Rival - Vista security - GONE - Linux

This is a discussion on Rival - Vista security - GONE - Linux ; This week at the Black Hat Security Conference two security researchers will discuss their findings which could completely bring Windows Vista to its knees. Mark Dowd of IBM Internet Security Systems (ISS) and Alexander Sotirov, of VMware Inc. have discovered ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 320

Thread: Rival - Vista security - GONE

  1. Rival - Vista security - GONE


    This week at the Black Hat Security Conference two security
    researchers will discuss their findings which could completely bring
    Windows Vista to its knees.

    Mark Dowd of IBM Internet Security Systems (ISS) and Alexander
    Sotirov, of VMware Inc. have discovered a technique that can be used
    to bypass all memory protection safeguards that Microsoft built into
    Windows Vista. These new methods have been used to get around Vista's
    Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), Data Execution Prevention
    (DEP) and other protections by loading malicious content through an
    active web browser. The researchers were able to load whatever content
    they wanted into any location they wished on a user's machine using a
    variety of objects, such as Java, ActiveX and even .NET objects. This
    feat was achieved by taking advantage of the way that Internet
    Explorer (and other browsers) handle active scripting in the Operating
    System.

    While this may seem like any standard security hole, other researchers
    say that the work is a major breakthrough and there is very little
    that Microsoft can do to fix the problems. These attacks work
    differently than other security exploits, as they aren't based on any
    new Windows vulnerabilities, but instead take advantage of the way
    Microsoft chose to guard Vista's fundamental architecture. According
    to Dino Dai Zovi, a popular security researcher, "the genius of this
    is that it's completely reusable. They have attacks that let them load
    chosen content to a chosen location with chosen permissions. That's
    completely game over."




    http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/0...by-new-exploit

  2. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:45:08 -0700 (PDT), Rex Ballard wrote:
    >
    >This week at the Black Hat Security Conference two security
    >researchers will discuss their findings which could completely bring
    >Windows Vista to its knees.


    >Mark Dowd of IBM Internet Security Systems (ISS) and Alexander
    >Sotirov, of VMware Inc. have discovered a technique that can be used
    >to bypass all memory protection safeguards that Microsoft built into
    >Windows Vista. These new methods have been used to get around Vista's
    >Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), Data Execution Prevention
    >(DEP) and other protections by loading malicious content through an
    >active web browser. The researchers were able to load whatever content
    >they wanted into any location they wished on a user's machine using a
    >variety of objects, such as Java, ActiveX and even .NET objects. This
    >feat was achieved by taking advantage of the way that Internet
    >Explorer (and other browsers) handle active scripting in the Operating
    >System.



    That's what you get when the standard user is an admin.

    The mountains of bandaids on the heavyweight applications don't change the
    fact that user has the ability to overwrite any part of the system at any
    time.

  3. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Rex Ballard wrote:



    It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

  4. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    > Rex Ballard wrote:
    >
    > It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.


    Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    doors since 1997.

    Right after IE4 was released, back in 1997, Tracy Reed at www.ultraviolet.org
    put up a site that showed how easy it was to circumvent ANY security
    mechanisms with simple web pages that abused VBScript and ActiveX
    controls.

    About 3 weeks later, he announced that Microsoft had gotten a court
    order and injunction ordering him to take down the information,
    because of "damage to brand" and "intent to encourage security
    violations".

    Over the last 10 years, it's been the same scenario several times.
    Someone posts examples of how easy it is to hack Microsoft using
    vbscript, javascript, and .NET, and a few weeks later, they have taken
    down their content, putting a notice that they have taken it down as a
    result of a court order.

    The latest "wide open back door" is OpenXML, which makes it really
    trivial to feed trojans into almost any Microsoft Office document.

    Many times, when the perpetrators of major viruses are caught, it's
    discovered that the means used to actually spread the viruses was
    these same trivial tactics. Often the viruses, worms, trojans, and
    malware that we see with Antivirus are spread using these same
    mechanisms.

  5. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Rex Ballard wrote:
    > On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>
    >> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

    >
    > Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    > "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    > doors since 1997.
    >


    Any O/S can be exploited in the wrong hands. I don't care if it's MS,
    Linux, Apple or whatever. None of them are bullet proof or ironclad, and
    if you think one of them is, then your fooling yourself.

    > Right after IE4 was released, back in 1997, Tracy Reed at www.ultraviolet.org
    > put up a site that showed how easy it was to circumvent ANY security
    > mechanisms with simple web pages that abused VBScript and ActiveX
    > controls.
    >


    I already know that. One of the things I do is develop Web solutions,
    along with non Web solutions.

