actually, at step 3), the PHB who agreed to LINUX in step 2) reverts back to MS.
You've proposed a chicken-and-egg solution:
- Once no windows apps are necessary, people will switch to LINUX.
- Once they switch to LINUX, the necessary Windows apps will be ported.
ActiveX is simply a "better" Netscape plugin
in the same sense that a machine-gun is a "better" weapon than a slingshot.
that is, until you use it to shoot yourself in the foot..........
exactly!
ActiveX is far too powerful (especially given it's weak/non-existant security model) to promote it as a mobile-code solution for the internet.
It's like using flame-throwers instead of matches. Sure, they work, but they're not exactly safe!
Security has to be part of the initial design, you can't retrofit it.
A motorcycle will always be inherently less save than a volvo, no matter what else you do to it.
(sure, a safe rider can be safer than an idiot in a volvo).
The design decisions that went into IE make it impossible to secure, no difficult, not expensive, but IMPOSSIBLE.
ActiveX is the most obvious example where functionality/usability/ease-of-use totally overrode security in the design.
You can't fix that, just like you can't make a motorcycle safe by adding seatbelts (more here: http://sans.org/rr/whitepapers/awareness/1509.php) .
Saying it's the users fault is like
giving someone a book of matches in a dynamite factory and saying "it's your fault for lighting the match".
IE is a wonderful inTRAnet explorer, filling out timesheets in a low-risk network.
Using it on the inTERnet is like entering a demolition derby on a motorbike.
like the understanduing you have with your boss, reading/. on company time?
There is (supposed to be) such a thing as trust. If you can't trust your employees without watching them
all the time then a little lost time is the least of your problems.
Sure, in some targeted cases, do the monitoring to back up a hunch that someone is goofing off too much, but don't monitor
everyone all the time just in case someone sometime might be abusing your trust.
oh what am I talking about, this isn't surveilance for the sake of surveilance, it's got something to do
with terrorists, or protecting children, or catching pirates.... Sorry, just ignore what I said.
The fact remains that getting rid of spyware is very, very hard.
Agreed. However, installing spyware in the first place shouldn't be as ridiculously easy as it is!
The design tradeoffs between security/usability have in IE have created a wonderful inTRAnet explorer.
It's great for filling in the company timesheet using some custom ActiveX applet,
but it should _NEVER_ be allowed on the inTERnet.
To follow your analogy, a dune-buggy is fantastic at messing around on dunes,
but you wouldn't want to be driving one on the highway.
the similarity between the.com domain and the.com executable has been exploited in recent email-worms.
At the rate TLD's are being added how long before more such problems arise?
How long before users simply click on this stuff, assuming that.url is simple another TLD?
All the stuff you mentioned comes under "training".
I can train a monkey to do stuff, it doesn't mean the monkey understands what it's doing.
"Education" is about teaching people to think for themselves.
Care to try again, or are you just a retarded MS fanboy?
I never realised how appropriate the "anon. coward" label is.....
Spam, viruses etc are a very fluid problem, defences have to adapt and change quickly. The OS is (should be?) too stable/slow-moving to be able to adapt quickly enough.
They have three choices: buy XP for their old computer and upgrade to SP2 (provided that their computer has at least a 400MHz processor with 256MB RAM), buy a new computer with XP SP2, or switch to an alternate OS.
In other words, they have three choices: give $$$ to MS, give $$$ to (some HW guy) and $$$ to MS, switch to an alternate OS.
Thank you!! This is a brilliant summary of why people should ditch MS and go with BSD/Linux!
Option 1: keep paying $$$ whenever (vendor) decides they'd like to squeeze some more money out of you by dropping support for you existing (product).
Option 2: F/OSS, bliss, nirvana, happyness!
It's not OK to call people dumb 'cos they can't service their cars.
It's not OK to call people dumb 'cos they can't service their PC's.
How do you convince people that, unless they want to learn how to do it themselves, their PC's need servicing, just like their cars do?
Don't want to do it yourself? Fine, just make sure it gets done by someone who knows how.
But, of course, admitting that a PC is more complicate than a toaster or VCR makes is less marketable, so no-one admits it!
... were pulled as quickly as pirate
But I guess the only 'security' enhanced by a such a move would be that of the end users, not that of the xxAA's bottom line.
OK.... don't really mean to bash the xxAA, but I'm so sick of 'secutiry' measures foisted on us that are utterly meaningless
while stuff like this is left unchecked.
Maybe RH should call up the ISP claiming copyright violation of the logo or somesuch,
then they could close down the site and protect their users.
I know what's on the bracelet 'cos I can read it.
I know who else is reading my bracelet 'cos they're standing right next to me.
I can remove the bracelet when I go home.
Slashdot Mirror
actually, at step 3), the PHB who agreed to LINUX in step 2) reverts back to MS.
You've proposed a chicken-and-egg solution:
- Once no windows apps are necessary, people will switch to LINUX.
- Once they switch to LINUX, the necessary Windows apps will be ported.
ActiveX is simply a "better" Netscape plugin
in the same sense that a machine-gun is a "better" weapon than a slingshot.
that is, until you use it to shoot yourself in the foot..........
OK... got it.
now, just let me run a quick test to make sure it's worki............
mea culpa, I didn't RTFC
I wonder though, has anyone tried MS virtualPC, or one of the other VMs?
If you have VMware, you can always boot a VM using the live CD :-)
what?
If it's not here in 30 mins, I want it FREE!
exactly!
ActiveX is far too powerful (especially given it's weak/non-existant security model) to promote it as a mobile-code solution for the internet.
It's like using flame-throwers instead of matches. Sure, they work, but they're not exactly safe!
That's exactly what Joe Average needs: a do-it-yourself brainsurgery kit for his computer...... [/sarcasm]
Security has to be part of the initial design, you can't retrofit it.) .
A motorcycle will always be inherently less save than a volvo, no matter what else you do to it. (sure, a safe rider can be safer than an idiot in a volvo).
The design decisions that went into IE make it impossible to secure, no difficult, not expensive, but IMPOSSIBLE.
ActiveX is the most obvious example where functionality/usability/ease-of-use totally overrode security in the design. You can't fix that, just like you can't make a motorcycle safe by adding seatbelts (more here: http://sans.org/rr/whitepapers/awareness/1509.php
Saying it's the users fault is like giving someone a book of matches in a dynamite factory and saying "it's your fault for lighting the match".
IE is a wonderful inTRAnet explorer, filling out timesheets in a low-risk network. Using it on the inTERnet is like entering a demolition derby on a motorbike.
like the understanduing you have with your boss, reading /. on company time?
There is (supposed to be) such a thing as trust. If you can't trust your employees without watching them all the time then a little lost time is the least of your problems.
Sure, in some targeted cases, do the monitoring to back up a hunch that someone is goofing off too much, but don't monitor everyone all the time just in case someone sometime might be abusing your trust.
oh what am I talking about, this isn't surveilance for the sake of surveilance, it's got something to do with terrorists, or protecting children, or catching pirates.... Sorry, just ignore what I said.
A lot of people still download and install programs manually...
Which is better than IE doing it for them automatically.....
The fact remains that getting rid of spyware is very, very hard.
/shameless plug ]
Agreed. However, installing spyware in the first place shouldn't be as ridiculously easy as it is!
The design tradeoffs between security/usability have in IE have created a wonderful inTRAnet explorer. It's great for filling in the company timesheet using some custom ActiveX applet, but it should _NEVER_ be allowed on the inTERnet.
To follow your analogy, a dune-buggy is fantastic at messing around on dunes, but you wouldn't want to be driving one on the highway.
[ shameless plug ]
See "Examination of PC security: How we got where we are and how to fix it"
[
the similarity between the .com domain and the .com executable has been exploited in recent email-worms.
.url is simple another TLD?
At the rate TLD's are being added how long before more such problems arise?
How long before users simply click on this stuff, assuming that
I whish I had mod points....
:-)
+1 Evil Bastard
All the stuff you mentioned comes under "training". I can train a monkey to do stuff, it doesn't mean the monkey understands what it's doing.
"Education" is about teaching people to think for themselves.
Care to try again, or are you just a retarded MS fanboy?
I never realised how appropriate the "anon. coward" label is.....
windows = kernel, GUI shell, IE, outlook, wordpad, solitaire and all the worms you can eat.
LINUX = (imagine I put in a really long, comprehensive list of all the stuff you get with LINUX)
LINUX ~ Windowes server edition + unlimited CAL's + MS Office Professional + MS SQL + Visual Studio + loads more stuff.
NOW compare prices!
OK, as long as you tint the windows so no children are exposed to nudity
The OS is a bad place to put this stuff.
Spam, viruses etc are a very fluid problem, defences have to adapt and change quickly. The OS is (should be?) too stable/slow-moving to be able to adapt quickly enough.
... they are throwing a lot of money at the root of the cause, ...
The root cause of SPAM are naive, uneducated users.
[insert-your-favourite-MEGACORP] has _never_ done anything to educate potential customers, it makes lying^H^H^H^H^H^Hmarketing more difficult.
They have three choices: buy XP for their old computer and upgrade to SP2 (provided that their computer has at least a 400MHz processor with 256MB RAM), buy a new computer with XP SP2, or switch to an alternate OS.
In other words, they have three choices: give $$$ to MS, give $$$ to (some HW guy) and $$$ to MS, switch to an alternate OS.
Thank you!! This is a brilliant summary of why people should ditch MS and go with BSD/Linux!
Option 1: keep paying $$$ whenever (vendor) decides they'd like to squeeze some more money out of you by dropping support for you existing (product).
Option 2: F/OSS, bliss, nirvana, happyness!
I'd agree if the fixes in XP-SP2 were being back-ported to W2K.
As it stands all these exploits are pressuring users to ditch 2K and upgrade, which by a stunning coincidence, is what MS wants them to do anyway.
It's this attitude towards customers, more than anything else, that makes me dislike MS.
It's not OK to call people dumb 'cos they can't service their cars.
It's not OK to call people dumb 'cos they can't service their PC's.
How do you convince people that, unless they want to learn how to do it themselves, their PC's need servicing, just like their cars do?
Don't want to do it yourself? Fine, just make sure it gets done by someone who knows how.
But, of course, admitting that a PC is more complicate than a toaster or VCR makes is less marketable, so no-one admits it!
... were pulled as quickly as pirate
But I guess the only 'security' enhanced by a such a move would be that of the end users, not that of the xxAA's bottom line.
OK.... don't really mean to bash the xxAA, but I'm so sick of 'secutiry' measures foisted on us that are utterly meaningless while stuff like this is left unchecked.
Maybe RH should call up the ISP claiming copyright violation of the logo or somesuch, then they could close down the site and protect their users.
I know what's on the bracelet 'cos I can read it.
I know who else is reading my bracelet 'cos they're standing right next to me.
I can remove the bracelet when I go home.
Of course, slashdot is the same crowd that thinks the war in Iraq is about oil and Haliburton
So enlighten us. What WAS the war about?