There's a good reason for that. I used to work in a school, and I found that most staff were somewhat - how can I put this? - naive in terms of "how you go about buying stuff", scared of making mistakes and only too happy to have someone offer to hold their hands, regardless of whether the person offering to hold their hands had a vested interest in selling a particular product.
I developed a theory - that there are two ways to run a lucrative business. The first is to produce a product which is in some way better/cheaper than the competition, devote a lot of time to customer service, and basically out-compete everyone else in your field.
The second is to order a print run of 10,000 leaflets saying "We are specialists in the education market" and carpet-bomb every school in the area with them. The depressing thing is, I think this would actually work.
The way it works in a lot of public sector organisations (schools in particular) is the person who spends the money (and therefore decides what to spend it on) is quite often not the person who has to deal with any fall-out.
And knows what? Normal payment cards are more secure because we use a Chip and a PIN code so you can't duplicate the magnetic stripe in 15 seconds...
So now the MO has changed.
Instead of having your identity stolen, one of the following happens:
- The magnetic stripe on your card is cloned and someone shoulder-surfs you putting your PIN in. The cloned card is used in ancient cash machines that don't read the chip. - Your wallet is stolen shortly after someone watches you enter your PIN. OK, the card in there is only good for a few hours, but there's a lot you can do in that time - and because the thief used your PIN to pay, then as far as the bank is concerned it's your problem because keeping the PIN secure is your responsibility. - You get mugged at the cash machine.
ie. "Is it the kind of thing an individual (rather than a business) would have a need to develop?" If the answer is "no", chances are that very little in the way of Free/OSS solutions exists.
Has there ever been a revolution that just reinstated what was already there? Or does it always start with a clean slate?
I think historically, by the time the revolution comes "what was already there" is long forgotten - people revolt because the government is blatantly doing something way wrong - as often as not, it's something like families are regularly starving simply because there isn't anywhere they can buy food.
A tyrannical government which rules its people with an iron fist can continue to operate for a surprisingly long time as long as the people are being fed - look at China and Saddam's Iraq.
The idea is to then write a rude letter to every ISP in Britain:
"We understand you are allowing your subscribers access to this service, which has been declared illegal. We demand you stop allowing your subscribers access to this service or we'll set the lawyers on you".
I've seen this kind of thing before - some of IBM's Rational software does it.
I never understood why it couldn't simply tie up a license with data like MAC address, processor ID and serial number at the central server rather than a license file. Granted, all of these can be forged, but anyone who's buying software like that is probably either quite happy to pay for the full version or won't pay for any version, instead looking for either a crack or a free alternative.
You're either a troll or you've been living under a rock for the last week.
Because Windows Genuine Advantage is not 100% accurate.
It has declared PCs to be running an illegal copy of Windows when that is not the case.
Now, if Microsoft could guarantee that they were only turning off pirate's PCs, fine. But the first PC they turn off that isn't running a pirated copy of Windows has some pretty nasty repercussions. Especially if that PC happens to be in a large company or owned by a journalist, lawyer or even a prominent person with a blog.
Myself, I think this is the trial run. Let's face it, the first incarnation of anything from Microsoft always sucks. Doubtless Vista will ship with an improved version of WGA, which is slightly harder to crack. Then, a year or two down the line (perhaps with the first service pack), there will be another improved version which actually works quite well. Then... well, then remote killing of pirated Windows installations may just happen.
WGA communicates with Microsoft HQ. The information transferred may or may not be 'sensitive' but this could be considered an invasion of privacy.
Hang about - presumably this is going on all over the world, right?
How does it stand in those parts of the world with Data Protection laws?
For instance, in the UK, the Data Protection Act is supposed to ensure that data is:
* fairly and lawfully processed;
* processed for limited purposes;
* adequate, relevant and not excessive;
* accurate and up to date;
* not kept longer than necessary;
* processed in accordance with the individual's rights;
* secure;
* not transferred to countries outside the European Economic area, unless there is adequate protection.
Except that technology has, in relative terms, been getting cheaper year on year - and most people are well aware of this, as it's glaringly obvious any time they walk past a shop that sells electronics.
I work as IT manager in a small shop - so small that we haven't got around to setting up our own centralised roll-out of Windows Updates yet, mainly because that requires a Windows server - and most of my customers (drug dealers have "users", thank you) would switch over to Linux in a heartbeat.
But they can't. They use a specific development tool which needs Windows. (Well, TBH, I doubt it does. But they like being able to call for support of the dev environment, and if you're developing on an unsupported platform, "being able to call support" will cease to be an option).
Now this concerns me a great deal. If every other PC in the office (despite having been purchased with XP Pro licenses) shuts down never to return in a few months time, muggins here is going to have some lovely explaining to do. The temptation to close off access to Windows Update at the firewall is strong.
Yet there are still plenty of pimly 14 year olds who provide the "tech support" for their circle of friends, and said pimply faced youths may know nothing but windows - rather than go the Linux way, they'll find a crack.
and the hardware, for the most part, will work with anything.
Except for the cheap WinModem that came in their PC, the WinPrinter which was £5 cheaper than the "real" printer, the wireless network card which doesn't even have Linux drivers, the host of games (which despite having been pirated, they still want to play) and the software (which despite having pirated, they still need to use).
If that Fortune 500 company is letting their PCs get updates directly from Microsoft, rather than rolling them out in a controlled fashion on their network having tested them thoroughly first, then WGA enforcement is only one of their many problems.
Lack of knowledge on your part does not change the situation.
Just because it came from that big company in Redmond that everybody loves to hate does not mean it's impossible to make it secure.
Difficult, maybe.
Impossible, no.
Using windows is a bad sign of security. For simple evidence, look at all the viruses and cracks;
95% of the "viruses" in current circulation are trojans or worms which depend on either Outlook, user error or both to propogate. A mail server with AV which updates frequently, block every executable (if you're really paranoid, block every attachment and silently turn all HTML email to plaintext on the mail server), don't allow connectivity to the Internet and mandate a webmail client.
Combine that with AD policies which turn a Desktop PC into a glorified dumb terminal which requires an administrator password simply to fart near, and you've got a reasonably secure system.
Granted, it's not 100%, but about the only way to achieve 100% guaranteed security is to turn the system off and bury it in 6 foot of reinforced concrete. This is a government organisation we're talking about here, not "Nobby's Hardware" - anyone who is that keen to crack the security is not for one minute going to be put off if they discover that the systems in question aren't running Windows.
Makes you wonder exactly what our homeland defense dept. is doing, when it runs Windows
At the risk of being labelled a trolling fanboy, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with using Windows (or indeed any given operating system) for a government agency.
What is intrinsically wrong is not taking some time to investigate the requirements of the agency and configuring things accordingly, instead just throwing a bunch of laptops onto a domain and saying "There y'go".
It may even be the case that they did configure things accordingly with strong encryption available and everything. But maybe no effort was made to ensure it actually got used. Perhaps strong encryption was used, and effort was made to ensure it worked when accessing databases - but some other application crept in for which it was easier to do a plain-text dump of the database onto an unencrypted area of the disk.
In any sizeable organisation, desktop IT requirements are very complicated. Just saying "They used Windows. What do you expect?" isn't particularly helpful, and doesn't cut to the root of the problem.
TBH, it's more cynicism than anything else on my part. There is evidence that the EU itself is simply too big to function as a beaurocratic machine - the auditors of the EU's finances have refused to sign the books for over a decade now:
That's probably because it's such a fantastically complicated, convoluted and to a certain extent already corrupt bunch of beaurocrats that finding the right bunch of people to bribe is a huge task in itself.
I've never heard of someone paying more for a call on the basis of the recipient being on a cell
Happens in the UK, and AFAIK most of Europe.
But in the UK, cellphone numbers always start with 07 so the caller knows in advance that they're calling a cellphone - AIUI that's not the case in the US.
Note the article doesn't say anything about how well ODF has to be supported.
£10 says that Microsoft will implement a half-arsed attempt at supporting ODF, which sometimes produces interoperable documents but usually doesn't (of course they'll render perfectly in Office), the Belgian government will accept this and everyone will go home happy.
Slashdot Mirror
Even with the Chip & PIN system, it's still not foolproof:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4980190.stm
They wouldn't be able to levy any fines. They'd be too busy trying to get their computers to work.
I still run BSD at home, but I'm glad I can work with MS software as it stands.
You should count yourself lucky. Some of us still have nightmares of the Win9x days, despite them being long gone.
There's a good reason for that. I used to work in a school, and I found that most staff were somewhat - how can I put this? - naive in terms of "how you go about buying stuff", scared of making mistakes and only too happy to have someone offer to hold their hands, regardless of whether the person offering to hold their hands had a vested interest in selling a particular product.
I developed a theory - that there are two ways to run a lucrative business. The first is to produce a product which is in some way better/cheaper than the competition, devote a lot of time to customer service, and basically out-compete everyone else in your field.
The second is to order a print run of 10,000 leaflets saying "We are specialists in the education market" and carpet-bomb every school in the area with them. The depressing thing is, I think this would actually work.
The way it works in a lot of public sector organisations (schools in particular) is the person who spends the money (and therefore decides what to spend it on) is quite often not the person who has to deal with any fall-out.
So now the MO has changed.
Instead of having your identity stolen, one of the following happens:
- The magnetic stripe on your card is cloned and someone shoulder-surfs you putting your PIN in. The cloned card is used in ancient cash machines that don't read the chip.
- Your wallet is stolen shortly after someone watches you enter your PIN. OK, the card in there is only good for a few hours, but there's a lot you can do in that time - and because the thief used your PIN to pay, then as far as the bank is concerned it's your problem because keeping the PIN secure is your responsibility.
- You get mugged at the cash machine.
There's loads of things like this.
The rule of thumb I apply when looking for free/OSS solutions to an issue is:
"Does it fail the Groupware Bad test"?
ie. "Is it the kind of thing an individual (rather than a business) would have a need to develop?" If the answer is "no", chances are that very little in the way of Free/OSS solutions exists.
Has there ever been a revolution that just reinstated what was already there? Or does it always start with a clean slate?
I think historically, by the time the revolution comes "what was already there" is long forgotten - people revolt because the government is blatantly doing something way wrong - as often as not, it's something like families are regularly starving simply because there isn't anywhere they can buy food.
A tyrannical government which rules its people with an iron fist can continue to operate for a surprisingly long time as long as the people are being fed - look at China and Saddam's Iraq.
That's not the idea.
The idea is to then write a rude letter to every ISP in Britain:
"We understand you are allowing your subscribers access to this service, which has been declared illegal. We demand you stop allowing your subscribers access to this service or we'll set the lawyers on you".
I've seen this kind of thing before - some of IBM's Rational software does it.
I never understood why it couldn't simply tie up a license with data like MAC address, processor ID and serial number at the central server rather than a license file. Granted, all of these can be forged, but anyone who's buying software like that is probably either quite happy to pay for the full version or won't pay for any version, instead looking for either a crack or a free alternative.
You're either a troll or you've been living under a rock for the last week.
Because Windows Genuine Advantage is not 100% accurate.
It has declared PCs to be running an illegal copy of Windows when that is not the case.
Now, if Microsoft could guarantee that they were only turning off pirate's PCs, fine. But the first PC they turn off that isn't running a pirated copy of Windows has some pretty nasty repercussions. Especially if that PC happens to be in a large company or owned by a journalist, lawyer or even a prominent person with a blog.
Myself, I think this is the trial run. Let's face it, the first incarnation of anything from Microsoft always sucks. Doubtless Vista will ship with an improved version of WGA, which is slightly harder to crack. Then, a year or two down the line (perhaps with the first service pack), there will be another improved version which actually works quite well. Then... well, then remote killing of pirated Windows installations may just happen.
WGA communicates with Microsoft HQ. The information transferred may or may not be 'sensitive' but this could be considered an invasion of privacy.
Hang about - presumably this is going on all over the world, right?
How does it stand in those parts of the world with Data Protection laws?
For instance, in the UK, the Data Protection Act is supposed to ensure that data is:
* fairly and lawfully processed;
* processed for limited purposes;
* adequate, relevant and not excessive;
* accurate and up to date;
* not kept longer than necessary;
* processed in accordance with the individual's rights;
* secure;
* not transferred to countries outside the European Economic area, unless there is adequate protection.
http://www.ico.gov.uk/eventual.aspx?id=34
Except that technology has, in relative terms, been getting cheaper year on year - and most people are well aware of this, as it's glaringly obvious any time they walk past a shop that sells electronics.
Agreed.
I work as IT manager in a small shop - so small that we haven't got around to setting up our own centralised roll-out of Windows Updates yet, mainly because that requires a Windows server - and most of my customers (drug dealers have "users", thank you) would switch over to Linux in a heartbeat.
But they can't. They use a specific development tool which needs Windows. (Well, TBH, I doubt it does. But they like being able to call for support of the dev environment, and if you're developing on an unsupported platform, "being able to call support" will cease to be an option).
Now this concerns me a great deal. If every other PC in the office (despite having been purchased with XP Pro licenses) shuts down never to return in a few months time, muggins here is going to have some lovely explaining to do. The temptation to close off access to Windows Update at the firewall is strong.
Who said that an autumn date was set in stone?
Wouldn't surprise me if it happens a month after Vista is released to OEMs.
Yet there are still plenty of pimly 14 year olds who provide the "tech support" for their circle of friends, and said pimply faced youths may know nothing but windows - rather than go the Linux way, they'll find a crack.
and the hardware, for the most part, will work with anything.
Except for the cheap WinModem that came in their PC, the WinPrinter which was £5 cheaper than the "real" printer, the wireless network card which doesn't even have Linux drivers, the host of games (which despite having been pirated, they still want to play) and the software (which despite having pirated, they still need to use).
If that Fortune 500 company is letting their PCs get updates directly from Microsoft, rather than rolling them out in a controlled fashion on their network having tested them thoroughly first, then WGA enforcement is only one of their many problems.
Just because it came from that big company in Redmond that everybody loves to hate does not mean it's impossible to make it secure.
Difficult, maybe.
Impossible, no.
95% of the "viruses" in current circulation are trojans or worms which depend on either Outlook, user error or both to propogate. A mail server with AV which updates frequently, block every executable (if you're really paranoid, block every attachment and silently turn all HTML email to plaintext on the mail server), don't allow connectivity to the Internet and mandate a webmail client.
Combine that with AD policies which turn a Desktop PC into a glorified dumb terminal which requires an administrator password simply to fart near, and you've got a reasonably secure system.
Granted, it's not 100%, but about the only way to achieve 100% guaranteed security is to turn the system off and bury it in 6 foot of reinforced concrete. This is a government organisation we're talking about here, not "Nobby's Hardware" - anyone who is that keen to crack the security is not for one minute going to be put off if they discover that the systems in question aren't running Windows.
At the risk of being labelled a trolling fanboy, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with using Windows (or indeed any given operating system) for a government agency.
What is intrinsically wrong is not taking some time to investigate the requirements of the agency and configuring things accordingly, instead just throwing a bunch of laptops onto a domain and saying "There y'go".
It may even be the case that they did configure things accordingly with strong encryption available and everything. But maybe no effort was made to ensure it actually got used. Perhaps strong encryption was used, and effort was made to ensure it worked when accessing databases - but some other application crept in for which it was easier to do a plain-text dump of the database onto an unencrypted area of the disk.
In any sizeable organisation, desktop IT requirements are very complicated. Just saying "They used Windows. What do you expect?" isn't particularly helpful, and doesn't cut to the root of the problem.
TBH, it's more cynicism than anything else on my part. There is evidence that the EU itself is simply too big to function as a beaurocratic machine - the auditors of the EU's finances have refused to sign the books for over a decade now:
t m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4438888.s
I think Microsoft simply haven't found the right combination of people to bribe yet.
That's probably because it's such a fantastically complicated, convoluted and to a certain extent already corrupt bunch of beaurocrats that finding the right bunch of people to bribe is a huge task in itself.
I've never heard of someone paying more for a call on the basis of the recipient being on a cell
Happens in the UK, and AFAIK most of Europe.
But in the UK, cellphone numbers always start with 07 so the caller knows in advance that they're calling a cellphone - AIUI that's not the case in the US.
Note the article doesn't say anything about how well ODF has to be supported.
£10 says that Microsoft will implement a half-arsed attempt at supporting ODF, which sometimes produces interoperable documents but usually doesn't (of course they'll render perfectly in Office), the Belgian government will accept this and everyone will go home happy.