fundamental differences between Windows and Linux. For starters, one is very much more likely to have remote shell access to Linux systems than Windows, as Windows effectively has no remote shell (Yes, I know about Windows 2000 telnet service, which nobody uses) and if it did, what would average users do with it? Windows needs it's GUI to be most effective. Many Linux systems at a school say, may give shell access by default to users with accounts on the system.
Second is the fact this code could feasibly be combined with other remote exploits to result in a remote root.
This is a serious exploit. And I have to agree with the parent - if this were for Windows Servers, the sky would be falling on
Because the moderator is an idiot.
Let me guess - the people with the "defect" are all christian nutt..er.. fundamentalists?
Wonder how long it will be before one of the nutters latches on to this story.
Wonder how long after that before research is done into the feasibility of using a retro virus to rewrite the DNA of HIV+ people to include the "immune" gene, thus curing them.
Oh no wait - it's god that makes people infected because they are gay isn't it? Silly old science - how could it possibly be right. Lets burn all the books while we are at it.
Somebody is taking his ball in.
I had a 75GXP drive which failed and lost me nearly 75Gb of data. I joined the class action lawsuit but nothing really came of that.
I have had many many specifically IBM drives fail both at home and at work. At work we have many in RAID arrays and they drop like flies. We replace them with any other make but IBM. As I write I have an IBM 40Gb waiting for me to get around to returning it under warranty for a replacement.
My advice based on much personal and professional experience is to avoid IBM drives like the plague.
I'd settle for a Hitachi (IBM) drive that simply worked for longer than a month or two. A long time ago if you wanted a uber reliable drive you sprung the extra cash for an IBM knowing it would be worth it because it would be more reliable.
Cut to IBM selling off their US manufacturing and moving everything to the middle east and reliability going through the floor. Then Hitachi bought the drive division out.
IBM/Hitachi drives are cheaper than the alternatives. There is a reason for this; they are shit. Avoid like the plague.
...and a sudden surge in used PDA's.
If it works, is free and can be deployed and controlled via Active Directory GPOs I am going to be a happy man for the enterprise.
Anyone know if it IS going to be free?
I think people might be getting the message and searching Google first.
The UK Government (lovely honest people that they are) have been having a paper shredding and email deletion frenzy ahead of this law coming into force.
Of course it's just a coincidence - they just thought they would clean up all the old records by destroying lots of them. Nothing to see here, move along.
1. Get a copy of Spybot
2. Run it on all your PC's. Statistically each PC will have on average 28 pieces of spyware on it.
3. DO NOT FIX THE PROBLEMS!!! They are now evidence!
4. Carefully research each piece of spyware found by Spybot to see if you can sue the makers for $1000 each.
5. If you find anything, call your lawyer.
6. Profit!
Q. What do you call a cluster of Windows machines?
A. A botnet.
I own a TV, I'm just not legally allowed to watch it as I don't have a TV license.
This is, of course by choice as "everything IS crap!@!#". I use it for DVDs.
I hereby predict that if this system works (or is made to work) then the next proposal will be for all US citizens to have once.
It's happening in Britain. Consider us a trial for the US.
I know I would be thrilled if the MPAA went straight to Hell.
So how much have you donated?
Instead of donating money to people violating the law, why not just buy the software/product in the first place?
Firstly, the above text from the parent is not a troll or flamebait, it is a valid question.
Secondly, lets see - site obviously offering pirated material for free... people downloading said material because they are either too tight to pay for it, adhere to the "why pay for it if it's free" mind set, or simply can't afford it (...yet can evidently afford high speed net links).
..and the site is seriously expecting these people to cough up cash to fight a court case against the MPAA?
Ok so they say they have $8k in donations right now? How much of that is going to turn out to be from stolen credit cards? (And one wonders is it a truthful amount).
Quite simple. Firstly you give your users Firefox to stop the spyware problem.
Now, for the external IE only applications, you create them as applications in Citrix and give each an icon on the user's desktop. If the user wants to use one of the external apps, they click the app icon which will launch a Citrix'ified IE window with the app in it. Obviously configure the Citrix IE to remove the address bar.
Evidently you have never managed a network with average users. Seriously - I know it's that simple, you know it's that simple, and users will swear blind that they will follow your advice, yet they clearly won't.
For example, your users will tell you that they would never surf for pr0n and so on.
Your proxy logs WILL show that pr0n surfing has gone on.
Noone admits to it. Obviously the logs must be wrong huh?
Time and time again it is proven that asking users to do (or rather, not to do) things is a waste of time. A large chunk of being responsible for network security involves dealing with this problem.
Within minutes I received the following:
okey I had remove the logo and the software completely.
And with that single line I had won. I checked his site and all references to our software were gone.
Boy that really showed him! I'm sorry but I don't think emailing someone and asking them to remove the software "otherwise you will complain to the hosting company" quite constitutes the phrase "steps it took to bring him down". I was hoping for a story of how you chartered a private bounty hunting squad of ex-navy SEALs and pursued him through the jungle while your software was tied to a site under threat of being sold - hell it would have been nice if he'd been sued for $50 but asking him to remove it? Come on - more like "steps it took to send an email asking him to remove it" may be more appropriate!
Make the bastards suffer!
[AOL] Me too!!!!!1111eleven [/AOL]