    One doesn't use IE and only uses IE at sites that IE is required and are
    trusted. One doesn't go to dubious sites where on can be exploited using
    IE. It's as simple as that.


    > About 3 weeks later, he announced that Microsoft had gotten a court
    > order and injunction ordering him to take down the information,
    > because of "damage to brand" and "intent to encourage security
    > violations".
    >

    So?

    > Over the last 10 years, it's been the same scenario several times.
    > Someone posts examples of how easy it is to hack Microsoft using
    > vbscript, javascript, and .NET, and a few weeks later, they have taken
    > down their content, putting a notice that they have taken it down as a
    > result of a court order.


    All one has to do is not run as Admin on the machine to circumvent those
    kind of attacks. But most don't run as Admin when they surf the Web, and
    anything can be used to attack via a Web page once the user clicks and
    is Admin.
    >
    > The latest "wide open back door" is OpenXML, which makes it really
    > trivial to feed trojans into almost any Microsoft Office document.


    You circumvent that by not opening documents from unknown sources, which
    is not bullet proof, but it goes a long way in the prevention.

    >
    > Many times, when the perpetrators of major viruses are caught, it's
    > discovered that the means used to actually spread the viruses was
    > these same trivial tactics. Often the viruses, worms, trojans, and
    > malware that we see with Antivirus are spread using these same
    > mechanisms.


    I know all about how exploits happen. One prevents exploits by using
    prevention measures such a practicing safe hex, as much as possible.

    An ounce of prevention goes a long way, along with hardening the O/S to
    attack.

    http://www.claymania.com/safe-hex.html

  6. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:

    > Rex Ballard wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.


    Nah, it's simply stating the obvious. The grass is green, the sky is blue,
    the pope is a catholic, and Windows is insecure crap. Nothing new there.

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  7. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Richard Rasker wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

    >
    > Nah, it's simply stating the obvious. The grass is green, the sky is blue,
    > the pope is a catholic, and Windows is insecure crap. Nothing new there.


    In your wrong hands, I would suspect so, and nothing new from you either.

  8. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ Rex Ballard on Tuesday 12 August 2008 09:32 : \____

    > On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>
    >> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

    >
    > Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    > "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    > doors since 1997.
    >
    > Right after IE4 was released, back in 1997, Tracy Reed at www.ultraviolet.org
    > put up a site that showed how easy it was to circumvent ANY security
    > mechanisms with simple web pages that abused VBScript and ActiveX
    > controls.
    >
    > About 3 weeks later, he announced that Microsoft had gotten a court
    > order and injunction ordering him to take down the information,
    > because of "damage to brand" and "intent to encourage security
    > violations".



    Can you find this announcement for me?


    > Over the last 10 years, it's been the same scenario several times.
    > Someone posts examples of how easy it is to hack Microsoft using
    > vbscript, javascript, and .NET, and a few weeks later, they have taken
    > down their content, putting a notice that they have taken it down as a
    > result of a court order.
    >
    > The latest "wide open back door" is OpenXML, which makes it really
    > trivial to feed trojans into almost any Microsoft Office document.
    >
    > Many times, when the perpetrators of major viruses are caught, it's
    > discovered that the means used to actually spread the viruses was
    > these same trivial tactics. Often the viruses, worms, trojans, and
    > malware that we see with Antivirus are spread using these same
    > mechanisms.


    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Anonymity - established 2001, Google Groups
    http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Tasks: 195 total, 1 running, 194 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
    http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkihdqkACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5jgACfcMjyqp//9+K4QYV9ko65MTvu
    XFYAmwbPYn0owpZr5IvFXaNn17+u/7dR
    =RTtj
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  9. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:

    >Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>
    >> Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>
    >>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

    >>
    >> Nah, it's simply stating the obvious. The grass is green, the sky is blue,
    >> the pope is a catholic, and Windows is insecure crap. Nothing new there.

    >
    >In your wrong hands, I would suspect so, and nothing new from you either.


    In his "wrong hands", huh? I guess you believe that the vast majority
    of Windows users are computer-saavy, are well-aware of the security
    issues, and so are able to "stay clean", huh?

    Idiot.


  10. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:

    > Richard Rasker wrote:
    >> Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>
    >>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

    >>
    >> Nah, it's simply stating the obvious. The grass is green, the sky is
    >> blue, the pope is a catholic, and Windows is insecure crap. Nothing new
    >> there.

