You said "how can i believe a story about some cat in the aussie wild is more credable then a story say like the london bombers" and i said "impact and adgenda go hand in hand".
What i am saying is that a high impact stories such as terroist bombings seem to always have 10 different possible adgendas behind them for instance was it really terroists, did the terroists know they had bombs, political modivations, conspiricy theorys, blah blah blah blah the list goes on! The cat story has no real impact on australian society in any way, ie nobody gives a shit here (btw i am australian) its not going to make a nation fall or instill fear into millions therefore it doesnt really matter if it exists or not.
Therefore what the media says about this story is more credable, more factual and broken down into logical information there is less here say and less conjecture.
What happened with the london bombings... conjecture, they forced the story on people they had very little information to go from oringally and they painted their own pictures, then they collected the information and dispursed that afterwards i.e speeches by polititions, then they had indepth storys about the bombers what they did in their lives,etc.
High impact stories seem to be just a race to inform everyone what was going on.. then they seem to mop it all up later by changing the flow of the information. I.E like a week after stating it was quite possible that the terrorists may not even known about the bombs in their backpacks making the original reports about the bombings less credable because they used conjecture orignally to form the story in the first place by calling them "suicide bombers"...
Its always the case the media guesses about particualar aspects to fill in the blanks, where in this case the media has very little to guess about here, the tail is real or fake a simple yes or no and definatly not an if but or maybe or propergate what they think has happend or what could of happened.
What you as a reader have to take on board is what you need to discard from media articals as being a peddler to lure readers to become a beliver in a particular movement or belief and be more open minded and say to yourself "just because the news has said something doesnt mean its really is the case, its the media and we all know how it loves to spin nonsense just to grab peoples attention"
A strange analogy but a correct one, for windows anyway.
For myself secuirty has always been a customised 'thing' ive always done myself to ensure my home pc or the servers that i run a safe from harm, doesnt mean they cannot be broken into but they stand a good chance from 99.9% of the things that are out there that could possibly cause problems and provided i keep them regulararly patched i feel safe knowing that its going to be tough for anyone to get in.
Now not to blow my own horn and rant on about how long ive been doing this and how long ive been doing that, i do have experience with pcs a good solid decade mind you and during that expeirence linux security is something that has been evolving during the time ive been using pcs, ive seen it by watching such sites as bugtraq, neworder, packetstorm, phrack... the list is endless and what do all these places have in common? continuous evolution of bugs and information of secruity flaws, linux has had PLENTY of them and as result it has founded a strong base for security during this time.
On these sites windows is looked at as a bit of a haha JOKE because its behind the rest of these multiuser os' in this evolution process. Read the last issue of phrack PERFECT example, there is a chapter about smashing windows stack to get into the system whereas in linux there is an artical about tricking the stack protection patches to then smash the stack/heap.
Some silly little conference inviting a bunch of geeks who subscribe to bugtraq and perhaps write these articals for phrack, a) they wont tell ms the real nasty tricks b) its a much bigger issue then a conference once a year.
Yes im ignorant, sure whatever, i suggest the silly little wise asses who go "your ignornat, your an idiot" should go and learn something about secruity before commenting about how its wonderful that microsoft decided to devote a WHOLE DAY into learning about secuirty from the very people who are most likley on the other end causing the problems for them....
Yep, good measure of cluelessness out and about these days...
They've been focusing on security for a while now, why make comments when you're totalling ignorant?
In the scheme of things, No they havent thats why we have big big companies called symantech and NAI and TrendMicro because they had a plenty big gap to make lots and lots of money out of the fact windows has ignored security for such a long time.. Thank you next please.
Errr... Care to explain why you give more credibility to some guy bringing back a tail of unknown origin, than a recent atrocity in which more than 50 people died, hundreds were injured and thousands affected.
You answered your own question, impact and adgenda.. Seems almost like it goes hand in hand.. what impact does a story like this have, none really so what adgenda does it support? none.
Terrorist attack! huge adgenda... LOTS of impact:) and since when did the death of a large amount of people ever turn them off from making lots of money from it.. makes the media seem almost souless if you think about it!
Yeah its quite different, Apple wouldnt be very concerned with their os as it doesnt hinge their sales like MS...
Without windows MS doesnt get your money, without OSX you've still had to buy the entire computer from them..
Logcically it would be quite beneficial for OSX to mindful of secruity because it then has something over MS..
You're an idiot, you think this is the first they've thought of security?
Well it was blue hat v2 so i guess it would be the 2nd time they've thought about it.
XP SP2 has yet to have any worms, so obviously they've been thinking about security for a while. What amazes me is how people make opinions without the facts.
We'll see, a large percentage of this type of stuff stays private amoungst hackers and crackers, when it become public is the real issue. But i guess you would no nothing about that. Throw down the gauntlet and challengers will appear.. never under estimate the hacking community, that was microsofts 1st mistake.
Anyone care to explain to me how you get spyware on a computer without browsing to 'not-so-decent-sites' or installing junk software from the Internet?
So what your saying is, they've nearly completed an operating system which is now past beta stage and is almost ready to be shipped and sold in stores around the world and will be used by millions if not billions of people. Now all of sudden they've decided to sit down and think about how they should of coded it...
Right, perfectly logical... *rolls eyes*
What is it with people looking at these dumb ass articals and thinking this blatently stupid behaviour is actually positive it really does amazes me..
"I would imagine that if we look into the future at the sixth Blue Hat... there probably won't be anything like the topics discussed at the first and second one, because things will have changed," he said.
This type of this stuff happened upon the realese of XP, everyone thought it was secure and i remember geeks and business people alike preaching how great and secure XP is and how there arnet any problems. A year later the problems a rose, now its time for everyone to go out an by Vista so lets peddle how we as microsoft care about our users security to get them to by Vista, then we'll do what we did before... let it get out of control so when it comes to the next version after vista we can look like the heros again
Why on earth would they want to secure an OS, if it gets too secure there is less of a reason for people to spend hundreds of dallors on the next version..
Joe went back to the store to return another useless wireless card. Not one wireless card that was on the shelves at CompUSA or Best Buy listed Linux driver support, so Joe gave up. That's right: Not one wireless card currently sold at CompUSA and at Best Buy mentions that it is suitable for use with Linux.
Obviously these people have never heard of the ndiswrapper kerenel module that allows just about _ANY_ wifi network card driver that works under windows work just as well under linux!
People if your going to use linux! you need to RTFM!
Whats obviously happened here is that scientists are trying to pass weed off as a beneficial learning tool to in turn introduce it into mainstream scientific practice so they sit in the laboratories and make the most sophisticated bongs known to mankind from bunson burners, test tubes, and beakers. Heck if they're smart enough they can set up their own hydroponics labs and grow it themselves inhouse..
I dont see how having a "microsoft" brand or "norton" or whatever is a big difference to the end user.
Unless micrsoft can actually make money off this endevor then its a waste of time for them, which means they are shipping a defective product and this will have backlashes on microsoft.
Heck we need to consider what AV really is, its just some tool that sits and stops brittany-nude.jpg.exe from being open or allowed to do harm on the pc. The malicious program can still do the harm and cause the same problems.
Insted of making a system to actully fix the problem realistically, ms is putting yet another bandaid on the situation _trying_ to make them look like the victors to the consumers.
Big pull wool over ya face deal here, still the same nonsense ms tactic. What ms needs to really worry about is biting too many hands that feeds them, they've started being more aggressive in the market then ever before and they can only pick so many fights before they start loosing them.
I yearn for the day when ms is just another software developer and not the only software developer, freedom to code slowly slips away from us when we condone yet another market in which microsoft will successfully plug away from the rest of us. We shouldnt let that freedom disappear for the OSS developer or other Businesses. If such a concept does not concern you then why would you really care what happens... norton, ms, mcaffee they all turn your pc into a slug and eat your resources to a dim.
Also i would be looking at code maturity here as an issue as well, norton has been playing the AV game for a while, MS is about to embark on this, i wonder how hard it is for the next worm to break this wonderous AV that is currently in beta stage and cause more millions in losses for people...
