On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 05:11:44 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Vista makes promises with regards to security only because it /can/. Vista
> has not hit the market yet. Does anyone still remember Nomad, the
> command-line tool which was bound to arrive with Vista? Even before it was
> released, an Austrian guy had discovered a serious vulnerability in it.
> Monad's inclusion was postponed and its inclusion in Vista was conceded.
God, Roy. Why is it you believe every rumor you hear?
Monad's inclusion had been postponed months earlier. Additionally, there
was no vulnerability in Monad, at least nothing you couldn't do in any
other shell (including Bash).
Here's the viruses themselves:
http://old.wheresthebeef.co.uk/pictures/news/vista-monad-virus-scripts.txt
As you can see, all they do is insert some code into other scripts. It
does stuff that shell scripts are supposed to do, and you could write the
exact same thing in bash if you wanted to.
> More to bear in mind: XP Service Pack III is due around 2007. Longhorn
> reached a dead end and suffered an avalanche that had it fall back to the
> code base of Windows XP Server 2003. This happened less than a year ago.
You are seriously misrepresenting that article. Nowhere in it does it say
anything about "fall[ing] back to the code base of Windows XP Server 2003".
You made that up.
The article is talking about Allchin's plan to restructure Windows.
Further, Vista is, and always was, based on the Windows Server 2003 code
base. Despite people like you repeating that it was supposed to e some
kind of rewrite, it never was, nor was it supposed to be.
> Firefox offers many plug-ins (=functionality), which Redmond could never
> boast given their closed-source development model.
IE has always had plug-ins. Your comment is a non-sequiter.
|
|