    >
    > In your wrong hands, I would suspect so, and nothing new from you either.


    Sure, Joe Sixpack is born with a Windows gene, so Windows is automatically
    the very best choice for Joe Sixpack, and never gives Joe Sixpack any
    trouble whatsoever -- and all this without Joe Sixpack knowing anything
    about computers, at that.
    It's just a sad twist of irony that only those who actually know a bit or
    two about computers complain about Windows being insecure, because they are
    so wrong; and Joe Sixpack can testify to that, because he knows what he's
    talking about -- or actually, he doesn't, which makes it all the more true.

    And oh, that half-billion or so Windows zombie computers are just a figment
    of the imagination of a handful of Windows haters, and nothing to worry
    about. As are reports that the millions of Linux desktops in use are
    somehow totally unaffected by any malware at all.

    Yeah, right.

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  11. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Richard Rasker wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >> Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>> Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.
    >>> Nah, it's simply stating the obvious. The grass is green, the sky is
    >>> blue, the pope is a catholic, and Windows is insecure crap. Nothing new
    >>> there.

    >> In your wrong hands, I would suspect so, and nothing new from you either.

    >
    > Sure, Joe Sixpack is born with a Windows gene, so Windows is automatically
    > the very best choice for Joe Sixpack, and never gives Joe Sixpack any
    > trouble whatsoever -- and all this without Joe Sixpack knowing anything
    > about computers, at that.


    So Joe Sixpacks and Larry 24Cans are the ones you covet that must come
    over to the Linux platform. It's going to be the same Joe Sixpacks and
    Larry 24Cans singing and dancing on that platform, when and if the Joe
    Sixpacks and Larry 24Cans get there. Linux is not going to be immune to
    the Joe Sixpacks or the Larry 24Cans. There are no gods, supermen or
    superwomen writing for Linux, none.

    Your point is moot.

    > It's just a sad twist of irony that only those who actually know a bit or
    > two about computers complain about Windows being insecure, because they are
    > so wrong; and Joe Sixpack can testify to that, because he knows what he's
    > talking about -- or actually, he doesn't, which makes it all the more true.


    This Joe SixPack has been in IT since 1971 using most of the O/S
    platforms over the years and still going strong professionally. There is
    nothing *you* can tell this Joe Sixpack about anything concerning
    computers -- nothing you can tell this Joe Sixpack period.

    Your point is moot. And I don't like negative people. If you can't come
    positive, then don't show at all.
    >
    > And oh, that half-billion or so Windows zombie computers are just a figment
    > of the imagination of a handful of Windows haters, and nothing to worry
    > about. As are reports that the millions of Linux desktops in use are
    > somehow totally unaffected by any malware at all.


    You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    what O/S it is either.

    >
    > Yeah, right.


    I not interested in your right. Your right means nothing to me.

  12. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:
    > Rex Ballard wrote:
    >> On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>
    >>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.

    >>
    >> Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    >> "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    >> doors since 1997.
    >>

    >
    > Any O/S can be exploited in the wrong hands. I don't care if it's MS,
    > Linux, Apple or whatever. None of them are bullet proof or ironclad, and
    > if you think one of them is, then your fooling yourself.


    Well, there's three main positions:

    Bulletproof: A theoretical position, as you state no OS is "hackerproof".

    Ironclad: The best case to hope for. Wearing as much armour as possible:
    user has sufficient rights to operate his system and no more. OS
    designed with proper user rights from the get go. In this scenario you
    still won't withstand hardened attack but the average script kiddy or
    botnet will bounce right off. If a part of the suit or armour gets too
    weak, replace it. This would be Linux and most of the other 'Nix's.

    Standing bent over, facing away with your pants around your ankles
    shouting "Hello sailor!". No thought to user privs from the word go.
    Allow apps to run with admin privs. Spend 10 years turning the target
    this way and that attempting to deny entry whilst allowing the user to
    "click here to face the original way", blithely ignoring the fact that
    he *still* ends up stood there with his arse in the air waiting for
    attack. Hope that you or someone can build a fence high enough to
    obscure his butthole, again ignoring the army ants that come along and
    tear the fences down faster than you can build them. This would be the
    windopes approach.

    The sooner M$ retire windopes and build a proper OS with proper privs
    from the word go the better. The keeping compatibility approach that
    they've been on for the last 15 years just aint gonna cut it no more.
    Time to start with a blank slate.

