It's designed to operate at so deep a level that the BIOS, boot loader, and media burners can be locked to signed-only operating systems and run only signed binaries to access attached storage media.
Yeah, this is already implemented and can be used together with bitlocker and a TPM for full disk encryption without any user interaction whatsoever. It's nice functionality, IMHO!
If the BIOS is modified, then Bitlocker requires a temporary unlock key.
Imagine who'd benefit the most from that, especially because the signatures are expensive? And who's going to hold the secret keys for all those signatures? The same company that's already been convicted several times of anti-trust and monopoly practices.
Again, this is kinda my point: If that were to become MANDATORY (which it isn't!) then it would be the catastrophe you're talking about. Only it's not mandatory, it's just a feature that can be used e.G. for full disk encryption.
Well, they haven't completely implemented Palladium, renamed 'Trusted Computing'.
That's technology. Signature enforcement on binaries can make perfect sense in high security environments.
Of course, technology being technology it can also be used for "bad" purposes. Like a knife can be used to cut meat or kill people.
Getting OpenSSH, VNC, and Apache going under Vista were not fun for me.
Okay, i can get that. With a new OS that changes a few fundamentals of the platform, there are bound to be some hiccups. The problem with Vista was that noone, not even commercial vendors, prepared their software using the beta releases.
I don't really see why you blame Vista for breaking e.G. VNC - i would blame the VNC vendors for not keeping up with the platform they're developing for.
XP to keep people from using free and DRM-free players like VLC
What? I've been using mplayer to watch my movies on Vista since forever - the only problem i have with it is that it still disables Aero. It's doesn't annoy me enough to learn enough C and DirectX to fix it, though:)
On my dads PC, somehow launching Firefox causes the UAC dialog.
So, Firefox is broken and you blame Vista? Interesting way of putting it.
Recent versions of Firefox have proper manifests and only show an UAC prompt when installing an update (which makes sense).
Nevermind that UAC offers not security at all, writing software to circumvent it is easy as pie. UAC just doesn't work, certainly not when I compare it to sudo on Linux.
That's because Vista's DRM isn't turned on yet. Microsoft says they'll turn it on starting year 2010 (via an update of course), and then good luck trying to play all your burned CDs and DVDs that lack DRM.
Yes, every vendor of any OS can release an update that changes the behaviour of it. That's kinda the reason for updates. Alas, this hasn't happened yet and it won't - there is no base for all the "evil conspiracy" hype around Vista.
I wouldn't be so sure that businesses will immediately jump to Windows 7. Being a contractor I get to see a lot of different companies installations, and Not One has upgraded to Vista. They still prefer XP even though it's almost three years since a new OS arrived.
Of course they won't! Heck, i still see businesses running Windows 2000 on Desktops and Servers, even new ones! (which is insane, IMO)
I work for an IT service company that services small businesses, and most (~80%) of the machines we deploy are running Windows Vista. We've been selling and installing Windows Server 2008 since the release date, and last week i just finished installing the first SBS 2008.
Yep, smaller companies are more progressive than very large companies, simply because they have fewer apps to support and are more flexible.
Vista has "intrusive DRM"? I never noticed, and i've been using Vista since Beta 2 on my laptop.
UAC, by the way, is not painful for users - if you just "use" your computer, you'll not see a single UAC prompt - when you start to do administrative tasks, things will be different.
Technically, Vista was ok. If it would've been released 2 years earlier, it would've been great. Windows 7 is the polishment to Vista that XP was to 2000. History repeats itself.
Vista fixed many, many issues that XP had, like the antique installer being replaced by a new image based installation systems that works better and faster. Of course, the casual user could care less about this.
Vista also made many design errors in applications more obvious, which was one of it's downfalls from a customer perspective, but from a long term POV, it was the right thing to do.
Like, from Switzerland to Germany. Which costs an 10+ CHF, so that for small amounts of money, sending it by post is cheaper and FASTER (of course more risky, but i was talking about small amounts anyway).
I will never understand why international wire transfers take more than a few minutes, instead they take three days minimum. National wire transfers also take an entire day, for no reason whatsoever. But at least those are free.
Aww, come on. Automatic code execution on Windows isn't what it was like 5 years ago.
Most of todays rootkits, viruses, etc. have very simple delivery methods, such as a mail with an.exe in a Zipfile. Or just a link to a.exe in a Mail.
The reasons those persist and work is because of user stupidity - it can't be prevented by any operating system.
Let's take your OSX for example: Imagine your Grandma getting a Mail with a attached.dmg file. She double clicks it. A finder Window opens, and there's a nice Smiley Face looking at her. She double clicks it, and depending on the design an UAC err Mac OS X Elevation prompt crops up that has her enter her password.
Or the malicious application just installs into the user profile - it doesn't really need system privileges, it just needs to send spam and hook into the web browser.
This isn't an OS issue - it's a general issue.
Any solution to the problem "User is able to execute arbitrary code even with system level privileges if he chooses to do so" will restrict the user. And turn the PC into an Xbox except with Word or Pages instead of Games.
I remember you withhold the right to vote from women in the same half-direct manner until 1971 if memory serves, so perhaps you shouldn't blow your alphorn as loud.
Womens right to vote was decided at the Kanton (state) level, and the last one to allow it was in 1971.
It just shows that what happens is the Peoples will - not what some people see as politically correct. This is, as you can see, a two-edged sword.
There may be decisions you disagree with, like the time it took for some to accept womens right to vote.
You know, there is no need to be a member of the EU. That's what was democratically decided in those countries.
This is also the reason why Switzerland isn't a member of the EU - it was declined in votes (by the people). One of the big advantages of the half-direct democracy we have here.
As far as I'm concerned, these are all features. Why the fuck should a corporation choose this stuff? Judge me on my work output, not on how I use my web browser.
Most of the users have very little knowledge about the computer/OS use from day to day. A standardized setup minimizes troubles and keeps support cost down.
Usually, most of these rules do not apply for people from the IT dept.
A 1000+ seat installation means you have lots of resources available. Guys dedicated to packaging software and testing it.
Now think of a 100 seat installation, where you often don't even have one full time IT employee.
Almost no resources - now create your own deployment package, and update it everytime Mozilla releases an update, and deploy that alongside an already existing webbrowser that more or less does it's job?
Why? Where's the business case? It costs hell of a lot time and money, of which you have neither, and doesn't really change all that much about the situation.
Ehm, what exactly needs to be "centrally managed" about a friggin' Web-Browser?
For example, which extensions may or may not be installed. Or what the homepage is set to. Or, disabling the Phishing Filter or enabling the Lookup-Portion of the Phishing Filter. Enable certain privacy settings by default, or disable them.
Firefox can auto-detect the proxy server to use and updates itself over the intertubes.
A feature which requires local administrative privileges, which is not the case in a corporate IT environment.
What more do you need in your "corporate environment"?
Lot's. You've obviously never worked in one, which is perfectly fine. But don't attack me just because you don't understand a large part of the global IT economy.
Microsoft leveraging the fact that it owns the OS.
Integration is certainly one of the big selling points of Microsoft, but Group Policy is an open platform, there is absolutely nothing preventing Chrome/Opera/Firefox from adding GP support. Heck, there's even a third-party Firefox build out there that implements this to some extent (Frontmotion).
MS is only able to achieve these things because the OS and the browser are still so closely tied, something that just isn't possible on the same level for the other browsers.
Sorry, but many other vendors have got their central management and update of applications on Windows working perfectly well.
IE does a lot of things right, which no other browser does.
Centrally managing IE in a Windows Environment is a breeze - everything can be configured using Group Policies, a powerful tool that automates application customization.
Deploying and upgrading IE is also easy, as it utilizes the same Windows Update infrastructure that is already in place - using the free WSUS product in small businesses, or WSUS/SCCM in larger businesses.
IE also allows powerful intranet applications and custom security zones that can also be configured centrally - yes, this feature has been the source of many a security problem, but businesses don't buy computers because they're secure, but because they solve business problems.
Firefox, Opera and Chrome seem to have little to no interest in being used in corporate IT environments, where automated deployment and central management is key.
Or the fact that you can't centrally manage it. There are some unsupported community builds out there, but none of them come close to what IE can do in the right hands - especially the whole Zones concept which, while not perfect, can allow very powerful policies to be set.
Add to that that a browser is highly security critical, and deploying IE updates is a breeze even in very small Windows deployments thanks to WSUS, it's not that easy with Firefox.
It clearly shows that the Mozilla Foundation, like Apple, only targets home users.
Well, Outlook is IMHO a very good Groupware client, and it works okay for general e-mail, but it's a complete PITA when it comes to "older" usages of e-mail, like mailing lists.
Quoting in Outlook sucks (it's nonexistent), there are plugins but they don't really work right.
Of course, most of these things do not matter to the average user - i'm using Outlook for all my corporate Groupware & Mail needs, and use Google Apps Premier for my private Mail (earlier, i used mutt).
We have a one or two clients without Exchange that use Thunderbird, and i think i would prefer it over Outlook for my private Mail needs - but i guess it all depends on what exactly you need it for.
You're aware that this sounds like sarcasm, right?
Both Islam and Christianity are, when taken at face value, highly violent and hate filled.
The difference here is that there are very few who still take Christianity at face value (and the rest are considered fringe nutjobs).
With Islam on the other hand, many still take it at face value, wear Burkas, don't eat Pig, etc. pp.
So what's the problem here? Christianity has evolved in the last few hundred years to become placebo religion without too much meaning left, some kind of social activity/club. Which is, imho, perfectly fine.
Oh, and of course there are people who believe in Islam, don't wear Burkas and eat Pig. But they're considered fringe Nutjobs. Islam never did evolve. They're stuck 500 years in the past.
No matter, most of continental europe will muslim and the minority (the old majority) will wish they had been more like the United States. The next 40 years will not be good ones for Europe
Which is exactly what many people in Switzerland (and several other European countries) are heavily afraid of.
While Switzerland has a rather popular party that tries to combat some of these problems (SVP, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_People's_Party) and it's a rather widespread opinion, the fact remains is that many people are afraid of talking about the fact that they voted for the SVP (which a rather large part of Switzerland did!).
It's interesting to see how this will go out - whether we will ultimately sacrifice ourselves for the multi-cultural/integration values instigated by left-wing parties, or whether we will survive with our own independent culture.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, this is already implemented and can be used together with bitlocker and a TPM for full disk encryption without any user interaction whatsoever. It's nice functionality, IMHO!
If the BIOS is modified, then Bitlocker requires a temporary unlock key.
Again, this is kinda my point: If that were to become MANDATORY (which it isn't!) then it would be the catastrophe you're talking about. Only it's not mandatory, it's just a feature that can be used e.G. for full disk encryption.
That's technology. Signature enforcement on binaries can make perfect sense in high security environments.
Of course, technology being technology it can also be used for "bad" purposes. Like a knife can be used to cut meat or kill people.
Okay, i can get that. With a new OS that changes a few fundamentals of the platform, there are bound to be some hiccups. The problem with Vista was that noone, not even commercial vendors, prepared their software using the beta releases.
I don't really see why you blame Vista for breaking e.G. VNC - i would blame the VNC vendors for not keeping up with the platform they're developing for.
What? I've been using mplayer to watch my movies on Vista since forever - the only problem i have with it is that it still disables Aero. It's doesn't annoy me enough to learn enough C and DirectX to fix it, though :)
So, Firefox is broken and you blame Vista? Interesting way of putting it.
Recent versions of Firefox have proper manifests and only show an UAC prompt when installing an update (which makes sense).
Can you elaborate on that?
Yes, every vendor of any OS can release an update that changes the behaviour of it. That's kinda the reason for updates. Alas, this hasn't happened yet and it won't - there is no base for all the "evil conspiracy" hype around Vista.
Of course they won't! Heck, i still see businesses running Windows 2000 on Desktops and Servers, even new ones! (which is insane, IMO)
I work for an IT service company that services small businesses, and most (~80%) of the machines we deploy are running Windows Vista. We've been selling and installing Windows Server 2008 since the release date, and last week i just finished installing the first SBS 2008.
Yep, smaller companies are more progressive than very large companies, simply because they have fewer apps to support and are more flexible.
Vista has "intrusive DRM"? I never noticed, and i've been using Vista since Beta 2 on my laptop.
UAC, by the way, is not painful for users - if you just "use" your computer, you'll not see a single UAC prompt - when you start to do administrative tasks, things will be different.
Technically, Vista was ok. If it would've been released 2 years earlier, it would've been great. Windows 7 is the polishment to Vista that XP was to 2000. History repeats itself.
Vista fixed many, many issues that XP had, like the antique installer being replaced by a new image based installation systems that works better and faster. Of course, the casual user could care less about this.
Vista also made many design errors in applications more obvious, which was one of it's downfalls from a customer perspective, but from a long term POV, it was the right thing to do.
Except international wire transfers.
Like, from Switzerland to Germany. Which costs an 10+ CHF, so that for small amounts of money, sending it by post is cheaper and FASTER (of course more risky, but i was talking about small amounts anyway).
I will never understand why international wire transfers take more than a few minutes, instead they take three days minimum. National wire transfers also take an entire day, for no reason whatsoever. But at least those are free.
Only in the next quarter ;)
Aww, come on. Automatic code execution on Windows isn't what it was like 5 years ago.
Most of todays rootkits, viruses, etc. have very simple delivery methods, such as a mail with an .exe in a Zipfile. Or just a link to a .exe in a Mail.
The reasons those persist and work is because of user stupidity - it can't be prevented by any operating system.
Let's take your OSX for example: Imagine your Grandma getting a Mail with a attached .dmg file. She double clicks it. A finder Window opens, and there's a nice Smiley Face looking at her. She double clicks it, and depending on the design an UAC err Mac OS X Elevation prompt crops up that has her enter her password.
Or the malicious application just installs into the user profile - it doesn't really need system privileges, it just needs to send spam and hook into the web browser.
This isn't an OS issue - it's a general issue.
Any solution to the problem "User is able to execute arbitrary code even with system level privileges if he chooses to do so" will restrict the user. And turn the PC into an Xbox except with Word or Pages instead of Games.
The ends don't justify the means.
That's your opinion. Fine.
But it's not an universal truth, and i'll disagree with you here.
I remember you withhold the right to vote from women in the same half-direct manner until 1971 if memory serves, so perhaps you shouldn't blow your alphorn as loud.
Womens right to vote was decided at the Kanton (state) level, and the last one to allow it was in 1971.
It just shows that what happens is the Peoples will - not what some people see as politically correct. This is, as you can see, a two-edged sword.
There may be decisions you disagree with, like the time it took for some to accept womens right to vote.
You know, there is no need to be a member of the EU. That's what was democratically decided in those countries.
This is also the reason why Switzerland isn't a member of the EU - it was declined in votes (by the people). One of the big advantages of the half-direct democracy we have here.
As far as I'm concerned, these are all features. Why the fuck should a corporation choose this stuff? Judge me on my work output, not on how I use my web browser.
Most of the users have very little knowledge about the computer/OS use from day to day. A standardized setup minimizes troubles and keeps support cost down.
Usually, most of these rules do not apply for people from the IT dept.
There is functionality in WSUS that would allow for 3rd party updates.
However, i do not know how complete it is, and if it would work for Firefox.
Firefox can do it. That wasn't the point. The point was central management.
A 1000+ seat installation means you have lots of resources available. Guys dedicated to packaging software and testing it.
Now think of a 100 seat installation, where you often don't even have one full time IT employee.
Almost no resources - now create your own deployment package, and update it everytime Mozilla releases an update, and deploy that alongside an already existing webbrowser that more or less does it's job?
Why? Where's the business case? It costs hell of a lot time and money, of which you have neither, and doesn't really change all that much about the situation.
For example, which extensions may or may not be installed. Or what the homepage is set to. Or, disabling the Phishing Filter or enabling the Lookup-Portion of the Phishing Filter. Enable certain privacy settings by default, or disable them.
A feature which requires local administrative privileges, which is not the case in a corporate IT environment.
Lot's. You've obviously never worked in one, which is perfectly fine. But don't attack me just because you don't understand a large part of the global IT economy.
No, most definitely not. Have you looked at the security setup in most ERP/LOB software packages out there?
Integration is certainly one of the big selling points of Microsoft, but Group Policy is an open platform, there is absolutely nothing preventing Chrome/Opera/Firefox from adding GP support. Heck, there's even a third-party Firefox build out there that implements this to some extent (Frontmotion).
Sorry, but many other vendors have got their central management and update of applications on Windows working perfectly well.
You're not looking at the whole picture.
IE does a lot of things right, which no other browser does.
Centrally managing IE in a Windows Environment is a breeze - everything can be configured using Group Policies, a powerful tool that automates application customization.
Deploying and upgrading IE is also easy, as it utilizes the same Windows Update infrastructure that is already in place - using the free WSUS product in small businesses, or WSUS/SCCM in larger businesses.
IE also allows powerful intranet applications and custom security zones that can also be configured centrally - yes, this feature has been the source of many a security problem, but businesses don't buy computers because they're secure, but because they solve business problems.
Firefox, Opera and Chrome seem to have little to no interest in being used in corporate IT environments, where automated deployment and central management is key.
It looks like you mixed up the resolver and the client.
Or the fact that you can't centrally manage it. There are some unsupported community builds out there, but none of them come close to what IE can do in the right hands - especially the whole Zones concept which, while not perfect, can allow very powerful policies to be set.
Add to that that a browser is highly security critical, and deploying IE updates is a breeze even in very small Windows deployments thanks to WSUS, it's not that easy with Firefox.
It clearly shows that the Mozilla Foundation, like Apple, only targets home users.
Well, Outlook is IMHO a very good Groupware client, and it works okay for general e-mail, but it's a complete PITA when it comes to "older" usages of e-mail, like mailing lists.
Quoting in Outlook sucks (it's nonexistent), there are plugins but they don't really work right.
Of course, most of these things do not matter to the average user - i'm using Outlook for all my corporate Groupware & Mail needs, and use Google Apps Premier for my private Mail (earlier, i used mutt).
We have a one or two clients without Exchange that use Thunderbird, and i think i would prefer it over Outlook for my private Mail needs - but i guess it all depends on what exactly you need it for.
Well, you're right, the US has it's share of problems too. That's not really surprising, and i don't think it matters much.
Which one's the lesser evil doesn't matter much, as long as it's an evil, it must be fought.
You're aware that this sounds like sarcasm, right?
Both Islam and Christianity are, when taken at face value, highly violent and hate filled.
The difference here is that there are very few who still take Christianity at face value (and the rest are considered fringe nutjobs).
With Islam on the other hand, many still take it at face value, wear Burkas, don't eat Pig, etc. pp.
So what's the problem here? Christianity has evolved in the last few hundred years to become placebo religion without too much meaning left, some kind of social activity/club. Which is, imho, perfectly fine.
Oh, and of course there are people who believe in Islam, don't wear Burkas and eat Pig. But they're considered fringe Nutjobs. Islam never did evolve. They're stuck 500 years in the past.
Which is exactly what many people in Switzerland (and several other European countries) are heavily afraid of.
While Switzerland has a rather popular party that tries to combat some of these problems (SVP, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_People's_Party) and it's a rather widespread opinion, the fact remains is that many people are afraid of talking about the fact that they voted for the SVP (which a rather large part of Switzerland did!).
It's interesting to see how this will go out - whether we will ultimately sacrifice ourselves for the multi-cultural/integration values instigated by left-wing parties, or whether we will survive with our own independent culture.