Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Why Microsoft should make windows open source


From: Troy Cregger <tcregger () kennedyinfo com>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 14:43:06 -0400

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

This is true, and I'm not saying they're "near the end", only at "the
beginning of the end"... and of course I may be wrong.

I doubt that the company will ever file chapter 11 or even get to the
point where they're totally irrelevant where software is concerned, but
the challenges they're facing now are a real and growing threat to their
market share. I just think eventually, maybe even sooner than people
think, M$ won't be such a giant relative to competition like Novell for
instance... and if I were on the board at M$ I'd keep a real close eye
on IBM too.

Honestly, the #1 reason I hear from most of the people I talk to for why
they're using Windows is "Windows plays all of my games". Between wine
and VM software that's available now, there that's becoming less of an
issue all the time. It's really starting to get down to an ease of
installation issue more than a technical one where games are concerned.

Time will tell though.

- -tlc

Simon Smith wrote:
I think that anyone who thinks that Microsoft is near an end is being
unrealistic. I think that they are going to have to contend with the
challenges imposed by open source operating systems and OSX, but they are a
software giant. Also remember, Windows is not the only thing that Microsoft
makes. They have their hands in a lot of different pots.



On 4/4/07 11:23 AM, "Troy Cregger" <tcregger () kennedyinfo com> wrote:

M$ will never let us h4x0rz into their source (willingly) but I agree
with you James, the open source paradigm has regularly outpaced M$ and
many other large corporate software producers where it comes to
addressing bugs, security holes, and in many cases feature requests.

I don't think too many people will agree with me on this but my feeling
(call it a hunch) has been that vista will be the beginning of the end
for M$. Already more and more "average users" (like my dad who knows
jack about computers) are installing, using, and liking Linux.

I guess time will tell. As to this patch, or the time M$ takes to
release any patch... the word that comes to mind here is "typical".
After all, what can you expect from a company that is commonly referred
to as Micro$loth.

-tlc


James Matthews wrote:
Hi Everyone

(This can also be an open letter to Microsoft)

Recently I have see a blog post of Microsoft's security team!  What i
have found disturbs me even more then when we find these 0days! This is
what they write!

I'm sure one question in people's minds is how we're able to release an
update for this issue so quickly. I mentioned on Friday
<http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2007/03/30/update-on-microsoft-securit
y-advisory-935423.aspx#Vulnerability>
that this issue was first brought to us in late December 2006 and we've
been working on our investigation and a security update since then. This
update was previously scheduled for release as part of the April monthly
release on April 10, 2007.

Are you telling me that this hole was around for just about 4 months and
they did nothing about it? I am not wondering why it took them so long
to come out with this patch not why they are putting out so early! Also
when they were told about this vulnerability they should of fixed it
right away as we have seen with the OpenBSD ICMP IP 6 hole! Core
security told them about it LESS THEN A WEEK LATER THERE WAS A PATCH.

So we ask why? Why does it take so long to put out a patch?

Due to the increased risk to customers from these latest attacks, we
were able to expedite our testing to ensure an update is ready for broad
distribution sooner than April 10.

Really? Then Please explain this paragraph

*Disclaimer: *

The information provided in this advisory is provided "as is" without
warranty of any kind. Microsoft disclaims all warranties, either express
or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for
a particular purpose. In no event shall Microsoft Corporation or its
suppliers be liable for any damages whatsoever including direct,
indirect, incidental, consequential, loss of business profits or special
damages, even if Microsoft Corporation or its suppliers have been
advised of the possibility of such damages. Some states do not allow the
exclusion or limitation of liability for consequential or incidental
damages so the foregoing limitation may not apply.


Links:
http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2007/04/01/latest-on-security-update-fo
r-microsoft-security-advisory-935423.aspx
<http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2007/04/01/latest-on-security-update-f
or-microsoft-security-advisory-935423.aspx>
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/935423.mspx


I can go on and on but you all get the point!

James










-- 
http://www.goldwatches.com/watches.asp?Brand=39
http://www.wazoozle.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGE/G5nBEWLrrYRl8RAie+AJ9JklnIVDNCoTfpEk9stk09Jz19nwCdFB+e
Jxj+tqF9rpdPwI30GmU6SeA=
=NB83
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


Current thread: