Who do you think is going to make it secure "in the first place"?
All you're doing is shifting the industry closer to the OS vendors, it's still very necessary.
Of course if Microsoft bought up all the AV, Firewall, IDS and other security vendors with this goal in mind, many people would shit a brick and twitter's head would explode.
That is a firewall issue. Poison Ivy doesn't make permanent changes to Firefox, it simply injects some extra code into it. That is standard Windows behavior, you don't need to run as admin to modify another non-admin process. Anti-virus software can only detect known malware and it doesn't take much to turn known malware into unknown malware. Just an EXE packer or crypter will do the trick most of the time.
The problem is that when Microsoft includes security features that replaces third party software, people scream monopoly. When they leave these holes open to be filled by third party software, people say it's weak. So, it's weak. If your friend insists on downloading cracks or doing whatever it was to get backdoored, tell him to run ProcessGuard. It prevents protected applications from being modified. It can stop attackers from getting a foothold in most cases. That is, if you start fresh and train it correctly in the beginning.
but it seems to me that a whole view is rarely suppressed
Very rarely but it does happen. An example is the article about Blizzard in a legal battle with cheat makers. Even though Blizzard is attacking fair use, many people didn't care simply because they are tired of cheaters.
If you don't want to play by their rules then you have to start your own business. This is how most of us dropouts are making it big. If you're going to be a serious programmer it's probably the best way to do it anyways. Find some niche that isn't being served well and take it over. You'll get a lot more return on the time you spend. I think they only problem with this approach is having to deal with the customers.
The reason why they want academics is because they are too lazy to screen everyone that comes through with some sort of actual test. They'd rather use a coarse grain filter and only let the good worker bees in. Then they can cherry pick the rest a lot more easily.
Size? Noise? Wireless? That's odd, because none of those things matter in the closet where I keep my media PC. I'm also not sure how $300 is less than FREE thanks to recycling a PC I kept instead of throwing away. I'm saving money and helping the environment.
Why should anyone interested in developing open solutions for set top boxes limit themselves to the OSD's closed embedded-style hardware
No, the question people should be asking is why buy the AppleTV if it's just another PC? I don't know about everyone else but whenever I get a new PC, my old PC becomes the media hub. It costs nothing extra and has more power than AppleTV could ever hope for. This seems like a product in search of a need.
However, it isn't a haha moment until the headline reads that someone found 25 Apple exploits and released a huge virus to exploit them.
I'm sure you meant a worm not a virus.
However, if there's ever more than 1 Mac for every 1 million* IP addresses then maybe a worm might surface.
I just hope the worm author does something creative with his captive audience. Perhaps some hilarious messagesm, "right click to continue", "dx9.dll missing, please reinstall" or how about changing all their bookmarks to point at http://www.mac-sucks.com/.
Insightful too. You've touched upon the reason why this is even news in the first place.
Apple and their fanboys have shot themselves in the foot. It was only a matter of time. You can only gloat and brag about how flawless and secure your operating system is before someone introduces you to their good friend reality and takes you down a peg (or 25).
I think The Washington Post is just a little shocked. Especially since the Mac "just works" so there shouldn't be any bugs. Plus since OS X is so secure there should never be any exploits either, remote or local.
The key is that, year over year, Apple's sales are still increasing, even though last year they didn't have to compete with Vista and this year they do.
The fact that their sales haven't been impacted is more likely to mean that Apple isn't competing at all. You can't hurt something that isn't happening.
Wait, that's what zoophile means?! I just thought it meant you like Zoos a lot! Oh shit, I need to cancel some magazine subscriptions before they arrive!
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I think that's the difference between inhuman and inhumane.
it's the literalists who don't want to admit that there could've been a translation error
So it's not that God doesn't exist or that he doesn't perform miracles, he's just a shitty editor.
The fact that the supreme word of God needs to be translated, edited and revised speaks volumes on how reliable it is.
So which parts of the Bible are the actual words of God? The baby killing? Wife beating? Slave owning?
No, only the "good" parts of the Bible are considered accurate and that seems a little too convenient.
I'm not sure if you realize it but none of that stuff actually happened.
Sorry to be the one to break it to you...
If you only like 6 songs then you don't like the band.
Delete the others and stop being a poser.
Who do you think is going to make it secure "in the first place"?
All you're doing is shifting the industry closer to the OS vendors, it's still very necessary.
Of course if Microsoft bought up all the AV, Firewall, IDS and other security vendors with this goal in mind, many people would shit a brick and twitter's head would explode.
Seems like they are trying to make a point of that. I just can't figure out what it is.
They're just changing their policy regarding how much they talk about it. The sad part is, Greenpeace made Apple look better, not worse.
It might reduce the number of pages, that's for sure
You may be sure that it might but I'm unsure that it won't...
That is a firewall issue. Poison Ivy doesn't make permanent changes to Firefox, it simply injects some extra code into it. That is standard Windows behavior, you don't need to run as admin to modify another non-admin process. Anti-virus software can only detect known malware and it doesn't take much to turn known malware into unknown malware. Just an EXE packer or crypter will do the trick most of the time.
The problem is that when Microsoft includes security features that replaces third party software, people scream monopoly. When they leave these holes open to be filled by third party software, people say it's weak. So, it's weak. If your friend insists on downloading cracks or doing whatever it was to get backdoored, tell him to run ProcessGuard. It prevents protected applications from being modified. It can stop attackers from getting a foothold in most cases. That is, if you start fresh and train it correctly in the beginning.
Actually, if you really want to know, you're both wrong.
It's all SCO intellectual property.
but it seems to me that a whole view is rarely suppressed
Very rarely but it does happen. An example is the article about Blizzard in a legal battle with cheat makers. Even though Blizzard is attacking fair use, many people didn't care simply because they are tired of cheaters.
If you don't want to play by their rules then you have to start your own business. This is how most of us dropouts are making it big. If you're going to be a serious programmer it's probably the best way to do it anyways. Find some niche that isn't being served well and take it over. You'll get a lot more return on the time you spend. I think they only problem with this approach is having to deal with the customers.
The reason why they want academics is because they are too lazy to screen everyone that comes through with some sort of actual test. They'd rather use a coarse grain filter and only let the good worker bees in. Then they can cherry pick the rest a lot more easily.
Size? Noise? Wireless? That's odd, because none of those things matter in the closet where I keep my media PC. I'm also not sure how $300 is less than FREE thanks to recycling a PC I kept instead of throwing away. I'm saving money and helping the environment.
Why should anyone interested in developing open solutions for set top boxes limit themselves to the OSD's closed embedded-style hardware
No, the question people should be asking is why buy the AppleTV if it's just another PC? I don't know about everyone else but whenever I get a new PC, my old PC becomes the media hub. It costs nothing extra and has more power than AppleTV could ever hope for. This seems like a product in search of a need.
I'm just glad you aren't trying to patent those comments because there is A LOT of prior art...
Weasel out of what? Are you trying to tell me I don't know what max dword is? Seriously, FFFFFFFFuck yourself? k? I'm not impressed.
Thanks for proving what a smart person you are.
Coming from someone that doesn't know what sarcasm or IPv6 is, I'll consider it a compliment.
However, it isn't a haha moment until the headline reads that someone found 25 Apple exploits and released a huge virus to exploit them.
I'm sure you meant a worm not a virus.
However, if there's ever more than 1 Mac for every 1 million* IP addresses then maybe a worm might surface.
I just hope the worm author does something creative with his captive audience. Perhaps some hilarious messagesm, "right click to continue", "dx9.dll missing, please reinstall" or how about changing all their bookmarks to point at http://www.mac-sucks.com/.
*made up number, real number is likely higher
Insightful too. You've touched upon the reason why this is even news in the first place.
Apple and their fanboys have shot themselves in the foot. It was only a matter of time. You can only gloat and brag about how flawless and secure your operating system is before someone introduces you to their good friend reality and takes you down a peg (or 25).
FUD? I doubt that was the intention.
I think The Washington Post is just a little shocked. Especially since the Mac "just works" so there shouldn't be any bugs. Plus since OS X is so secure there should never be any exploits either, remote or local.
Wish MSFT also would clearly say what is not affected by the hole.
You mean like how every MS security bulletin has a list of "Affected Software" and then lists each specific operating system version and service pack?
He said "cite" and you post Wikipedia entries. I'm not sure that word means what you think it means. Do you often cite chalkboards as sources too?
Someone hasn't tried Reason.
a rageband-723027.jpg
e nt/Propellerhead/PR/Reason-2-front-large.jpg
http://www.farsipraise.net/blog/uploaded_images/g
vs.
http://namm.harmony-central.com/Musikmesse02/Cont
Even better, runs on both Windows and Mac.
The key is that, year over year, Apple's sales are still increasing, even though last year they didn't have to compete with Vista and this year they do.
The fact that their sales haven't been impacted is more likely to mean that Apple isn't competing at all. You can't hurt something that isn't happening.
Wait, that's what zoophile means?! I just thought it meant you like Zoos a lot! Oh shit, I need to cancel some magazine subscriptions before they arrive!