Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Security > Hidden-code flaw in Windows renews worries over stealthly malware

Reply
Thread Tools

Hidden-code flaw in Windows renews worries over stealthly malware

 
 
Moe Trin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-04-2005
In the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
<(E-Mail Removed)>, Imhotep wrote:

>Moe Trin wrote:
>
>> I've been using UNIX since 4.1BSD (and I _still_ hate csh).


>What do you prefer? zsh?


I stay with the Bourne shell - either direct, or BASH, and on rare
occasions the Korn shell.

>Ah come on EMACS baby!!! (I bet your a vi guy!)


---------------------
EMACS == Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping
---------------------
"Emacs is a great OS. The only thing it lacks is a decent editor."
---------------------
Computers tend to come with at least 512Mb RAM these days. Half for X,
half for emacs, what's the problem?
---------------------
"Thanks to the joint efforts of OpenOffice, Mozilla, and a few others, Emacs
officially entered the category of lightweight utilities." -- kalifa on /.
---------------------

So, when the computer is sick and barely able to open one eye - what do
you have access to? EMACS? Heck, if you're lucky, you have vi - maybe
only ed - otherwise, it's 'echo', redirection, and filename globbing.
That's why I've stuck with vi over the years.

Old guy
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Imhotep
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-05-2005
Moe Trin wrote:

> In the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
> <(E-Mail Removed)>, Imhotep wrote:
>
>>Moe Trin wrote:
>>
>>> I've been using UNIX since 4.1BSD (and I _still_ hate csh).

>
>>What do you prefer? zsh?

>
> I stay with the Bourne shell - either direct, or BASH, and on rare
> occasions the Korn shell.
>
>>Ah come on EMACS baby!!! (I bet your a vi guy!)

>
> ---------------------
> EMACS == Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping
> ---------------------
> "Emacs is a great OS. The only thing it lacks is a decent editor."
> ---------------------
> Computers tend to come with at least 512Mb RAM these days. Half for X,
> half for emacs, what's the problem?
> ---------------------
> "Thanks to the joint efforts of OpenOffice, Mozilla, and a few others,
> Emacs
> officially entered the category of lightweight utilities." -- kalifa on
> /. ---------------------
>
> So, when the computer is sick and barely able to open one eye - what do
> you have access to? EMACS? Heck, if you're lucky, you have vi - maybe
> only ed - otherwise, it's 'echo', redirection, and filename globbing.
> That's why I've stuck with vi over the years.
>
> Old guy


Oh man that was funny. I still love Emacs despite it's bloated code!

Imhotep
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Imhotep
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-05-2005
Jim Watt wrote:

> On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 16:49:23 -0400, Imhotep <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>Jim Watt wrote:
>><snip>
>>> But this is yet another bit of MS bashing which is getting tedious.

>>
>>Why is it whenever anyone criticizes MS you always use that lame ass
>>excuse about bashing?

>
> Not 'anyone' just those who will critisise anything that MS do and
> anything I might say. Like yourself for example.
>
>>It is a fact, the registry sucks...

>
> in your opinion.
>
> --
> Jim Watt
> http://www.gibnet.com


Jim, this thread is about a Hidden Code flaw relating to the Windows
Registry. Keep to the topic...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim Watt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-05-2005
On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 01:18:14 -0400, Imhotep <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Jim Watt wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 16:49:23 -0400, Imhotep <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Jim Watt wrote:
>>><snip>
>>>> But this is yet another bit of MS bashing which is getting tedious.
>>>
>>>Why is it whenever anyone criticizes MS you always use that lame ass
>>>excuse about bashing?

>>
>> Not 'anyone' just those who will critisise anything that MS do and
>> anything I might say. Like yourself for example.
>>
>>>It is a fact, the registry sucks...

>>
>> in your opinion.
>>
>> --
>> Jim Watt
>> http://www.gibnet.com

>
>Jim, this thread is about a Hidden Code flaw relating to the Windows
>Registry. Keep to the topic...


FOAD
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Hairy One Kenobi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-05-2005
"Imhotep" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

> Jim, this thread is about a Hidden Code flaw relating to the Windows
> Registry. Keep to the topic...


OK, here goes for the very first on-topic post of this thread ;o)

MS are, regrettably (for some), perfectly correct - it's Bad Programming in
things /running/ on Windows.

Easy to duplicate with an INI file - cripple the line length that an editor
will cope with to (say) 255 characters* and then try to edit an INI file
with a longer line lurking in there somewhere.

Volia! You've just duplicated the problem on a different platform.

So, now that we've sorted that out, back to Windows-bashing for everyone..?
)

H1K

*Or simply use an old version. IIRC, the old "short string" type originated
in UNIX. Some people still seem to use it, despite it having been replaced
by full null-terminated support when 32-bit Windows came along.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Imhotep
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-05-2005
Hairy One Kenobi wrote:

> "Imhotep" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> Jim, this thread is about a Hidden Code flaw relating to the Windows
>> Registry. Keep to the topic...

>
> OK, here goes for the very first on-topic post of this thread ;o)
>
> MS are, regrettably (for some), perfectly correct - it's Bad Programming
> in things /running/ on Windows.
>
> Easy to duplicate with an INI file - cripple the line length that an
> editor will cope with to (say) 255 characters* and then try to edit an INI
> file with a longer line lurking in there somewhere.
>
> Volia! You've just duplicated the problem on a different platform.


I believe you meant a different configuration source...

> So, now that we've sorted that out, back to Windows-bashing for
> everyone..?
> )


A criticism is bashing??? I guess it depends on which side you side
with....plus, face it, Microsoft just gives too much ammunition.

> H1K
>
> *Or simply use an old version. IIRC, the old "short string" type
> originated in UNIX. Some people still seem to use it, despite it having
> been replaced by full null-terminated support when 32-bit Windows came
> along.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Hairy One Kenobi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2005
"Imhotep" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hairy One Kenobi wrote:
>
> > "Imhotep" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> >> Jim, this thread is about a Hidden Code flaw relating to the Windows
> >> Registry. Keep to the topic...

> >
> > OK, here goes for the very first on-topic post of this thread ;o)
> >
> > MS are, regrettably (for some), perfectly correct - it's Bad Programming
> > in things /running/ on Windows.
> >
> > Easy to duplicate with an INI file - cripple the line length that an
> > editor will cope with to (say) 255 characters* and then try to edit an

INI
> > file with a longer line lurking in there somewhere.
> >
> > Volia! You've just duplicated the problem on a different platform.

>
> I believe you meant a different configuration source...


Nope. Unless you're claiming that (say) VI was never available under UNIX?

The same technique works.

> > So, now that we've sorted that out, back to Windows-bashing for
> > everyone..?
> > )

>
> A criticism is bashing??? I guess it depends on which side you side
> with....plus, face it, Microsoft just gives too much ammunition.


Unwarranted criticism, with no hope of sustaining a valid argument, is
"bashing".

The real arguments (away from this froup) have been varied and.. to be
honest, utterly pointless and inconsequential. Of no more interest to the
professional techie than the Ultrix beats VMS religious yawns^H^H^H^Hwars of
two decades' ago.

Sad to say - and please feel free to Google/Deja for the posts, excessive
and blindly illogical platform advocacy has actually /harmed/ adoption.

I'd be happy to argue the point (although this is hardly the correct
froup!). Let's take a specific example that we both know about: Ultrix.

Ultrix wasn't quite as greasy as Olson's "snake oil", but (i) failed basic
Y2k, (ii) had a sufficiently "blow chunks" IP stack to put-off many
professional developers, (iii) was noticeable inferior in a number of areas
to OpenVMS on a platform basis (SunOS was less crap, and significantly
cheaper when it came to hardware, OS, and layered products)

I've endured the IP stack; I've programmed non-transparent DECnet (thanks,
guys, for giving me a whole *two sentences* in the bleeding manual).

I've also done "stuff" with UNIX, DG RDOS (don't ask. No, really - the
machines came with hardware diagrams in the manual) and some even more
obscure platforms (Spirit-3).

Let me put it this way: I'm a /techie/.

But one that lives in (approximately) the Real World.

Rarely, I don't actually have a Linux platform to play with at home - RH
went Gnome on the installation, and some idiot didn't test how that worked
with a generic 15" flat-panel. Given that I needed the Ethereal
*application* rather urgently, I simply shoved Windows onto the box.
Couldn't be bothered with the Solaris box (other plans, application-wise).
Just got p*ssed-off with the failure of a perfectly good machine, and a
badly scratched "previous version" RH Linux CD (the *working* version,
running on the same physical machine).

Let's add to that an IBM mainframe emulator (license costs - let alone the
eye-watering cost of the two IBM [crap] SCSI disks that I'd have needed to
replace) meant that I wrote an emulator that runs on Windows. I'd /love/ to
have it on Kylix, but there doesn't seem to be anyone interested in that
particular project. So much for Linux Open-Source heroes.

In other words, it's the software and applications that count. Linux - in
one instance - found severely wanting. A lot of primarily Linux-based
software is still found wanting. And - like the average user or Corporate -
I'm only interested in applications. Do I really give a toss whether the
case is held together by Metric or Imperial screw-threads? I think not. And
that's of about as much interest as the OS. It's down to cost, cost of
support, and security.

Anyhow. I'm still mildly p*ssed (hence the mispetl novella I've just typed).
Where possible, I pick the best platform for the job; who knows, if
BSD^H^H^HMacOS on Intel is available soon, that'll probably join the mix.

Anyone that talks in absolutes ("myOS am best") is either unrealistic,
narrow-minded, or just plain arrogant. Or a combination.

If you can't find a use for Windows, or can't find a use for Linux, then
you're either not looking hard enough, bigoted, incompetent, or all three.
Or in a peculiarly specific industry (consultancy available to help ;o)

Oh, and apparently 70% on yer genuine line-of-business data is on an IBM
mainframe. Just a thought.

H1K


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim Watt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2005
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 00:11:33 GMT, "Hairy One Kenobi"
<abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

<large snip>

>Oh, and apparently 70% on yer genuine line-of-business data is on an IBM
>mainframe. Just a thought.


I threw out my AS400 model 70 with six racks of DASD. The current
pc has more storage it was sad to see it go, but the electricity
was prohibitive. The power up sequence was a joy to behold.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
VOIP over VPN over TCP over WAP over 3G Theo Markettos UK VOIP 2 02-14-2008 03:27 PM
Outlook TNEF flaw could be much worse than WMF flaw Au79 Computer Support 0 01-13-2006 10:48 PM
Wireless Network Worries =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?= Wireless Networking 2 01-01-2006 08:34 PM
AGP Worries MELT Computer Support 5 01-05-2004 09:33 PM
i18n worries P@draigBrady.com Python 0 07-02-2003 03:01 PM



Advertisments