Well Michael is a moron frankly. What WOULD prevent Linux from becoming as virus infested as Windows would be security out of the box. Locked down settings.
We have buffer overflows in programs just like them.
So, it's good to know that Lindows distributes itself with no user accounts, but you run as root.
Additionally, why does CVS or SVN need access to WRITE to the files at all? At least the anonymous portion. For non-anonymous access, the problem goes down to how Unix programs operate. Two choices can be made: 1) the program suids to the user requesting access 2) the program does the action on behalf of the user, weither he has a local account or not.
2 should never happen. It is insecure by design.
1 is preferable. Access happens as those needing access, system level. 1 however, for traditional Unix, requires the process to have root access to suid. This is unacceptable. Windows NT programs do not need Administrator access to conduct operations on behalf of a user, they just need that user's crediantials, which are passed to a trusted subsystem, and that subsystem grants the system the permissions neccassary. The OS doensn't trust the software. (I am in no way saying that Windows is "more secure", im just saying that in this particular example, it has the potential to be more secure, cleaner, and easier.)
What Unix really needs is a new way to suid. I would say it would work like this: The program passes the username/password the user sent to another component, which is out of process. Such as a daemon, or maybe kernel level. That other process uses the local system configuration to make a determination weither or not the CVS daemon should be able to conduct operations on the user's behalf, and grants only those permissions needed to a certain context, even involving a time frame if neccassary. The program does the actions, and then "releases" the access.
I think Wine really needs a standerized unix deployment methodology. As of right now, Wine is "self contained". By that I mean, you usually install it in one place for one peice of software.
We need a standard distro supported Wine layout, such as/usr/lib/win32, which contains win32 dlls. Software such as mplayer and friends can install their DLLs here, and reuse each others.
Similar to Java/usr/share/java containing.jar files, and Mono having a central place to put them, etc.
Doing this would reinforce the fact that Wine is just one more Unix subsystem, like Java, Mono, Perl, Python, and all the others. Commericial Windows developers, who want to distribute there software for Linux, can integrate such a package layout (RPM building,.Deb building) system into there current Windows build system.
I sort of envision this creating an easier division of logic for WineX and Crossover as well. It means the common components of each could be shared. WineHQ could provide the linker, loader, and base framework, as they do, and other projects like WineX, could just provide implementations of Microsoft DLLs, such as DirectX, etc. Intead of what they are doing now (complete forks).
I believe Wine has there own implementation of the controls anyways. These are things which are in shared DLLs which do not need to come from Windows, because wine has a built in implementation... so, it doesn't seem that hard.
Um. Throughout time that has been considered Good Development... by every language for every purpose. Even MS's MSDN tech articals and teching try to tell you to develop.Net apps this way. No big project uses ASP.NET data bound controls. They are slow and tie your data layer DIRECTLY into your presentation layer, ruining future expansion totally. Doesn't mean you CAN"T do it though.
J2EE is the same way. Nobody is forcing you to use more than JSP and JDBC on the same page, but doing so is pretty fucking stupid.:)
I know the whole philosophy of debian is built around CHOICE and FREEDOM. But, at some points, just make a fucking decision for the consumer, will you? You're probably not going to alienate any zealots if you just go ahead and autodetect the network adaptor without creating a committee and waiting for someone to second the motion.
Uh. Who's the "consumer" again? Oh, right, me. And I *WANT* my computer to perhaps give me a clue about what's going on. That's why I use Debian.
And if you don't want that, don't use it. Don't complain about it. Debian is more of a meta distribution than something somebody would put into a box and ship as a "product". It has the infrastructure for you to customize on your own. If you don't want that, don't use it.
Eh. I download music. I will offer no defense or moral or legal justification for it however.
I download a lot of music in fact. But, let's consider the last week:
Friend sent me a link to this album by the Stars. Very good. Like, I was amazed how good. It was so good in fact that I went over to Amazon and ordered it. I also noticed on Amazon that they had another album, so I ordered it too, without having heard it before. Purchase was justified as the music was really top notch.
This actually repeated itself twice in a week. Friend sent me really crappy rips of Pinback's new album Offcell... burnt them to CD, played them over and over and over again. Ended up buying that CD, as well as their two previous CDs. While I was at the store buying those, I noticed another CD from another artist I had downloaded (VAST) and grabbed that as well.
I have a lot of music however that I never did pay for. There are a few albums in there, that if I could find, I would definatly buy in a heartbeat. There are also a lot that I really would never buy in a second.
Now, im a reclusive computer geek type. I do not as a matter of habit go out to shows, or assoicate with people. If I hadn't gotten those albums from that friend, I wouldn't have bought them. Ever. And I also wouldn't have been buying random albums from bands that get absolutly zero air time on any radio station... in fact, this brings up a curious question. These artists I like are indie. where did people hear about them pre-internet? I don't know.:)
So, anyways, that's just one persons experience. I won't attempt to say I'm right or justified in downloading music. However, in my specific 1% case, it has made a big difference in the music I listen to. If it goes away, *I* will be out of a great source... and I'm not positive what it would be replaced by.
I run Debian on a home desktop... and a few work desktops for Users. It's better than anything else out there in my opinion. You can bend apt to your will to deploy software to an entire office... and debconf to deploy configuration settings.
Anyways on my personal desktop, I run unstable. I do have problems, but they are life ending things. It's sort of something you're going to have when you're bleeding edge.
Really knowing Debian is just knowing dpkg/apt. The entire system is just a bunch of packages. You know you can install Debian from a Knoppix CD just by making a partition, mounting it, and typing 'debootstrap woody/the/partition http://us.debian.org/debian'. Beats the hell out of any other installer.:)
this highlights the one thing standing between Linux the obscure 'haxor leet' operating system, and Linux the mainstream operating system : peer level support,
it only takes one CFO being told as a joke to type rm -rf or whatever to pretty much poison the well at any company he does business with
So what do YOU define as peer level support?
I define peer level support as opening up a mailing list of some sort, and asking a question, and having a few people ask you furthur questions and perhaps get the problem solved. By my peers. Now, there is nothing stopping anybody from telling anybody to rm -rf anything... in any PEER model. Heck I've had people from peer Windows support forums suggest format c:. So I don't see your point.
Have you ever actually tried to get linux support?
Apparently this guy didn't realize Mom and Pop's don't install sound cards, nor do they install Linux. They buy Dells and Gateways, that come with it all set up. Or they go to CompUSA and have the tech install it for them.
So, I guess I don't see the problem. This guy is a techy right? So figure it out. If he can't, he has no business being inside his computer installing a sound card. It's not really THAT hard.
Read the article. They use a weakness in the establishment of the connection to DRAMATICALLY reduce the time it takes for a dictionary attack, by gaining knowledge of the last two bytes of the NT hash.
The idea is that these vulnerbilities don't have equal impact at all. Lets examine some of the unix security vulns i've seen in the last few months.
3 or 4 games, unsafe handling of common scoreboard files producing exploits.
WHAT THE HELL? That's Unix security for you... even GAMES that have vulns get attention. Windows only gets remotely exploitable vuln attention.
Consider how many windows programs use shared registry keys, consider how many read/write to common temp folders, or common locations on disk. Have any of the probably hundreds of overflows involved in reading a temp file from C:\Winnt\Temp been taken into consideration with WIndows? Heck no, nobody even cares. Windows too many remote vulns to even pay attention to stuff like that.
Consider gzip's unsafe handling of temporary files. I wonder how many Winzip/Windows Compressed Folders have? NOBODY HAS EVEN LOOKED.
Style should not come into this, except as presentation on the web site. Making individual CSS files for each document is retarded. Making ONE style sheet, targetting the output of Docbook->HTML is what I would do.
"While I like FOSS, I've yet to see how it can sustain a viable corporate business."
100% right. But FOSS can and does sustain non-software companies. It's only a matter of time before non-software companies can simply see no point in using anything other than FOSS, leaving software companies out in the cold.
You're right, it can't sustain a software company like closed source can. And that is not going to change. Software companies need to accept meger profit margins, or go out of business.
I use VoiceXML for our IVR response system. IBM has an implementation, Cisco has an implementation. There are open source implementations. There are quite a few implementations actually, in very wide use.
I think he's correct on point with the XAML components. All you have to do is look at what some big companies do TODAY. ActiveX is used all over the corporate world. DHTML, IE specific JavaScript hacks. MS offers a "new way to make web pages", and when you use it, you get beautiful GUIs that are fully interactive and not browser based. Will these same people use them? HELL YEAH. And what will it do? It will totally knock a Linux/Unix desktop out of hte picture unless we implement these things, or at least implement our own answers to them.
MS is successful because it makes programs people want... regardless how much the design of those programs suck.:0 They get a job done, they get people a pay check. We need to compete on the same area.
XAML, depending on it's design, gives us a great place to leverage the Unix desktop. Consider (if) it is a generic UI describing XML document... whose to say weither it's rendered using Windows or GTK? At the same time, we would be promoting XAML.
So, we need to decide. Do we implement XAML, or do we make our own better version? I for one think we should at least take a look at XAML, if it sucks, we should make our own.
Why can't the w3c define the schema for such a document?
The problem with all this crap is Debian is obviously not designed for Joe, Bob or Norm. Debian is designed for the people who design it.
To think otherwise is foolhardy. We make packages as convienent and understandable and standard as possible: but they're still packages. You still have to know what you want to install when, and how to configure most of it.
The people who like Debian like it because they know what they're doing. End.
Okay. I'll list the problems with my W2K workstations/servers I had this week.
Outlook constantly freezes, for no apparent reason. It requires ending the task. Users get confused by this and call me to come fix it. That wastes my time. I'm sure it's a very simple problem, but I'll never be able to figure it out.
One of my user's computer's randomlly stops accepting keyboard input. It works fine booted from Knoppix, so I can only assume it is something windows is doing. I'm sure a reformat would fix it, but we don't have time... and it only pauses for a few seconds.
One of my user's desktop locks up when somebody prints to their shared printer. It pauses for about 25 seconds, appears totally frozen, but then goes again in a few seconds.
On one of our IIS servers, Explorer.exe has ceased working. You can double click on My Computer, and Explorer says "Unknown or invalid argument." This makes absolutly no sense. We do all our file work from cmd.exe on it now. It's very odd. Sure a reboot would fix it.
Our SQL server ranomlly fails to authenticate people with Windows authentication (single sign on). Nothing we can do here, we just accept it as a given that people's VB programs will randomlly crash.
Our Exchange server "pauses" every now and then. Can't place it. Everybody in the office's outlook just "stops" for a few seconds. The network is fine, i've got a ping running constantly from an affected system to the server, and it never falters. During the failure, Exchange is using 100% of both CPUs. There is no indication about what it is doing... and it doesn't show any abnormal IO usage (hard drive). The system itself responds just fine, except it's a bit slow because of the lack of CPU.
We set up a network deployment of Windows, using RIS. It distributes automated windows installs to our workstations. We can run it on two identical computers, begin installing software in the exact same order... specifically the VB runtime, MDAC. One then fails to launch our VB programs saying a.dll is missing, the other works fine. Regsvring the.dll solves the problem. This happened once this week.
Starting VB6 starts a reinstall of Outlook 2000.
Outlook 2000 randomlly switches to Internet Mode from Workgroup mode. This requires an administrator to log into the system and switch it back. This is annoying as hell.
IE freezes. User's do not understand this, nomatter how hard I try. THey'll be browsing a web site, and it'll simple stop. THey get confused, and come ask me (help desk). This wastes my time and theirs. I believe this could have something to do with Outlook freezing since it uses IE. But really, what can I do?
That was just stuff I'd experienced THIS WEEK, with a user base of 30 people. We do not do anything "funny". We install Windows, all of the drivers are part of the standard install. We install our software. This is "normal".
We have up to date patches for every peice of software. Users do not have Administrator access. We have symantec av. We NEVER get viruses, because we filter them at the email server, just like you... I've been running Linux on my desktop for about 2 years now, and i'll admit, I have my share of problems. But fix it once, and it never comes back. I run Debian sid though, so I keep getting new problems from new pre-beta software... but I continue to visualize a stable Linux office. A problem happens? You fix it. But it never comes back! I'd be bored.
This is why I dislike Windows? You pay 200 dollars for it, and get what amounts to crap software. You pay $0 for Unix stuff, and get software that although not perfect, is definatly better than Windows. That MAKES ME MAD.
We are currently working on setting up automated linux installs, and a base, nicely configured desktop for our users. Admitidly there are a lot of technical details to figure out. But imagine how easy it will be to manage?
Was the guy doing it to show support for a political or religious or other idealistic change? No? Then it's not terrorism. Go look up the defination of terrorism. It was a CRIME.
Slashdot Mirror
Well Michael is a moron frankly. What WOULD prevent Linux from becoming as virus infested as Windows would be security out of the box. Locked down settings.
We have buffer overflows in programs just like them.
So, it's good to know that Lindows distributes itself with no user accounts, but you run as root.
Additionally, why does CVS or SVN need access to WRITE to the files at all? At least the anonymous portion. For non-anonymous access, the problem goes down to how Unix programs operate. Two choices can be made: 1) the program suids to the user requesting access 2) the program does the action on behalf of the user, weither he has a local account or not.
2 should never happen. It is insecure by design.
1 is preferable. Access happens as those needing access, system level. 1 however, for traditional Unix, requires the process to have root access to suid. This is unacceptable. Windows NT programs do not need Administrator access to conduct operations on behalf of a user, they just need that user's crediantials, which are passed to a trusted subsystem, and that subsystem grants the system the permissions neccassary. The OS doensn't trust the software. (I am in no way saying that Windows is "more secure", im just saying that in this particular example, it has the potential to be more secure, cleaner, and easier.)
What Unix really needs is a new way to suid. I would say it would work like this: The program passes the username/password the user sent to another component, which is out of process. Such as a daemon, or maybe kernel level. That other process uses the local system configuration to make a determination weither or not the CVS daemon should be able to conduct operations on the user's behalf, and grants only those permissions needed to a certain context, even involving a time frame if neccassary. The program does the actions, and then "releases" the access.
That's how It Should Be.
http://kyoto.larvalstage.net/shares/Screenshot.png
I think you suck.
I think Wine really needs a standerized unix deployment methodology. As of right now, Wine is "self contained". By that I mean, you usually install it in one place for one peice of software.
/usr/lib/win32, which contains win32 dlls. Software such as mplayer and friends can install their DLLs here, and reuse each others.
/usr/share/java containing .jar files, and Mono having a central place to put them, etc.
.Deb building) system into there current Windows build system.
We need a standard distro supported Wine layout, such as
Similar to Java
Doing this would reinforce the fact that Wine is just one more Unix subsystem, like Java, Mono, Perl, Python, and all the others. Commericial Windows developers, who want to distribute there software for Linux, can integrate such a package layout (RPM building,
I sort of envision this creating an easier division of logic for WineX and Crossover as well. It means the common components of each could be shared. WineHQ could provide the linker, loader, and base framework, as they do, and other projects like WineX, could just provide implementations of Microsoft DLLs, such as DirectX, etc. Intead of what they are doing now (complete forks).
Hmm. Food for thought.
I believe Wine has there own implementation of the controls anyways. These are things which are in shared DLLs which do not need to come from Windows, because wine has a built in implementation... so, it doesn't seem that hard.
it's called apt. :0
Um. Throughout time that has been considered Good Development... by every language for every purpose. Even MS's MSDN tech articals and teching try to tell you to develop .Net apps this way. No big project uses ASP.NET data bound controls. They are slow and tie your data layer DIRECTLY into your presentation layer, ruining future expansion totally. Doesn't mean you CAN"T do it though.
J2EE is the same way. Nobody is forcing you to use more than JSP and JDBC on the same page, but doing so is pretty fucking stupid. :)
Uh. Who's the "consumer" again? Oh, right, me. And I *WANT* my computer to perhaps give me a clue about what's going on. That's why I use Debian.
And if you don't want that, don't use it. Don't complain about it. Debian is more of a meta distribution than something somebody would put into a box and ship as a "product". It has the infrastructure for you to customize on your own. If you don't want that, don't use it.
Awesome. Totally awesome.
:)
Eh. I download music. I will offer no defense or moral or legal justification for it however.
I download a lot of music in fact. But, let's consider the last week:
Friend sent me a link to this album by the Stars. Very good. Like, I was amazed how good. It was so good in fact that I went over to Amazon and ordered it. I also noticed on Amazon that they had another album, so I ordered it too, without having heard it before. Purchase was justified as the music was really top notch.
This actually repeated itself twice in a week. Friend sent me really crappy rips of Pinback's new album Offcell... burnt them to CD, played them over and over and over again. Ended up buying that CD, as well as their two previous CDs. While I was at the store buying those, I noticed another CD from another artist I had downloaded (VAST) and grabbed that as well.
I have a lot of music however that I never did pay for. There are a few albums in there, that if I could find, I would definatly buy in a heartbeat. There are also a lot that I really would never buy in a second.
Now, im a reclusive computer geek type. I do not as a matter of habit go out to shows, or assoicate with people. If I hadn't gotten those albums from that friend, I wouldn't have bought them. Ever. And I also wouldn't have been buying random albums from bands that get absolutly zero air time on any radio station... in fact, this brings up a curious question. These artists I like are indie. where did people hear about them pre-internet? I don't know.
So, anyways, that's just one persons experience. I won't attempt to say I'm right or justified in downloading music. However, in my specific 1% case, it has made a big difference in the music I listen to. If it goes away, *I* will be out of a great source... and I'm not positive what it would be replaced by.
"You just wasted part of our day."
Exactly.
I run Debian on a home desktop... and a few work desktops for Users. It's better than anything else out there in my opinion. You can bend apt to your will to deploy software to an entire office... and debconf to deploy configuration settings.
/the/partition http://us.debian.org/debian'. Beats the hell out of any other installer. :)
Anyways on my personal desktop, I run unstable. I do have problems, but they are life ending things. It's sort of something you're going to have when you're bleeding edge.
Really knowing Debian is just knowing dpkg/apt. The entire system is just a bunch of packages. You know you can install Debian from a Knoppix CD just by making a partition, mounting it, and typing 'debootstrap woody
www.go-mono.com
So what do YOU define as peer level support?
I define peer level support as opening up a mailing list of some sort, and asking a question, and having a few people ask you furthur questions and perhaps get the problem solved. By my peers. Now, there is nothing stopping anybody from telling anybody to rm -rf anything... in any PEER model. Heck I've had people from peer Windows support forums suggest format c:. So I don't see your point.
Have you ever actually tried to get linux support?
Apparently this guy didn't realize Mom and Pop's don't install sound cards, nor do they install Linux. They buy Dells and Gateways, that come with it all set up. Or they go to CompUSA and have the tech install it for them.
So, I guess I don't see the problem. This guy is a techy right? So figure it out. If he can't, he has no business being inside his computer installing a sound card. It's not really THAT hard.
Read the article. They use a weakness in the establishment of the connection to DRAMATICALLY reduce the time it takes for a dictionary attack, by gaining knowledge of the last two bytes of the NT hash.
The idea is that these vulnerbilities don't have equal impact at all. Lets examine some of the unix security vulns i've seen in the last few months.
3 or 4 games, unsafe handling of common scoreboard files producing exploits.
WHAT THE HELL? That's Unix security for you... even GAMES that have vulns get attention. Windows only gets remotely exploitable vuln attention.
Consider how many windows programs use shared registry keys, consider how many read/write to common temp folders, or common locations on disk. Have any of the probably hundreds of overflows involved in reading a temp file from C:\Winnt\Temp been taken into consideration with WIndows? Heck no, nobody even cares. Windows too many remote vulns to even pay attention to stuff like that.
Consider gzip's unsafe handling of temporary files. I wonder how many Winzip/Windows Compressed Folders have? NOBODY HAS EVEN LOOKED.
LDP should host Docbook documents.
Style should not come into this, except as presentation on the web site. Making individual CSS files for each document is retarded. Making ONE style sheet, targetting the output of Docbook->HTML is what I would do.
fuck sun.
"While I like FOSS, I've yet to see how it can sustain a viable corporate business."
100% right. But FOSS can and does sustain non-software companies. It's only a matter of time before non-software companies can simply see no point in using anything other than FOSS, leaving software companies out in the cold.
You're right, it can't sustain a software company like closed source can. And that is not going to change. Software companies need to accept meger profit margins, or go out of business.
That's what a commodity is.
I use VoiceXML for our IVR response system. IBM has an implementation, Cisco has an implementation. There are open source implementations. There are quite a few implementations actually, in very wide use.
I think he's correct on point with the XAML components. All you have to do is look at what some big companies do TODAY. ActiveX is used all over the corporate world. DHTML, IE specific JavaScript hacks. MS offers a "new way to make web pages", and when you use it, you get beautiful GUIs that are fully interactive and not browser based. Will these same people use them? HELL YEAH. And what will it do? It will totally knock a Linux/Unix desktop out of hte picture unless we implement these things, or at least implement our own answers to them.
:0 They get a job done, they get people a pay check. We need to compete on the same area.
MS is successful because it makes programs people want... regardless how much the design of those programs suck.
XAML, depending on it's design, gives us a great place to leverage the Unix desktop. Consider (if) it is a generic UI describing XML document... whose to say weither it's rendered using Windows or GTK? At the same time, we would be promoting XAML.
So, we need to decide. Do we implement XAML, or do we make our own better version? I for one think we should at least take a look at XAML, if it sucks, we should make our own.
Why can't the w3c define the schema for such a document?
The problem with all this crap is Debian is obviously not designed for Joe, Bob or Norm. Debian is designed for the people who design it. To think otherwise is foolhardy. We make packages as convienent and understandable and standard as possible: but they're still packages. You still have to know what you want to install when, and how to configure most of it. The people who like Debian like it because they know what they're doing. End.
Okay. I'll list the problems with my W2K workstations/servers I had this week.
.dll is missing, the other works fine. Regsvring the .dll solves the problem. This happened once this week.
Outlook constantly freezes, for no apparent reason. It requires ending the task. Users get confused by this and call me to come fix it. That wastes my time. I'm sure it's a very simple problem, but I'll never be able to figure it out.
One of my user's computer's randomlly stops accepting keyboard input. It works fine booted from Knoppix, so I can only assume it is something windows is doing. I'm sure a reformat would fix it, but we don't have time... and it only pauses for a few seconds.
One of my user's desktop locks up when somebody prints to their shared printer. It pauses for about 25 seconds, appears totally frozen, but then goes again in a few seconds.
On one of our IIS servers, Explorer.exe has ceased working. You can double click on My Computer, and Explorer says "Unknown or invalid argument." This makes absolutly no sense. We do all our file work from cmd.exe on it now. It's very odd. Sure a reboot would fix it.
Our SQL server ranomlly fails to authenticate people with Windows authentication (single sign on). Nothing we can do here, we just accept it as a given that people's VB programs will randomlly crash.
Our Exchange server "pauses" every now and then. Can't place it. Everybody in the office's outlook just "stops" for a few seconds. The network is fine, i've got a ping running constantly from an affected system to the server, and it never falters. During the failure, Exchange is using 100% of both CPUs. There is no indication about what it is doing... and it doesn't show any abnormal IO usage (hard drive). The system itself responds just fine, except it's a bit slow because of the lack of CPU.
We set up a network deployment of Windows, using RIS. It distributes automated windows installs to our workstations. We can run it on two identical computers, begin installing software in the exact same order... specifically the VB runtime, MDAC. One then fails to launch our VB programs saying a
Starting VB6 starts a reinstall of Outlook 2000.
Outlook 2000 randomlly switches to Internet Mode from Workgroup mode. This requires an administrator to log into the system and switch it back. This is annoying as hell.
IE freezes. User's do not understand this, nomatter how hard I try. THey'll be browsing a web site, and it'll simple stop. THey get confused, and come ask me (help desk). This wastes my time and theirs. I believe this could have something to do with Outlook freezing since it uses IE. But really, what can I do?
That was just stuff I'd experienced THIS WEEK, with a user base of 30 people. We do not do anything "funny". We install Windows, all of the drivers are part of the standard install. We install our software. This is "normal".
We have up to date patches for every peice of software. Users do not have Administrator access. We have symantec av. We NEVER get viruses, because we filter them at the email server, just like you... I've been running Linux on my desktop for about 2 years now, and i'll admit, I have my share of problems. But fix it once, and it never comes back. I run Debian sid though, so I keep getting new problems from new pre-beta software... but I continue to visualize a stable Linux office. A problem happens? You fix it. But it never comes back! I'd be bored.
This is why I dislike Windows? You pay 200 dollars for it, and get what amounts to crap software. You pay $0 for Unix stuff, and get software that although not perfect, is definatly better than Windows. That MAKES ME MAD.
We are currently working on setting up automated linux installs, and a base, nicely configured desktop for our users. Admitidly there are a lot of technical details to figure out. But imagine how easy it will be to manage?
Yeah. When the open source guys break insecure applicications at least they get fixed in minutes, or it just takes a recompile. :0
How are you suppose to correct these apps? I bet some don't even have company's behind them anymore.
Was the guy doing it to show support for a political or religious or other idealistic change? No? Then it's not terrorism. Go look up the defination of terrorism. It was a CRIME.