OK, there is info at the website but there is no exploit code given and there is not enough information to produce a script for the kiddies and it will be very difficult to reproduce this attack without more info.
Imagine if this was full disclosure. What if they simply posted a little.exe that anyone can run that will immediately "root" any XP or specially configured (98/ME) box. Would that be "better?" HOW would that help in any way? This is an example of how cool the guys at EEYE are. They did the right thing by a) waiting for the patch to be released and b) not publishing damaging exploit code.
The key to remember everyone, it's a vulnerability for which there is not an exploit available and it's patched already. So, if, in 2 months from now there is CodeOrange Part 23 out there and it uses this vulnerability - let's all remember that the patch was released before there was ever a threat.
I seriously doubt anyone at/. will mod this up as anything but a troll because I didn't join the bandwagon to slam MS (I'm not defending them, per say, but everyone did do the right thing - fixed the problem before it was one) but I hope someone reads it and thinks for a second back to holes in other OSes and how they were handled (and/or abused) before getting so high and mighty.
That wasn't a troll you brain dead moderator. It's truthful and factual and informative. Just because you may not like the fact that it shines a good light on something MS related doesn't give you the right to try to censor this information. Information wants to be free - censorship is wrong. Censoring the facts is wrong. Moderation is censorship when it's used incorrectly.
Paul at WinInformant wrote: "InfoWorld stood alone this week when it declared that Windows XP significantly underperformed Windows 2000 and Windows 9x in its tests. Not only do the controversial InfoWorld results fly in the face of Microsoft's published results and actual real-world use, they refute every independent XP performance test performed to date. One gets the idea that... nah... InfoWorld was trying to make XP lose. Don't believe me? Consider this: The following organizations have tested XP, independently of Microsoft: CNET/ZDNET, eTesting Labs, eWeek, PC Magazine, and PC World. All these independent labs came to the same conclusion: XP meets or exceeds the performance of Win2K and Win9x. The InfoWorld results are also at odds with real-world XP use, which already includes hundreds of thousands of beta testers, tens of thousands of IT professionals and developers, and hundreds of thousands of enterprise customers. "Microsoft has not received any indications that users are experiencing reduced performance compared with Windows 2000," a company spokesperson said. "We have had extensive feedback that Windows XP is better performing than Windows 9x." Go figure. And yet, you just know that every anti-Microsoft site on the planet is going to run with the InfoWorld story and not any of the positive stories. Ain't life grand?"
InfoWorld is full of crap - total liars. We have tested XP ourselves in a 110 PC test lab. It runs CIRCLES around the W2K SP2 machines we replaced. AND more important than some silly benchmarks, our users were able to do things easier and faster. They were able to figure things out for themselves instead of calling IT every 15 minutes.
InfoWorld is among the most anti-MS rags out there, next to The Register, and it's agenda has finally been revealed publically. There are 500,000 XP users out there today (including those who've used XP while it was in beta) that can prove that XP is faster than W2K.
Make $10K using this exploit!
on
Linux Kernel Bugs
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Hey, why doesn't someone use this exploit to insert a virus on that guy who was offering a $10K reward to anyone who could do this to his Linux box. A recent/. story but I don't have it handy. Come on, we know who that was...
http://node2.callihq.net/ has got the full screen version of this trailer in a high and higher bandwidth Windows Media streaming format. Go ahead,/. it...
"This movie does not support saving" is the error I get when I try the export function. I can turn off the tracks I don't want but I can't get the video/audio out.
I'm trying to convert from.MOV to anything and I'm getting conversion errors using Blink and Smack. Anyone got a way to convert this.MOV into MPEG or something else. I want to mirror it in MPG and streaming AVI format (Divx and/or WMV).
Tell ya what, get it to me and I'll host it up on our Gigabit ethernet connection to Level 3, capped at 100 mb/s by the router but it'll pony up the bandwidth. Just gotta get the original first! damn!
Take all those amazon prices and slash $15 off of them and buy at costco.
Also, note. these are prices before the OS is even released and at quantity 1. HELL, give it a month (after release) and the price will drop another 15. In 6 months it will drop 25%
Either way you look at it, WinXP Home cost the same as Win9x/Me and WinXP Pro cost the same as Win2K Pro. And you get a better OS with more features. Looks good to me.
No - it's obvious he used Napster, like everyone else (without exception, in my opinion), to pirate copyrighted music. What other reason is there to use Napster? To chat with people? To trade music you already own?
taco is just to stupid to realize his slip-up and to change it now would be an even greater omission.
Have seen it done with more. But not on one box, doh, of course. However, I wasn't talking about Exchange, I'm using IMail and, yes, I have 24,000 POP3/IMAP account on a single server.
Exchange can't handle it? Yea right. Please. We've got an E2K box in our data center where we're migrating all of those users to, about 1000 per 2 weeks. So far we have 8400 on 3 boxes, one HTTP/POP3 front end and two back end. So far no problems at all. I suspect you are talking about Exchange 5.5 - 2000 didn't even hardly blip at 4K.
Oh, I'm sorry , I forgot this is Slashdot Where it's IMPOSSIBLE for a MS product to do well and only linux is to be worshipped. Silly me for talking about a real first hand experience that is actually positive about a MS product.
Troll? flamebait? Only if you don't care for facts and only care for blind worship of linus.
I'm not using Exchange, I'm using IMail, just like I wrote. And I have 24,000 POP3/IMAP accounts on a single box. It has 4 stripped/mirrored cheetas for hard drive space, 72 gigs of space. This is not a problemo
Unless the author steps up and provides proof of this mystical magical worse-case-scenario for NT/Best-case-scenerio for Linux company I doubt anyone except blind linvocates are going to believe this crap?
Seperate file and printer server? Yea right.
Seperate "internet mail" server? We about 24,000 accounts on a single PII-450 with 256 Mb RAM under NT4 running IMail. If it were Exchange you'd think he would have mentioned that.
In fact, you would think this guy would mention ANY solid named products and provide some real information instead of this fairy tale dream of how nothing MS works and everything crashes daily (unlike the experiences at our 20,000 seat corporation).
ANYONE believing this story will also believe in Santa Claus...
This is the REAL news. Windows XP is finally done and was given to the top PC makers. It's petty denial for Slashdot to NOT cover this.
Don't Like It That Way? Don't Buy It That Way?
on
$1200 Cheap!
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I'm struggling to think of what else to write... If you don't want to buy the bundle then... DON'T! Get the unbundled version. Is this that difficult to comprehend? Every other game maker creates bundles which are cheaper than all the components seperately -- why single out MS for this behavi- oh, I forgot, it's MS.
You didn't read the article - that driver wouldn't be blocked by default. Unless it was already known/documented to be bad it won't be blocked. Get it? So, go ahead, install something you should already know better and see what happens. MS won't block that. What they are blocking are things guarenteed to screw you up.
Slashdot Mirror
Who he works for doesn't make it possible for him to fudge those numbers.
You are truely desperate to deny these figures aren't yoU?
OK, there is info at the website but there is no exploit code given and there is not enough information to produce a script for the kiddies and it will be very difficult to reproduce this attack without more info.
.exe that anyone can run that will immediately "root" any XP or specially configured (98/ME) box. Would that be "better?" HOW would that help in any way? This is an example of how cool the guys at EEYE are. They did the right thing by a) waiting for the patch to be released and b) not publishing damaging exploit code.
/. will mod this up as anything but a troll because I didn't join the bandwagon to slam MS (I'm not defending them, per say, but everyone did do the right thing - fixed the problem before it was one) but I hope someone reads it and thinks for a second back to holes in other OSes and how they were handled (and/or abused) before getting so high and mighty.
Imagine if this was full disclosure. What if they simply posted a little
The key to remember everyone, it's a vulnerability for which there is not an exploit available and it's patched already. So, if, in 2 months from now there is CodeOrange Part 23 out there and it uses this vulnerability - let's all remember that the patch was released before there was ever a threat.
I seriously doubt anyone at
That wasn't a troll you brain dead moderator. It's truthful and factual and informative. Just because you may not like the fact that it shines a good light on something MS related doesn't give you the right to try to censor this information. Information wants to be free - censorship is wrong. Censoring the facts is wrong. Moderation is censorship when it's used incorrectly.
Paul at WinInformant wrote: "InfoWorld stood alone this week when it declared that Windows XP significantly underperformed Windows 2000 and Windows 9x in its tests. Not only do the controversial InfoWorld results fly in the face of Microsoft's published results and actual real-world use, they refute every independent XP performance test performed to date. One gets the idea that ... nah ... InfoWorld was trying to make XP lose. Don't believe me? Consider this: The following organizations have tested XP, independently of Microsoft: CNET/ZDNET, eTesting Labs, eWeek, PC Magazine, and PC World. All these independent labs came to the same conclusion: XP meets or exceeds the performance of Win2K and Win9x. The InfoWorld results are also at odds with real-world XP use, which already includes hundreds of thousands of beta testers, tens of thousands of IT professionals and developers, and hundreds of thousands of enterprise customers. "Microsoft has not received any indications that users are experiencing reduced performance compared with Windows 2000," a company spokesperson said. "We have had extensive feedback that Windows XP is better performing than Windows 9x." Go figure. And yet, you just know that every anti-Microsoft site on the planet is going to run with the InfoWorld story and not any of the positive stories. Ain't life grand?"
InfoWorld is full of crap - total liars. We have tested XP ourselves in a 110 PC test lab. It runs CIRCLES around the W2K SP2 machines we replaced. AND more important than some silly benchmarks, our users were able to do things easier and faster. They were able to figure things out for themselves instead of calling IT every 15 minutes.
InfoWorld is among the most anti-MS rags out there, next to The Register, and it's agenda has finally been revealed publically. There are 500,000 XP users out there today (including those who've used XP while it was in beta) that can prove that XP is faster than W2K.
Hey, why doesn't someone use this exploit to insert a virus on that guy who was offering a $10K reward to anyone who could do this to his Linux box. A recent /. story but I don't have it handy. Come on, we know who that was...
http://node2.callihq.net/ - come and get it!
http://node2.callihq.net/ - And windows media format too.
Sorry, it's there now. AND the MPEG version AND the Divx version!! And both streaming media versions!
Thanks to your help Dan I finally got it converted and mirrored up at http://node2.callihq.net - check it out...
http://node2.callihq.net/ has got the full screen version of this trailer in a high and higher bandwidth Windows Media streaming format. Go ahead, /. it...
"This movie does not support saving" is the error I get when I try the export function. I can turn off the tracks I don't want but I can't get the video/audio out.
I'm trying to convert from .MOV to anything and I'm getting conversion errors using Blink and Smack. Anyone got a way to convert this .MOV into MPEG or something else. I want to mirror it in MPG and streaming AVI format (Divx and/or WMV).
It's ONE ring so fellowshipoftheringS.mov is not quite right eh?
Thanks, I'm getting it now (480 KB/s) and will post mirror shortly ...
I don't have Morpheus but I guess I'll have to get it
:)
I have a port that needs some stressin'
Tell ya what, get it to me and I'll host it up on our Gigabit ethernet connection to Level 3, capped at 100 mb/s by the router but it'll pony up the bandwidth. Just gotta get the original first! damn!
Take all those amazon prices and slash $15 off of them and buy at costco.
Also, note. these are prices before the OS is even released and at quantity 1. HELL, give it a month (after release) and the price will drop another 15. In 6 months it will drop 25%
Either way you look at it, WinXP Home cost the same as Win9x/Me and WinXP Pro cost the same as Win2K Pro. And you get a better OS with more features. Looks good to me.
No - it's obvious he used Napster, like everyone else (without exception, in my opinion), to pirate copyrighted music. What other reason is there to use Napster? To chat with people? To trade music you already own?
taco is just to stupid to realize his slip-up and to change it now would be an even greater omission.
24K accounts on Exchange.
Absolutely!
Have seen it done with more. But not on one box, doh, of course. However, I wasn't talking about Exchange, I'm using IMail and, yes, I have 24,000 POP3/IMAP account on a single server.
Exchange can't handle it? Yea right. Please. We've got an E2K box in our data center where we're migrating all of those users to, about 1000 per 2 weeks. So far we have 8400 on 3 boxes, one HTTP/POP3 front end and two back end. So far no problems at all. I suspect you are talking about Exchange 5.5 - 2000 didn't even hardly blip at 4K.
The article is fake, anandtech does this a lot.
Oh, I'm sorry , I forgot this is Slashdot Where it's IMPOSSIBLE for a MS product to do well and only linux is to be worshipped. Silly me for talking about a real first hand experience that is actually positive about a MS product.
Troll? flamebait? Only if you don't care for facts and only care for blind worship of linus.
I'm not using Exchange, I'm using IMail, just like I wrote. And I have 24,000 POP3/IMAP accounts on a single box. It has 4 stripped/mirrored cheetas for hard drive space, 72 gigs of space. This is not a problemo
Unless the author steps up and provides proof of this mystical magical worse-case-scenario for NT/Best-case-scenerio for Linux company I doubt anyone except blind linvocates are going to believe this crap?
Seperate file and printer server? Yea right.
Seperate "internet mail" server? We about 24,000 accounts on a single PII-450 with 256 Mb RAM under NT4 running IMail. If it were Exchange you'd think he would have mentioned that.
In fact, you would think this guy would mention ANY solid named products and provide some real information instead of this fairy tale dream of how nothing MS works and everything crashes daily (unlike the experiences at our 20,000 seat corporation).
ANYONE believing this story will also believe in Santa Claus...
This is the REAL news. Windows XP is finally done and was given to the top PC makers. It's petty denial for Slashdot to NOT cover this.
I'm struggling to think of what else to write... If you don't want to buy the bundle then ... DON'T! Get the unbundled version. Is this that difficult to comprehend? Every other game maker creates bundles which are cheaper than all the components seperately -- why single out MS for this behavi- oh, I forgot, it's MS.
You didn't read the article - that driver wouldn't be blocked by default. Unless it was already known/documented to be bad it won't be blocked. Get it? So, go ahead, install something you should already know better and see what happens. MS won't block that. What they are blocking are things guarenteed to screw you up.