So you believe TOR is used by "child rapists"? Funny. How would you even rape a person using a piece of software? I guess the rest of the mental activity you are capable of is of similar quality.
Why can these people not let things alone that work well? Have they never heard of the fundamental engineering principle "if it is not broken, do not fix it"? Morons. This type of idiocy is why the software-industry is not mature at all.
The large enterprises where I know the IT are still recovering from the move to Win7. One upgraded the last users end of 2014. They will not move to Win10 anytime soon and with all the UI changes and BS features that have no place in a workplace, I expect many large enterprises will not even seriously consider it before there is no choice. And with enough pressure, I bet Win7 will get enterprise support way beyond 2020, if the alternative is losing the customers completely.
Probably power-management, maybe other drivers for on-chip hardware. A hardware-backdoor would not need driver support at all, or it becomes pretty worthless. The whole point of a hardware-backdoor is that it does _not_ require software support.
Also note that this support is likely not "needed" so much, but makes things work better. With the press being ever more clueless, otherwise MS could face headlines like "Win7 and 8 is stops to support Skylake CPUs" or the like.
Seriously, is TOR so unbreakable that you shills need to bad-mouth it at any opportunity?
First, the promise to not backdoor is ages-old. Second, who finances it has been known since shortly after the beginning of the project. I asked Roger Dingledine more than a decade ago about it and his answer makes a lot more sense than the often repeated "The gobbermet founds it, it has backdoor!" that never comes with any additional details. And as to backdoors, it is very hard to keep backdoors in FOSS projects with active communities hidden for a long time. Add to that that anybody that finds a working backdoor in TOR has instant fame, backdoors in TOR are rather unlikely. And as to "TOR was broken in the past by the FBI", that is just a shameless lie. What was broken was the JavaScript engine of Firefox that served as basis of an outdated TOR browser bundle that the users did not upgrade despite very clear warnings each time they started it. That is right, the FBI simply implemented that attack against Firefox after the vulnerability was fixed (and likely they did it form the documentation of that vulnerability) and caught these 1500 idiots that way, no vulnerability in TOR and only a FF vulnerability that had already been patched in the current TOR browser bundle.
Now, despite these facts, the same idiotic anti-TOR propaganda keeps going. I can only speculate that this is intended to drive people away from TOR and to less-secure alternatives that are a lot easier to break.
Call is a "remote management engine" or a "remote hardware backdoor". That is more descriptive and more common. Especially, as this sits in the chip-set in some cases and not always in the CPU.
However, I re-iterate, Microsoft does not need any of those to break your security. These are for attacks when the OS vendor does not cooperate.
I begin we have actually two main terrorist factions acting here: One fighting against the western governments and the other constituted by the western governments.
That is nonsense. MS already owns the OS and the OS is closed-source. They do not need any CPU "side-band" (whatever that is supposed to mean) capabilities.
I guess MS will still rather have people on Win7/Win8 than gong completely for alternatives. And because Win10 is an absolute no-go for quite a few people that have actually looked at what it means, it is either that or lose these customers.
Actually, it causes less death, pain and suffering and economic damage than fat and sugar, two completely uncontrolled substances. There is no rationality behind the "war on drugs", just a deep and repulsive desire to control others.
That is because nothing happens to the FBI if they screw up. Hence they screw up more and more, because screwing up is easier and cheaper than not screwing up. Power without accountability will invariably do that to any organization.
Indeed. The one thing you absolutely need to do right (besides key-generation) in a public-key system is to keep the secret key secret. If you cannot do that, then you have no business building anything with security implications. Yes, MS is utterly incompetent and has been known for ages to be.
Slashdot Mirror
So you believe TOR is used by "child rapists"? Funny. How would you even rape a person using a piece of software? I guess the rest of the mental activity you are capable of is of similar quality.
Hahahaha, spoken like a citizen of a country in decline that was once great.
Nice find.
And nothing of value was lost.
May just require some tools. If they think they can lock down music completely, then they are mistaken.
Why can these people not let things alone that work well? Have they never heard of the fundamental engineering principle "if it is not broken, do not fix it"? Morons. This type of idiocy is why the software-industry is not mature at all.
The large enterprises where I know the IT are still recovering from the move to Win7. One upgraded the last users end of 2014. They will not move to Win10 anytime soon and with all the UI changes and BS features that have no place in a workplace, I expect many large enterprises will not even seriously consider it before there is no choice. And with enough pressure, I bet Win7 will get enterprise support way beyond 2020, if the alternative is losing the customers completely.
Probably power-management, maybe other drivers for on-chip hardware. A hardware-backdoor would not need driver support at all, or it becomes pretty worthless. The whole point of a hardware-backdoor is that it does _not_ require software support.
Also note that this support is likely not "needed" so much, but makes things work better. With the press being ever more clueless, otherwise MS could face headlines like "Win7 and 8 is stops to support Skylake CPUs" or the like.
You are seriously advising people to use an old, known-vulnerable version of Tails? Well, some utter morons may fall for that...
And since everybody of them sits in the US, they would have zero chance to do it anyways....NOT.
An NSL does mean absolutely nothing to an international community of developers.
Seriously, is TOR so unbreakable that you shills need to bad-mouth it at any opportunity?
First, the promise to not backdoor is ages-old. Second, who finances it has been known since shortly after the beginning of the project. I asked Roger Dingledine more than a decade ago about it and his answer makes a lot more sense than the often repeated "The gobbermet founds it, it has backdoor!" that never comes with any additional details. And as to backdoors, it is very hard to keep backdoors in FOSS projects with active communities hidden for a long time. Add to that that anybody that finds a working backdoor in TOR has instant fame, backdoors in TOR are rather unlikely. And as to "TOR was broken in the past by the FBI", that is just a shameless lie. What was broken was the JavaScript engine of Firefox that served as basis of an outdated TOR browser bundle that the users did not upgrade despite very clear warnings each time they started it. That is right, the FBI simply implemented that attack against Firefox after the vulnerability was fixed (and likely they did it form the documentation of that vulnerability) and caught these 1500 idiots that way, no vulnerability in TOR and only a FF vulnerability that had already been patched in the current TOR browser bundle.
Now, despite these facts, the same idiotic anti-TOR propaganda keeps going. I can only speculate that this is intended to drive people away from TOR and to less-secure alternatives that are a lot easier to break.
Call is a "remote management engine" or a "remote hardware backdoor". That is more descriptive and more common. Especially, as this sits in the chip-set in some cases and not always in the CPU.
However, I re-iterate, Microsoft does not need any of those to break your security. These are for attacks when the OS vendor does not cooperate.
It does not really have a meaning in the given context.
I begin we have actually two main terrorist factions acting here: One fighting against the western governments and the other constituted by the western governments.
That is nonsense. MS already owns the OS and the OS is closed-source. They do not need any CPU "side-band" (whatever that is supposed to mean) capabilities.
I guess MS will still rather have people on Win7/Win8 than gong completely for alternatives. And because Win10 is an absolute no-go for quite a few people that have actually looked at what it means, it is either that or lose these customers.
Fascinating. Forced to sleep on the couch and now spreading hate?
Yes, technically you are right. But signing anything an attacker can ever wish for with the secret key and then handing it over is hardly any better.
Actually, it causes less death, pain and suffering and economic damage than fat and sugar, two completely uncontrolled substances. There is no rationality behind the "war on drugs", just a deep and repulsive desire to control others.
I second that.
That is because nothing happens to the FBI if they screw up. Hence they screw up more and more, because screwing up is easier and cheaper than not screwing up. Power without accountability will invariably do that to any organization.
Indeed. The whole "security" thing is just a cover-up lie.
Indeed. The one thing you absolutely need to do right (besides key-generation) in a public-key system is to keep the secret key secret. If you cannot do that, then you have no business building anything with security implications. Yes, MS is utterly incompetent and has been known for ages to be.
It is also mostly text. Copy & paste into text-editor and read without the hassle.