  13. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    On 2008-08-12, chrisv claimed:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >
    >>Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.
    >>>
    >>> Nah, it's simply stating the obvious. The grass is green, the sky is blue,
    >>> the pope is a catholic, and Windows is insecure crap. Nothing new there.

    >>
    >>In your wrong hands, I would suspect so, and nothing new from you either.

    >
    > In his "wrong hands", huh? I guess you believe that the vast majority
    > of Windows users are computer-saavy, are well-aware of the security
    > issues, and so are able to "stay clean", huh?
    >
    > Idiot.


    Diminutive MD 20/20: Another drunken troll.

    --
    When I hear of a long time smoker dying of lung cancer I think 'That's
    too bad, but they made their choices'. When I hear about companies
    getting screwed by Microsoft I think the same thing.
    ---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
    http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups

  14. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    chrisv wrote:
    >
    > In his "wrong hands", huh? I guess you believe that the vast majority
    > of Windows users are computer-saavy, are well-aware of the security
    > issues, and so are able to "stay clean", huh?
    >



    Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts. But for me,
    yes I am savvy enough to keep any computer O/S clean, because I have
    taken the time and/or will take the time, and I have the expertise to do so.

    And this coming from the infamous chirsv that has trolled the Internet
    from one side to the other. I have seen you in action over the years
    harassing people and then doing your *plonk* and run routine that you
    are so infamous for that you been doing for years. You are a super
    troll bar none. I am surprised you didn't issue your usual plonk and run.

    > Idiot.
    >


    You take a hard look at yourself in the mirror, because the times I have
    seen you, you are far from being perfect. I really think that you have
    some serious mental issues you need to seek professional help on.

    You're out here on the Internet way too much to be sane.

  15. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Sinister Midget wrote:

    >
    > Diminutive MD 20/20: Another drunken troll.
    >


    As for you, what can be said about you? You are something. I don't know
    what you are, but you are something very sinister.

  16. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:

    >chrisv wrote:
    >>
    >> In his "wrong hands", huh? I guess you believe that the vast majority
    >> of Windows users are computer-saavy, are well-aware of the security
    >> issues, and so are able to "stay clean", huh?

    >
    >Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    >suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.


    Obviously, some O/S are more susceptable to attack than others. I
    don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.

    >But for me,
    >yes I am savvy enough to keep any computer O/S clean, because I have
    >taken the time and/or will take the time, and I have the expertise to do so.


    You are not the issue. The issue is the tragically poor Windows
    security model, which renders it, really, unfit for the masses that it
    purports to serve. I acknowledge that it works sort of OK for
    experts, or in corporate environments where experts protect the users.

    >And this coming from the infamous chirsv that has trolled the Internet
    >from one side to the other. I have seen you in action over the years
    >harassing people and then doing your *plonk* and run routine that you
    >are so infamous for that you been doing for years. You are a super
    >troll bar none. I am surprised you didn't issue your usual plonk and run.


    If someone doesn't like my postings, they are free to filter them.
    Unlike you, I don't nym-shift, so it need only be done once.

    > > Idiot.

    >
    >You take a hard look at yourself in the mirror, because the times I have
    >seen you, you are far from being perfect.


    I'm about as "perfect" as Linux is. 8)

    >I really think that you have
    >some serious mental issues you need to seek professional help on.
    >
    >You're out here on the Internet way too much to be sane.


    LOL You got me there! 8)


  17. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>> On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.
    >>>
    >>> Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    >>> "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    >>> doors since 1997.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Any O/S can be exploited in the wrong hands. I don't care if it's MS,
    >> Linux, Apple or whatever. None of them are bullet proof or ironclad,
    >> and if you think one of them is, then your fooling yourself.

    >
    > Well, there's three main positions:
    >
    > Bulletproof: A theoretical position, as you state no OS is "hackerproof".
    >
    > Ironclad: The best case to hope for. Wearing as much armour as possible:
    > user has sufficient rights to operate his system and no more.


    No, users must be educated like I was educated on how to protect the O/S.

    > OS
    > designed with proper user rights from the get go. In this scenario you
    > still won't withstand hardened attack but the average script kiddy or
    > botnet will bounce right off. If a part of the suit or armour gets too
    > weak, replace it. This would be Linux and most of the other 'Nix's.


