Linux Pimps wrote:
> Richard Rasker wrote:
>> Linux Pimps wrote:
>>> Richard Rasker wrote:
>>>> tells me that Windows doesn't deserve the qualification
>>>> of "operating system". It's a glorified application
>>>> starter, which isn't designed with security (or even
>>>> networking) in mind.
>>> This person is talking out the side of his head too.
>>> Windows Vista is known to be much more picky about the
>>> file types it allows the user to use than previous
>>> operating systems. Some file types are considered to be a
>>> potential threat, and therefore are blocked.
>>> One downloads files from a reputable source. One doesn't
>>> run around to p2p's and other such dubious places
>>> downloading files. And that's called use commonsense with
>>> computers while in a social engineering setting.> Richard
>>> Rasker wrote:
>> If this is proof of anything, it's that Microsoft are
>> utterly incompetent morons who have NO IDEA what "security"
>> means. Just give a file a different extension, and oh looky,
>> it's downloaded right away, no questions asked.
>> This is the same kind of utter stupidity in Vista where an
>> executable file with the string "install" in its name
>> triggers a security warning, but the exact same file renamed
>> "fred" (or whatever else) is merrily executed right away.
>> And remember the Zune? It had this (don't laugh) "DRM" on
>> board, where copying music files between users was prevented
>> by, yup, looking at extensions. If it weren't so sad, it
>> would be laughable. It's like having a guard dog which only
>> barks at stealthy moving masked intruders, but wags its tail
>> when strangers in plain clothes walk into the house.
>> What is this with Microsoft? Howcome that in 2008, these
>> idiots /still/ design software that treats a file name or
>> extension as any reliable indication of a file's nature? And
>> in the process of (hahaha) "securing the OS" and (pffrrrt)
>> "protecting the users" all they achieve is making Windows
>> more of a hassle to use (sheesh, editing the Registry to be
>> able to receive MP3 files ...). But apparently, the OS is
>> still as secure as a wet paper bag, and needs all the
>> "protection" from the binary equivalent of sticky tape,
>> paperclips, elastic bands, and shielding baggies it can get.
>> And sure, i'll help. As long as the bad guys stick to
>> Microsoft's naming and extension conventions as well. Duh.
> You're no expert on anything. You are a dumb home user. And I
> wouldn't trust anything you have to say as far as I could
> toss a building somewhere. When you pull out a link from the
> year 2006 and give false information or your spin on it as if
> it's the gospel, then no, no one should trust anything you
> have to say.
> You are guru's guru and an expert's expert in your own
> worthless mind, *clown*.
Rather sad that this troll has consistently attacked the poster
with insults instead of a proper reply.
This is an example of:
--Subject: 3.4 The nasty Troll
If anyone does anything which will interfere with the
troll's ability to cause mayhem, they can become very
nasty, posting from obviously incorrect variations of the
name etc. insults, call them netcops, netnannies,
Quando omni flunkus moritati
(If all else fails, play dead)
- "Red" Green