On 2005-10-30, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
> __/ [Sinister Midget] on Sunday 30 October 2005 12:00 \__
>
>> On 2005-10-29, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted
>> something concerning:
>>> Microsoft have realised that there was a critical security flaw, which
>>> potentially converted Windows machines into zombies. They patched up the
>>> O/S...
>>>
>>> http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1879102,00.asp
>>
>> If they'd paid me a billion dollars, I would have told them they had
>> holes in their software that spawned zombies 5 or 10 years ago. They
>> always have. Unless they start from scratch, they always will.
>
>
> Somebody has already told them about the idiotic loopholes. He even wrote a
> formal report about it. Microsoft continue with their arrogance and it
> doesn't seem like they even care about the havoc their mistakes have wreaked
> in cyberspace.
>
> Speaking of starting from scratch,
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112743680328349448,00.html?mod=todays_us_page_one
>
><snip>
>
> REDMOND, Wash. ? Jim Allchin, a senior Microsoft Corp. executive, walked
> into Bill Gates?s office here one day in July last year to deliver a
> bombshell about the next generation of Microsoft Windows.
>
> ?It?s not going to work,? Mr. Allchin says he told the Microsoft
> chairman. The new version, code-named Longhorn, was so complex its writers
> would never be able to make it run properly.
>
> The news got even worse: Longhorn was irredeemable because Microsoft
> engineers were building it just as they had always built software.
> Throughout its history, Microsoft had let thousands of programmers each
> produce their own piece of computer code, then stitched it together into one
> sprawling program. Now, Mr. Allchin argued, the jig was up. Microsoft needed
> to start over.
>
></snip>
>
> Read the last sentence again, if needed.
I know. Now All-chin is going to quit. Right after longGone/Fister is
released.
Sorta like when somebody in politics quits right after some action is
taken, often an action that has been known and in the making for
months. They time their departure to coincide with the action being
taken for the purpose of calling attention to their disagreement.
Unfortunately, they've already made it known that it's going to happen
at that time. All-chin's "retirement" won't have the same effect it
would had he waited until the day after release to turn in his notice.
>>> But guess what? A mistake was made. There is still a loophole. What does
>>> Microsoft do? Release another patch? Oh, no. They go after the hijackers:
>>>
>>>
> http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=0HJBRZJ2FG3A0QSNDBECKHSCJUMEKJVN?articleID=172901083&pgno=1
>>
>> There's more money to be made from suing people. There's more good will
>> fostered when people _think_ you're doing something you aren't, but
>> makes it sound like you're serious.
>
>
> They recently chased some spammers and prosecuted them. What a crusade
> Microsoft is doing... a service to society, eh? Needless to mention, it is
> often hijacked Windows machines that despatch that spam (see article).
> Others would also explain to you why, from an historical viewpoint,
> Microsoft encouraged the rise of spam too. I am too young to be aware of it.
>
>
>>> In the midst of it all, my site is getting hammered by zombies (over 1,000
>>> per day since the beginning of the month).
>>
>> You should be paying MICROS~1 hundreds of thousands of dollars a year
>> to overcome this minor annoyance. They'll let you call them up for the
>> right amount. They'll give you numbers to refer to when you call them
>> back to tell them it's still happening.
>>
>>> When will Microsoft get their s**t together and let the rest of the world
>>> leave in peace, i.e. without zombies? Will they ever properly test what
>>> they unleash to the market?
>>
>> When will leopards change to elephants?
>
>
> The law among ISP's must change. Here at the University we disconnect people
> who are hosts to active viruses that scan ports. The same policy should
> apply to people whose machine is susceptible to hijackers. Period.
I'm in favor or laws requiring ISPs to disconnect machines that are
demonstrated, beyond a doubt, to be spambots or zombies. Nothing will
work to make people change their habits (and perhaps software) faster
than cutting their connections to the world.
--
Windows: Pay more, expect less.
|
|