I guess MS is just one of those businesses that people get burnt by they then the same person just sticks their hand back into the fire... Dont you find it the least bit curious that they are realeasing it with Vista, and not with their last office package which makes more sence because thats where outlook is packaged and not with the os! or its last service pack with all of its other security components they released? All they are trying to do is sell Vista as being more secure, DUH!
Heck this virus issue has been around since when? the days of 286! virus' have always been an issue, why now all of a sudden MS gets the idea that its time to implement AV? simple more hype so people will blindly purchase MS products and not stear away to linux, which realistcally holds a big threat for them.
I think i was preaching this nonesense since windows 98 was out and about and since then very little has changed, how come all of a sudden its going to change now with this magical vista os appearing, i remember the same bs was said about xp, unhackable, secure, safe... pfft whatever... whatever sells i guess.
I think it was Alan Cox who said that the only safe computer is one that you've unplugged from the wall, went out in the bush and dug a hole and then placed the computer in the hole burried it and then not tell anyone where it is. (maybe wrong about alan cox saying this but it sounds like something he'd say:)
Heck, new intrusion methods are being developed every single day, secure code yes, non executable stack and heap, but what about secure user? what about putting every known secuirty precaution in mind to make the flexability of your pc considerablly limited to stop the user from achiving efficent results with their computing.
Theres always a way, artificial, human or otherwise. Secure coding practices _should_ already be inplace but the reailies are programmers are paid by the hour and deadlines are needed to be met, furthermore to know every single process of making your code 100% secure would require significant upskilling for allot of programmers, pretty much taking them to school again and saying strncpy() NOT strcpy() so on and so fourth...
Sorry about that, 1st time poster.. Here i fixed for you:
Being a linux desktoper, i have to say i feel quite high and dry from all the ISSUES surrounded by windows and i see alot of people arguing that because windows is targetted because its popular. Not the case!
Windows is targetted because its an easy one, linux hacks have been around _before_ windows hacks, buffer overflows and every other tricks in the book has been applied to linux and other *nix's since the dawn of the internets popularity. Windows realistically is a new commer into the server market, compare it to the UNIX Os', BSD, and Linux and its got half the maturity (even less for most of these os's).
As for desktop this is not the case, windows is the dominator in this respect and always has been.
What has happened is the hackers of the internet have found breaking into the desktop has become easy and affective. Microsoft ignorantly enough was not prepared for this, people have been dealing with Virus' on Dos and Windows since 286's and CGA montiors and they were being transmitted on floppy disks and embeeded in versions of Commander Keen or being downloaded off BBS's. What the internet has done is simply made it easier for virus' to spread, thats it and nothing more.
On top of this hackers have now begun their assult, bringing togeather a real issue for Windows security. Microsoft's philosophy since the 286 and Dos days was, simply just ignore virus's as its the users problem/their fault.
Now all the user has to do is visit a website or open an email! and on the server side of things all you to do is just have to have your box plugged in to the internet! (sorry micrsoft but after that pnp flaw alot of servers copped it and your response patch took way too long) and the issue here is that windows is too uniform, with linux this is totally different i.e custom kernels and too many distros to poke a stick at so linux worms are going to have VERY little impact, plus linux admins usually customise their servers in all sorts of configurations, with Windows its simply 2003 server or 2000 server and when worms like the PNP comes out the success rate is much higher.
Microsoft has and always has believed that security is the users problem, but all of a sudden they want to make it their problem... 2 questions have arrisen from this for me and they are... How much extra is this going to cost? and what does it do for windows if this is just another free service? Heck writing patches and updating antivirus is a resource and a cost to them... Wheres the catch? I see 2 major contradictions in microsofts usualy behaviour and it makes me question how good is this service really going to be.
On the Symantec point of view, they've always got the coporate server market selling custom solutions to large corporations, this move from m$ will affect them considerably but it wont cripple them.
No it wasnt, what a load of crap...
It was the regular people who are populuting our oceans with crap killing our sealife and people logging the amzon for fossil fuels to power cars, some guy in the bush doing some recreational hunting isnt the reason why our planet is screwed!
You know i find it a bit of a laugh how most people are dismissing this as a hoax..
For me i find this more plausable then "terroist attack in london" or "microsoft is cheaper to run the linux" sorry but this story doesnt have a reason to exsist it really doesnt, no one would give a rats if a big cat exisisted in australia, heck we have enough dangerous animals live around here then anywhere else in the world, a big black rare cat isnt going to trouble anyone...
Oh and the bit about the cat runing to the left, perfectly plausable, regular tactic for the feline family to attack their opponent with their torso sideon incase they need a quick escape they can run forwards and evade...
Being an aussie and living a fair bit of my life out on farms and in the bush i can safley say he'll get away with it. The story about the cat charging him is obvious bs, but shooting an animal during "hunting" and it not being on the protected species list he wont get busted. Say he shot a croc, he'd be thrown in jail. If he shot a roo or a wild pig all would be fine for him.
Animal cruelty is moreso for domestic pets or protected species...
I think i outlined a concern in my above post and that is, how does this benefit MS if there is no money in it?
I dont understand how this benefits them unless there is a dime in it for them. You look at businesses like symantec, and i have friends who work in AV companies and they agree there is some serous amounts of monitoring / response work having to develop the patches and update then circulating them within short time frame, Now if ms is to do this it means having every windows pc on the internet sucking down AV updates on a regular basis... All these things cost money and last time i checked ms is not one of the most charitable businesses out there.
Its either one of two things, they are going try to sell it off OR its not what its cut out too be, just like the rest of the windows security components, windows dodgy firewall for instance...
Being a linux desktoper, i have to say i feel quite high and dry from all the ISSUES surrounded by windows and i see alot of people arguing that because windows is targetted because its popular. Not the case!
Windows is targetted because its an easy one, linux hacks have been around _before_ windows hacks, buffer overflows and every other tricks in the book has been applied to linux and other *nix's since the dawn of the internets popularity. Windows realistically is a new commer into the server market, compare it to the UNIX Os', BSD, and Linux and its got half the maturity (even less for most of these os's).
As for desktop this is not the case, windows is the dominator in this respect and always has been.
What has happened is the hackers of the internet have found breaking into the desktop has become easy and affective. Microsoft ignorantly enough was not prepared for this, people have been dealing with Virus' on Dos and Windows since 286's and CGA montiors and they were being transmitted on floppy disks and embeeded in versions of Commander Keen or being downloaded off BBS's. What the internet has done is simply made it easier for virus' to spread, thats it and nothing more. Ontop of this hackers have now begun their assult, bringing togeather a real issue for Windows security.
Microsoft's philosophy since the 286 and Dos days was, simply just ignore virus's as its the users problem/their fault. Now all the user has to do is visit a website or open an email! and on the server side of things all you to do is just have to have your box plugged in to the internet! (sorry micrsoft but after that pnp flaw alot of servers copped it and your response patch took way too long) and the issue here is that windows is too uniform, with linux this is totally different i.e custom kernels and too many distros to poke a stick at so linux worms are going to have VERY little impact, plus linux admins usually customise their servers in all sorts of configurations, with Windows its simply 2003 server or 2000 server and when worms like the PNP comes out the success rate is much higher.
Microsoft has and always has believed that security is the users problem, but all of a sudden they want to make it their problem...
2 questions have arrisen from this for me and they are... How much extra is this going to cost? and what does it do for windows if this is just another free service?
Heck writing patches and updating antivirus is a resource and a cost to them... Wheres the catch? I see 2 major contradictions in microsofts usualy behaviour and it makes me question how good is this service really going to be.
On the Symantec point of view, they've always got the coporate server market selling custom solutions to large corporations, this move from m$ will affect them considerably but it wont cripple them.
Slashdot Mirror
You said "how can i believe a story about some cat in the aussie wild is more credable then a story say like the london bombers" and i said "impact and adgenda go hand in hand".
.. then they seem to mop it all up later by changing the flow of the information. I.E like a week after stating it was quite possible that the terrorists may not even known about the bombs in their backpacks making the original reports about the bombings less credable because they used conjecture orignally to form the story in the first place by calling them "suicide bombers" ...
What i am saying is that a high impact stories such as terroist bombings seem to always have 10 different possible adgendas behind them for instance was it really terroists, did the terroists know they had bombs, political modivations, conspiricy theorys, blah blah blah blah the list goes on! The cat story has no real impact on australian society in any way, ie nobody gives a shit here (btw i am australian) its not going to make a nation fall or instill fear into millions therefore it doesnt really matter if it exists or not.
Therefore what the media says about this story is more credable, more factual and broken down into logical information there is less here say and less conjecture.
What happened with the london bombings... conjecture, they forced the story on people they had very little information to go from oringally and they painted their own pictures, then they collected the information and dispursed that afterwards i.e speeches by polititions, then they had indepth storys about the bombers what they did in their lives,etc.
High impact stories seem to be just a race to inform everyone what was going on
Its always the case the media guesses about particualar aspects to fill in the blanks, where in this case the media has very little to guess about here, the tail is real or fake a simple yes or no and definatly not an if but or maybe or propergate what they think has happend or what could of happened.
What you as a reader have to take on board is what you need to discard from media articals as being a peddler to lure readers to become a beliver in a particular movement or belief and be more open minded and say to yourself "just because the news has said something doesnt mean its really is the case, its the media and we all know how it loves to spin nonsense just to grab peoples attention"
A strange analogy but a correct one, for windows anyway. For myself secuirty has always been a customised 'thing' ive always done myself to ensure my home pc or the servers that i run a safe from harm, doesnt mean they cannot be broken into but they stand a good chance from 99.9% of the things that are out there that could possibly cause problems and provided i keep them regulararly patched i feel safe knowing that its going to be tough for anyone to get in. Now not to blow my own horn and rant on about how long ive been doing this and how long ive been doing that, i do have experience with pcs a good solid decade mind you and during that expeirence linux security is something that has been evolving during the time ive been using pcs, ive seen it by watching such sites as bugtraq, neworder, packetstorm, phrack... the list is endless and what do all these places have in common? continuous evolution of bugs and information of secruity flaws, linux has had PLENTY of them and as result it has founded a strong base for security during this time. On these sites windows is looked at as a bit of a haha JOKE because its behind the rest of these multiuser os' in this evolution process. Read the last issue of phrack PERFECT example, there is a chapter about smashing windows stack to get into the system whereas in linux there is an artical about tricking the stack protection patches to then smash the stack/heap. Some silly little conference inviting a bunch of geeks who subscribe to bugtraq and perhaps write these articals for phrack, a) they wont tell ms the real nasty tricks b) its a much bigger issue then a conference once a year. Yes im ignorant, sure whatever, i suggest the silly little wise asses who go "your ignornat, your an idiot" should go and learn something about secruity before commenting about how its wonderful that microsoft decided to devote a WHOLE DAY into learning about secuirty from the very people who are most likley on the other end causing the problems for them ....
Yep, good measure of cluelessness out and about these days ...
They've been focusing on security for a while now, why make comments when you're totalling ignorant?
In the scheme of things, No they havent thats why we have big big companies called symantech and NAI and TrendMicro because they had a plenty big gap to make lots and lots of money out of the fact windows has ignored security for such a long time.. Thank you next please.
Errr... Care to explain why you give more credibility to some guy bringing back a tail of unknown origin, than a recent atrocity in which more than 50 people died, hundreds were injured and thousands affected.
You answered your own question, impact and adgenda.. Seems almost like it goes hand in hand.. what impact does a story like this have, none really so what adgenda does it support? none.
Terrorist attack! huge adgenda... LOTS of impact :) and since when did the death of a large amount of people ever turn them off from making lots of money from it .. makes the media seem almost souless if you think about it!
You don't. It's just more fun to ignorantly bash "Wind0z3".
Yes :D
Yeah its quite different, Apple wouldnt be very concerned with their os as it doesnt hinge their sales like MS... Without windows MS doesnt get your money, without OSX you've still had to buy the entire computer from them.. Logcically it would be quite beneficial for OSX to mindful of secruity because it then has something over MS..
You're an idiot, you think this is the first they've thought of security?
Well it was blue hat v2 so i guess it would be the 2nd time they've thought about it.XP SP2 has yet to have any worms, so obviously they've been thinking about security for a while. What amazes me is how people make opinions without the facts.
We'll see, a large percentage of this type of stuff stays private amoungst hackers and crackers, when it become public is the real issue. But i guess you would no nothing about that. Throw down the gauntlet and challengers will appear.. never under estimate the hacking community, that was microsofts 1st mistake.
Anyone care to explain to me how you get spyware on a computer without browsing to 'not-so-decent-sites' or installing junk software from the Internet?
install windows
So what your saying is, they've nearly completed an operating system which is now past beta stage and is almost ready to be shipped and sold in stores around the world and will be used by millions if not billions of people. Now all of sudden they've decided to sit down and think about how they should of coded it ...
... *rolls eyes*
..
Right, perfectly logical
What is it with people looking at these dumb ass articals and thinking this blatently stupid behaviour is actually positive it really does amazes me
i knew someone who put a spanking brand new 2003 box in a dc not so long ago, didnt run the patches before linking it up ...
3hours and the system had enough spyware on it to sink a battle ship!
I'd laugh thinking this is something humerous that was just said, execpt ive seen this happen!
ummmmm ... DUH!!!!!
This type of this stuff happened upon the realese of XP, everyone thought it was secure and i remember geeks and business people alike preaching how great and secure XP is and how there arnet any problems. A year later the problems a rose, now its time for everyone to go out an by Vista so lets peddle how we as microsoft care about our users security to get them to by Vista, then we'll do what we did before... let it get out of control so when it comes to the next version after vista we can look like the heros again
Why on earth would they want to secure an OS, if it gets too secure there is less of a reason for people to spend hundreds of dallors on the next version..
Joe went back to the store to return another useless wireless card. Not one wireless card that was on the shelves at CompUSA or Best Buy listed Linux driver support, so Joe gave up. That's right: Not one wireless card currently sold at CompUSA and at Best Buy mentions that it is suitable for use with Linux.
Obviously these people have never heard of the ndiswrapper kerenel module that allows just about _ANY_ wifi network card driver that works under windows work just as well under linux!
People if your going to use linux! you need to RTFM!
Whats obviously happened here is that scientists are trying to pass weed off as a beneficial learning tool to in turn introduce it into mainstream scientific practice so they sit in the laboratories and make the most sophisticated bongs known to mankind from bunson burners, test tubes, and beakers. Heck if they're smart enough they can set up their own hydroponics labs and grow it themselves inhouse..
Damn true ...
Put your hand in the fire, you usually pull away and not do that again. Unfortunatly with ms everyone keeps putting their dumb ass hand back in there!
I dont see how having a "microsoft" brand or "norton" or whatever is a big difference to the end user.
... norton, ms, mcaffee they all turn your pc into a slug and eat your resources to a dim.
...
... Dont you find it the least bit curious that they are realeasing it with Vista, and not with their last office package which makes more sence because thats where outlook is packaged and not with the os! or its last service pack with all of its other security components they released? All they are trying to do is sell Vista as being more secure, DUH!
... pfft whatever ... whatever sells i guess.
Unless micrsoft can actually make money off this endevor then its a waste of time for them, which means they are shipping a defective product and this will have backlashes on microsoft.
Heck we need to consider what AV really is, its just some tool that sits and stops brittany-nude.jpg.exe from being open or allowed to do harm on the pc. The malicious program can still do the harm and cause the same problems.
Insted of making a system to actully fix the problem realistically, ms is putting yet another bandaid on the situation _trying_ to make them look like the victors to the consumers.
Big pull wool over ya face deal here, still the same nonsense ms tactic. What ms needs to really worry about is biting too many hands that feeds them, they've started being more aggressive in the market then ever before and they can only pick so many fights before they start loosing them.
I yearn for the day when ms is just another software developer and not the only software developer, freedom to code slowly slips away from us when we condone yet another market in which microsoft will successfully plug away from the rest of us. We shouldnt let that freedom disappear for the OSS developer or other Businesses. If such a concept does not concern you then why would you really care what happens
Also i would be looking at code maturity here as an issue as well, norton has been playing the AV game for a while, MS is about to embark on this, i wonder how hard it is for the next worm to break this wonderous AV that is currently in beta stage and cause more millions in losses for people
I guess MS is just one of those businesses that people get burnt by they then the same person just sticks their hand back into the fire
Heck this virus issue has been around since when? the days of 286! virus' have always been an issue, why now all of a sudden MS gets the idea that its time to implement AV? simple more hype so people will blindly purchase MS products and not stear away to linux, which realistcally holds a big threat for them.
I think i was preaching this nonesense since windows 98 was out and about and since then very little has changed, how come all of a sudden its going to change now with this magical vista os appearing, i remember the same bs was said about xp, unhackable, secure, safe
I think it was Alan Cox who said that the only safe computer is one that you've unplugged from the wall, went out in the bush and dug a hole and then placed the computer in the hole burried it and then not tell anyone where it is. (maybe wrong about alan cox saying this but it sounds like something he'd say :)
Heck, new intrusion methods are being developed every single day, secure code yes, non executable stack and heap, but what about secure user? what about putting every known secuirty precaution in mind to make the flexability of your pc considerablly limited to stop the user from achiving efficent results with their computing.
Theres always a way, artificial, human or otherwise. Secure coding practices _should_ already be inplace but the reailies are programmers are paid by the hour and deadlines are needed to be met, furthermore to know every single process of making your code 100% secure would require significant upskilling for allot of programmers, pretty much taking them to school again and saying strncpy() NOT strcpy() so on and so fourth...
Sorry about that, 1st time poster.. Here i fixed for you:
Being a linux desktoper, i have to say i feel quite high and dry from all the ISSUES surrounded by windows and i see alot of people arguing that because windows is targetted because its popular. Not the case!
Windows is targetted because its an easy one, linux hacks have been around _before_ windows hacks, buffer overflows and every other tricks in the book has been applied to linux and other *nix's since the dawn of the internets popularity. Windows realistically is a new commer into the server market, compare it to the UNIX Os', BSD, and Linux and its got half the maturity (even less for most of these os's).
As for desktop this is not the case, windows is the dominator in this respect and always has been.
What has happened is the hackers of the internet have found breaking into the desktop has become easy and affective. Microsoft ignorantly enough was not prepared for this, people have been dealing with Virus' on Dos and Windows since 286's and CGA montiors and they were being transmitted on floppy disks and embeeded in versions of Commander Keen or being downloaded off BBS's. What the internet has done is simply made it easier for virus' to spread, thats it and nothing more.
On top of this hackers have now begun their assult, bringing togeather a real issue for Windows security. Microsoft's philosophy since the 286 and Dos days was, simply just ignore virus's as its the users problem/their fault.
Now all the user has to do is visit a website or open an email! and on the server side of things all you to do is just have to have your box plugged in to the internet! (sorry micrsoft but after that pnp flaw alot of servers copped it and your response patch took way too long) and the issue here is that windows is too uniform, with linux this is totally different i.e custom kernels and too many distros to poke a stick at so linux worms are going to have VERY little impact, plus linux admins usually customise their servers in all sorts of configurations, with Windows its simply 2003 server or 2000 server and when worms like the PNP comes out the success rate is much higher.
Microsoft has and always has believed that security is the users problem, but all of a sudden they want to make it their problem... 2 questions have arrisen from this for me and they are... How much extra is this going to cost? and what does it do for windows if this is just another free service? Heck writing patches and updating antivirus is a resource and a cost to them... Wheres the catch? I see 2 major contradictions in microsofts usualy behaviour and it makes me question how good is this service really going to be.
On the Symantec point of view, they've always got the coporate server market selling custom solutions to large corporations, this move from m$ will affect them considerably but it wont cripple them.
No it wasnt, what a load of crap... It was the regular people who are populuting our oceans with crap killing our sealife and people logging the amzon for fossil fuels to power cars, some guy in the bush doing some recreational hunting isnt the reason why our planet is screwed!
You know i find it a bit of a laugh how most people are dismissing this as a hoax..
...
For me i find this more plausable then "terroist attack in london" or "microsoft is cheaper to run the linux" sorry but this story doesnt have a reason to exsist it really doesnt, no one would give a rats if a big cat exisisted in australia, heck we have enough dangerous animals live around here then anywhere else in the world, a big black rare cat isnt going to trouble anyone...
Oh and the bit about the cat runing to the left, perfectly plausable, regular tactic for the feline family to attack their opponent with their torso sideon incase they need a quick escape they can run forwards and evade
Being an aussie and living a fair bit of my life out on farms and in the bush i can safley say he'll get away with it. The story about the cat charging him is obvious bs, but shooting an animal during "hunting" and it not being on the protected species list he wont get busted. Say he shot a croc, he'd be thrown in jail. If he shot a roo or a wild pig all would be fine for him.
Animal cruelty is moreso for domestic pets or protected species...
Youve made quite an interesting point...
I think i outlined a concern in my above post and that is, how does this benefit MS if there is no money in it?
I dont understand how this benefits them unless there is a dime in it for them. You look at businesses like symantec, and i have friends who work in AV companies and they agree there is some serous amounts of monitoring / response work having to develop the patches and update then circulating them within short time frame, Now if ms is to do this it means having every windows pc on the internet sucking down AV updates on a regular basis... All these things cost money and last time i checked ms is not one of the most charitable businesses out there.
Its either one of two things, they are going try to sell it off OR its not what its cut out too be, just like the rest of the windows security components, windows dodgy firewall for instance...
Being a linux desktoper, i have to say i feel quite high and dry from all the ISSUES surrounded by windows and i see alot of people arguing that because windows is targetted because its popular. Not the case! Windows is targetted because its an easy one, linux hacks have been around _before_ windows hacks, buffer overflows and every other tricks in the book has been applied to linux and other *nix's since the dawn of the internets popularity. Windows realistically is a new commer into the server market, compare it to the UNIX Os', BSD, and Linux and its got half the maturity (even less for most of these os's). As for desktop this is not the case, windows is the dominator in this respect and always has been. What has happened is the hackers of the internet have found breaking into the desktop has become easy and affective. Microsoft ignorantly enough was not prepared for this, people have been dealing with Virus' on Dos and Windows since 286's and CGA montiors and they were being transmitted on floppy disks and embeeded in versions of Commander Keen or being downloaded off BBS's. What the internet has done is simply made it easier for virus' to spread, thats it and nothing more. Ontop of this hackers have now begun their assult, bringing togeather a real issue for Windows security. Microsoft's philosophy since the 286 and Dos days was, simply just ignore virus's as its the users problem/their fault. Now all the user has to do is visit a website or open an email! and on the server side of things all you to do is just have to have your box plugged in to the internet! (sorry micrsoft but after that pnp flaw alot of servers copped it and your response patch took way too long) and the issue here is that windows is too uniform, with linux this is totally different i.e custom kernels and too many distros to poke a stick at so linux worms are going to have VERY little impact, plus linux admins usually customise their servers in all sorts of configurations, with Windows its simply 2003 server or 2000 server and when worms like the PNP comes out the success rate is much higher. Microsoft has and always has believed that security is the users problem, but all of a sudden they want to make it their problem... 2 questions have arrisen from this for me and they are... How much extra is this going to cost? and what does it do for windows if this is just another free service? Heck writing patches and updating antivirus is a resource and a cost to them... Wheres the catch? I see 2 major contradictions in microsofts usualy behaviour and it makes me question how good is this service really going to be. On the Symantec point of view, they've always got the coporate server market selling custom solutions to large corporations, this move from m$ will affect them considerably but it wont cripple them.