__/ [Robert Newson] on Saturday 05 November 2005 23:01 \__
> DFS wrote:
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>If you insist, try alt.legal, or better try a newsgroup that is alive
>>>such as uk.legal. I recently ignited a big thread there. I asked
>>>the readers about if Microsoft can be blamed for these 1000+
>>>zombies that attack my site every day.
>> I hope uk.legal told you to stuff it.
There were people on both sides. That's why the thread developed.
>> The virus writers and denial of service attackers are responsible for
>> zombies. Nobody else
Who is responsible for leaving those door open? If a driver is involved in a
car accident and the seatbelt breaks loose leading to death, do you blame
the driver for getting involved in the accident? Do you investigate what
caused the seatbelt to break loose?
> Though MS certainly does a good job of aiding and abetting them in doing it
> - there have been virus problems with MS operating systems since Win 3.1,
> or earlier, ie DOS (when I worked for a computer retailer (until '94), I
> had my first experience of a virus on a DOS machine and Windows 3.1 was
> being sold about then) - over the last 12 years they have failed to make
> any headway in plugging the exploits that viruses use; in fact, it'd
> probably be more accurate to say that they have made headway in helping
> them by making more
> exploits possible. Their most recent attempts at plugging seem to be to
> buy an anti-virus company['s software], and yet they have the source code
> to the OS and so should be able to plug the holes.
Here is a message I recently received. It strengthens your point.
im thinking here of a bug that effects windows 95. if you delete a large
number of files sometimes the system can sort of freeze, it doesnt crash, it
just does nothing because it waits for a thread to run that doesnt exist. m$
were made aware of this after the first edition of windows 95, when windows
95 usb came out in 96 the bug was still there. it was still there in windows
98, windows 98se and was finally fixed in windows me. it took them five
years to fix a bug they knew existed.
as for the EULA, can someone say if they are actually legal. everything ive
read about them suggests otherwise. also, if a person buys a computer with
windows pre installed how is the EULA even relevant, the consumer has no
chance to actually read it before running windows because windows is pre
installed. the EULA is not provided before the sale of the comptuer
happens... so where is the legality in it on pre instaklled machines?
> I don't see these same problems with viruses for *nix - all the cracked
> machines I have ever known (since I started using *nix about 18 years ago),
> have been done by someone and not an automatic program (aka virus).
The operating system was built correctly from the ground up, not allowing
untrusted sources to execute whatever they desired.
Roy S. Schestowitz | Real E-mail -> Harvest -> Fraud -> Spammers profit
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
3:20am up 2 days 23:18, 5 users, load average: 0.26, 0.38, 0.43
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms