Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 01 March 2008 08:48 : \____
>
>> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Jerry McBride wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hell, I'll even go so far as to suggest that msft may be the
>>>> originator of some, if not all, of the windows virus, malware and
>>>> worms. Who better to know the attack vectors, than the programmer of
>>>> the OS itself?
>>>
>>> Don't know about the Vole specifically, but I've long suspected the AV
>>> vendors of fuelling the same fires they purport to extinguish. Given the
>>> covert nature of Windows development, it seems reasonable that Microsoft
>>> are involved somehow, although much can be achieved with reverse
>>> engineering, as many FOSS projects have already demonstrated.
>>
>> Be in no doubt, it's in the interests of AV companies to fuel some fear.
>> I'm quite sure that they've considered writing viruses, even if they
>> haven't actually done it...
>>
>>>
>>> The vast number of exploits do seem to indicate Microsoft's complicity.
>>> Either that, or there's more hackers using computer's than regular
>>> users, which seems unlikely. Of course the cynical answer is that
>>> Windows must be trivial to hack, not that I have any personal
>>> experience, beyond that of a Malware victim. The closest I ever got was
>>> experimenting with TSRs back in the DOS days, and Amiga coolcapture and
>>> coldcapture vectors before that. No I wasn't writing viruses :) I was
>>> experimenting with bootable ram disks.
>>>
>>
>> Personally, I still believe that Microsoft just write sh1te code. I
>> don't think that they care all that much about AV companies, but they
>> *do* care about selling an improved version of the same thing every year
>> or so. Gates even said so, back in about 1994 or so. Therefore, I
>> agree with the view that problems are deliberately not "properly" fixed,
>> but I doubt Microsoft have the skills to selectively drip security
>> problems in, rather, I suspect that the lack the skills to write secure
>> code.
>
> Watch what Kempin said about sufficiency and having to make programs more
> resource hungry. That's 'Microsoft think'. Of course, in a competitive market,
> this type of behaviour won't prevail
I agree; their approach has been to write deliberately bloated code in
order to drive replacement hardware sales. By changing file formats in
their office suites, they've forced incompatibility between different
versions, thus also forcing otherwise quite contented people into an
upgrade cycle they neither needed nor wanted. It's total monopoly
abuse.
>
> Behold low-cost Linux laptops galore.
>
The inevitable consequence of their approach... the public, in the end,
reach for freedom.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
