A building isn't a car either, but its still engineered.
This is just a cop-out of software engineers.
One of the main reasons that software is not truly engineered is that everyone makes up their own specifications. When you look at RFC's they look very much like engineering specs, and older technonogy like TCP has engineering like specifications too.
Now Microsofts problem was in the implementing of DCOM over TCP/IP and the security they used. Its their own specification, and not subject to proposal and being reviewed as the above mentioned RFC's are. Sure other protocols and implementations have had holes and exploits, but new RFCs can then be written and the hole fixed. This is exactly the same as saying the bridge design used for the Tacoma Narrows bridge will never be used again.
But it is that propietary code Microsoft writes and hides and does not publish full specifications for that is making their OS vulnerable to worms. It is their defect, they should own up to responsibilty for it.
And yes, if they did publish full specs for their system calls and interfaces, or God forbid, released their code for all to review, I would cut them more slack.
Bullshit, the DCOM vunlerability should never have been in there in the first place, it was absolutely shoddy coding on their part. At my company the patch was not through testing yet, and I don't blame them for it either.
I understand that in your little world administrators have nothing better to do but sit and wait for the latest patch and then immediatly go install it, oh and with no ill affects either.
In the real world many companies have half the IT staff (or less) than they used to and they're overworked even before having to install patches on EVERY machine.
The exploits in Windows were DEFECTS in the product. My company pays millions to put that product on thousands of machines, and it was defective. I plan on asking IT higher ups if we are planning any legal action against Microsoft for selling defective products.
When Ford gets sued because Crown Victorias explode when they are rear ended by another car, Ford doesn't get out of the lawsuits because "someone else ran into the car" they pay through the nose because their gas tanks are defective. Microsoft deserves the same treatment in the courts. Its the only true way they will EVER take security seriously.
You can bet your ass they're getting serious about security, espescially in the enterprise line of software.
Microsoft has been saying they're seirous about security for almost a decade now, isn't it time to get something else.
The only thing I'm taking from the virus outbreaks is how much people are willing to put up with. Microsoft has talked about security for too long, they're the boy crying wolf now...
You know reading this thread I really wish the moderators would... QUIT MODERATING THE CORRECT ANSWER AS REDUNDANT!!!
This guy is out of his mind to try and do this himself. Hire the professional. If you do this yourself, the tools you would need to buy to do it safely are going to cost a fortune anyway. If you don't buy the right tools, there's no way you will do it safely.
I love how Bush 1 did all of this just so his son could benifit at some point in the future (like he new what would happen. And GW Bush is evil for wanting deregulation, but Clinton "found his soul" and put in price caps.
I'm not saying I'm for deregulation, in fact I am quite against it, but to get the "Fair and Balanced" label, perhaps a little more blame should be placed at Clinton's feet as well.
Deregulation has been a nightmare. Right now power is supplied where I live by a rural electric cooperative, reliably and at a low cost. 45 miles south of me the private electric company that handles most of the power for the largest city in the state (Sioux Falls, SD), routinely has multi-hour blackouts because of their poor infrastructure.
The federal government should take over total control of the power grid and the infrastructure that supports it. And before complaining how bad that would be, imagine how bad the highways would be if they were built and maintained by private companies.
The solution is easy, limit the fine to a maximum of the full amount paid for the software.;-)
And really that is the case, many billions of dollars were paid to Microsoft for defective software. When auto makers have a recall, they are required to fix the problem for you. With software you have to do it yourself, and if you don't its your fault. Then again if you do install the patch yourself and your machine breaks, its still your fault!
Basically, expect to see no real improvement in Microsoft's software until someone has the guts to sue them or the government gets involved (ala auto recalls). Otherwise there is absolutely zero incentive for them to work any harder than they have to to sell you software.
Or maybe, just maybe, computer systems are beginning to resemble organic systems.
The scary thing about Blaster is how well it did its job. It was effective enough as a virus (I know its technically a worm) to infect a massive number of hosts, but not leathal enough kill the host machines allowing the virus to continue to spread. This is almost exactly like real viruses in the real world.
Ok now on to replying to your rant against Linux....
Its not the fact the per se Linux is less prone to viruses. Its just that its not the dominant organism on the net so to speak. Current viruses are attacking the dominant operating system. Having such a large number of organisms(OSes) out there that all have the same genetic structure(code base) makes them logically the primary target. Diversity of the gene pool (OS code) would do wonders for the overall stability of the system with a larger portion of computers to be able to fight off the virus.
BSD, Linux, OS X having a larger share of the market would lead to a healtier net. Continued monopoly will IMHO lead to the eventual super-virus that will cause real, prolonged, and large damage.
But the sad point is thet even if the BIA wins, they still won't get secure netowrks or good infrastructure out of this.
So they're not really succeeding, unless is the verdict is for the Interior Department to pay for whoever the BIA wants to hire from the outside to come in and do the job right.
Sure they do. They believe that you should pay for music each time you hear any particular song. They just haven't figured out how to do that, so they'll settle for suing their customers and charging insanely high prices for CD's. Don't argue that CDs are worth that kind of money, if I can burn a CD for under $1, they're making them for pennys a piece.
Yep, the only way for this to really be fixed is to never buy another CD ever again.
I fully expect everyone on the RIAA's "list" to never buy one again , and I would like them to tell everyone they know what happened and urge them never to buy another CD. I am still waiting for someone I know to be hit with one of these letters, but when that happens (and I'm certain it will) I will fully support them by NOT buying CDs from the RIAA ever again.
Industries that openly attack their customers do not deserve to stay in business.
I would second that suggestion, even though it's a very America centric sort of tourist destination (being a national monument and all), its also an impressive feat of engineering. The Crazy Hourse monument is impressive engineering as well, but still under construction.
I would say that if you at all like wide open spaces and being out in nature make your way through the Rockies on your way to SD as well. You could hit Yellowstone, which is neat. I would love to live in Jackson Hole, WY (nearby Yellowstone), but unfortunately there are very few Information Technology jobs there (hell, there very few in the whole state).
Oh and after going through the black hills don't forget to visit the worlds "One and only Corn Palace", I kid you not. Its a feat of engineering, or something;-).
Re:The War of Information
on
Saving the Net
·
· Score: 1
Sorry, China probably wouldn't be able to bear the economic impact of Disney removing all of their toymaking enterpirses from their country in response...
Some other country may be able do it but China is in too deep with American companies from a manufacturing perspective to pull it off.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right I knew someone here would point that out, but the rest of the comments are right on. Espically the ones about JAVA vs. ActiveX.
A building isn't a car either, but its still engineered.
This is just a cop-out of software engineers.
One of the main reasons that software is not truly engineered is that everyone makes up their own specifications. When you look at RFC's they look very much like engineering specs, and older technonogy like TCP has engineering like specifications too.
Now Microsofts problem was in the implementing of DCOM over TCP/IP and the security they used. Its their own specification, and not subject to proposal and being reviewed as the above mentioned RFC's are. Sure other protocols and implementations have had holes and exploits, but new RFCs can then be written and the hole fixed. This is exactly the same as saying the bridge design used for the Tacoma Narrows bridge will never be used again.
But it is that propietary code Microsoft writes and hides and does not publish full specifications for that is making their OS vulnerable to worms. It is their defect, they should own up to responsibilty for it.
And yes, if they did publish full specs for their system calls and interfaces, or God forbid, released their code for all to review, I would cut them more slack.
Software engineering can't be compared to nuts-and-bolts engineering because it doesn't WANT to be compared to nuts-and-bolts engineering.
It deemed to hard to do true engineering on software. Thats bunk, coders just want to be "artistic" and forget engineering.
You don't see Fords engineers going "but building a car is really complex, cut us some slack."
My example is not void, Microsoft just doesn't want to work on engineering their software enough.
Oh and the remedy should be based on what you pay for the software, therefore your including Linux, FreeBSD and OpenBSD is void.
BTW: the Enterprise version of Linux that are sold for a price should live up to this level.
Bullshit, the DCOM vunlerability should never have been in there in the first place, it was absolutely shoddy coding on their part. At my company the patch was not through testing yet, and I don't blame them for it either.
I understand that in your little world administrators have nothing better to do but sit and wait for the latest patch and then immediatly go install it, oh and with no ill affects either.
In the real world many companies have half the IT staff (or less) than they used to and they're overworked even before having to install patches on EVERY machine.
The exploits in Windows were DEFECTS in the product. My company pays millions to put that product on thousands of machines, and it was defective. I plan on asking IT higher ups if we are planning any legal action against Microsoft for selling defective products.
When Ford gets sued because Crown Victorias explode when they are rear ended by another car, Ford doesn't get out of the lawsuits because "someone else ran into the car" they pay through the nose because their gas tanks are defective. Microsoft deserves the same treatment in the courts. Its the only true way they will EVER take security seriously.
You can bet your ass they're getting serious about security, espescially in the enterprise line of software.
Microsoft has been saying they're seirous about security for almost a decade now, isn't it time to get something else.
The only thing I'm taking from the virus outbreaks is how much people are willing to put up with. Microsoft has talked about security for too long, they're the boy crying wolf now...
Wasn't the point of this thread that you didn't have to do forced upgrades with Microsoft products.
Oh, wait, you do.
And, sure maybe you'll want to upgrade Linux over time too, but that will cost you the same as what you spent the first time, nothing!!
Larry, is that you??
Seriously, though, great post!
Republican - "You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride
Someone mod this guy redundant. I wanna see his head explode. :)
/., I fully expected either a redundant, or a flamebait for that one.
;-)
Come on now, this is
You know reading this thread I really wish the moderators would... QUIT MODERATING THE CORRECT ANSWER AS REDUNDANT!!!
This guy is out of his mind to try and do this himself. Hire the professional. If you do this yourself, the tools you would need to buy to do it safely are going to cost a fortune anyway. If you don't buy the right tools, there's no way you will do it safely.
not a single one has not seen
!(not a single one has not seen) == everyone has seen
That would have been soo much easier to read.
I love how Bush 1 did all of this just so his son could benifit at some point in the future (like he new what would happen. And GW Bush is evil for wanting deregulation, but Clinton "found his soul" and put in price caps.
I'm not saying I'm for deregulation, in fact I am quite against it, but to get the "Fair and Balanced" label, perhaps a little more blame should be placed at Clinton's feet as well.
Deregulation has been a nightmare. Right now power is supplied where I live by a rural electric cooperative, reliably and at a low cost. 45 miles south of me the private electric company that handles most of the power for the largest city in the state (Sioux Falls, SD), routinely has multi-hour blackouts because of their poor infrastructure.
The federal government should take over total control of the power grid and the infrastructure that supports it. And before complaining how bad that would be, imagine how bad the highways would be if they were built and maintained by private companies.
The solution is easy, limit the fine to a maximum of the full amount paid for the software. ;-)
And really that is the case, many billions of dollars were paid to Microsoft for defective software. When auto makers have a recall, they are required to fix the problem for you. With software you have to do it yourself, and if you don't its your fault. Then again if you do install the patch yourself and your machine breaks, its still your fault!
Basically, expect to see no real improvement in Microsoft's software until someone has the guts to sue them or the government gets involved (ala auto recalls). Otherwise there is absolutely zero incentive for them to work any harder than they have to to sell you software.
I wish I still had some mod points!!
You succinctly captured exactly what I was thinking when I read the parent to your post.
Or maybe, just maybe, computer systems are beginning to resemble organic systems.
The scary thing about Blaster is how well it did its job. It was effective enough as a virus (I know its technically a worm) to infect a massive number of hosts, but not leathal enough kill the host machines allowing the virus to continue to spread. This is almost exactly like real viruses in the real world.
Ok now on to replying to your rant against Linux....
Its not the fact the per se Linux is less prone to viruses. Its just that its not the dominant organism on the net so to speak. Current viruses are attacking the dominant operating system. Having such a large number of organisms(OSes) out there that all have the same genetic structure(code base) makes them logically the primary target. Diversity of the gene pool (OS code) would do wonders for the overall stability of the system with a larger portion of computers to be able to fight off the virus.
BSD, Linux, OS X having a larger share of the market would lead to a healtier net. Continued monopoly will IMHO lead to the eventual super-virus that will cause real, prolonged, and large damage.
patch early, patch often screw uptime!!
But the sad point is thet even if the BIA wins, they still won't get secure netowrks or good infrastructure out of this.
So they're not really succeeding, unless is the verdict is for the Interior Department to pay for whoever the BIA wants to hire from the outside to come in and do the job right.
It doesn't, it says that they need new laws to make this work out, so they need to pay off both parties.
Sure they do. They believe that you should pay for music each time you hear any particular song. They just haven't figured out how to do that, so they'll settle for suing their customers and charging insanely high prices for CD's. Don't argue that CDs are worth that kind of money, if I can burn a CD for under $1, they're making them for pennys a piece.
Yep, the only way for this to really be fixed is to never buy another CD ever again.
I fully expect everyone on the RIAA's "list" to never buy one again , and I would like them to tell everyone they know what happened and urge them never to buy another CD. I am still waiting for someone I know to be hit with one of these letters, but when that happens (and I'm certain it will) I will fully support them by NOT buying CDs from the RIAA ever again.
Industries that openly attack their customers do not deserve to stay in business.
I would second that suggestion, even though it's a very America centric sort of tourist destination (being a national monument and all), its also an impressive feat of engineering. The Crazy Hourse monument is impressive engineering as well, but still under construction.
;-).
I would say that if you at all like wide open spaces and being out in nature make your way through the Rockies on your way to SD as well. You could hit Yellowstone, which is neat. I would love to live in Jackson Hole, WY (nearby Yellowstone), but unfortunately there are very few Information Technology jobs there (hell, there very few in the whole state).
Oh and after going through the black hills don't forget to visit the worlds "One and only Corn Palace", I kid you not. Its a feat of engineering, or something
Sorry, China probably wouldn't be able to bear the economic impact of Disney removing all of their toymaking enterpirses from their country in response...
Some other country may be able do it but China is in too deep with American companies from a manufacturing perspective to pull it off.
In the buy.com discussion I vowed not to buy anything from them anymore.
I have yet to buy anything from apple (well recently anyway, I do have an Apple ][e ).
No hypocracy here, I don't use iTunes either. I would very much like both apple and buy.com to support Linux.
Apparently I'm no longer a customer of Buy.com either....
Fine, but SCO is trying to charge people for code someone else distributed under the GPL for free.
Double Dastardly....