    I don't have a problem using the MS or the Linux platform, but neither
    one of them are all that. You can believe that about .Nix, but I have
    been doing this for too long to know better.
    >
    > Standing bent over, facing away with your pants around your ankles
    > shouting "Hello sailor!". No thought to user privs from the word go.
    > Allow apps to run with admin privs. Spend 10 years turning the target
    > this way and that attempting to deny entry whilst allowing the user to
    > "click here to face the original way", blithely ignoring the fact that
    > he *still* ends up stood there with his arse in the air waiting for
    > attack. Hope that you or someone can build a fence high enough to
    > obscure his butthole, again ignoring the army ants that come along and
    > tear the fences down faster than you can build them. This would be the
    > windopes approach.


    I don't respect talk like this. Therefore, I must toss your opinion in
    the trash can, because you don't seem sane here.
    >
    > The sooner M$ retire windopes and build a proper OS with proper privs
    > from the word go the better. The keeping compatibility approach that
    > they've been on for the last 15 years just aint gonna cut it no more.
    > Time to start with a blank slate.


    The blank slate started with .Net. They will get around to the O/S. The
    desktop O/S(s) are going to the waste side anyway, including the *.nic's.

  18. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    Little Mad Dog wrote:
    > Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    >> Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>> On Aug 12, 1:17 am, Little Mad Dog wrote:
    >>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It's a Chicken Little post and Chicken Little hype.
    >>>>
    >>>> Not exactly. It's actually a well known exploit that shows that
    >>>> "nothing has changed". If anything Microsoft has opened MORE back
    >>>> doors since 1997.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Any O/S can be exploited in the wrong hands. I don't care if it's MS,
    >>> Linux, Apple or whatever. None of them are bullet proof or ironclad,
    >>> and if you think one of them is, then your fooling yourself.

    >>
    >> Well, there's three main positions:
    >>
    >> Bulletproof: A theoretical position, as you state no OS is "hackerproof".
    >>
    >> Ironclad: The best case to hope for. Wearing as much armour as
    >> possible: user has sufficient rights to operate his system and no more.

    >
    > No, users must be educated like I was educated on how to protect the O/S.
    >
    >> OS designed with proper user rights from the get go. In this scenario
    >> you still won't withstand hardened attack but the average script kiddy
    >> or botnet will bounce right off. If a part of the suit or armour gets
    >> too weak, replace it. This would be Linux and most of the other 'Nix's.

    >
    > I don't have a problem using the MS or the Linux platform, but neither
    > one of them are all that. You can believe that about .Nix, but I have
    > been doing this for too long to know better.
    >>
    >> Standing bent over, facing away with your pants around your ankles
    >> shouting "Hello sailor!". No thought to user privs from the word go.
    >> Allow apps to run with admin privs. Spend 10 years turning the target
    >> this way and that attempting to deny entry whilst allowing the user to
    >> "click here to face the original way", blithely ignoring the fact that
    >> he *still* ends up stood there with his arse in the air waiting for
    >> attack. Hope that you or someone can build a fence high enough to
    >> obscure his butthole, again ignoring the army ants that come along and
    >> tear the fences down faster than you can build them. This would be the
    >> windopes approach.

    >
    > I don't respect talk like this. Therefore, I must toss your opinion in
    > the trash can, because you don't seem sane here.
    >>
    >> The sooner M$ retire windopes and build a proper OS with proper privs
    >> from the word go the better. The keeping compatibility approach that
    >> they've been on for the last 15 years just aint gonna cut it no more.
    >> Time to start with a blank slate.

    >
    > The blank slate started with .Net. They will get around to the O/S. The
    > desktop O/S(s) are going to the waste side anyway, including the *.nic's.


    The blank slate needs to be the OS. The dev model that sits on top of it
    is not the issue. If the OS were properly modelled from a security pov
    there would be a lot less malware around. So what if a few apps break? A
    few rewrites and months later and new proper versions and the internet
    would be a much safer place.

  19. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Obviously, that's not the case. Obviously, any O/S in the wrong hands is
    > suspect. I don't care how you view it. Those are the facts.


    Bill Gates spent much of his working life getting Windows into "the
    wrong hands", then.

    --
    Abstainer, n.:
    A weak person who yields to the temptation of denying himself a
    pleasure.
    -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

  20. Re: Rival - Vista security - GONE

    * Little Mad Dog peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > You're silly. You have made silly comments here. And the O/S(s) are
    > swiss cheese in the wrong hands. And that's a fact. It doesn't matter
    > what O/S it is either.


    Idiot.

    --
    Just to have it is enough.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast