Microsoft to reveal parts of Windows source code

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Shane, Jan 28, 2006.

  1. Shane

    Shane Guest

    Shane, Jan 28, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Shane

    steve Guest

    steve, Jan 28, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:14:53 +1300, Shane wrote:

    > http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-01/26/content_4102994.htm
    >
    > How is this different to the shared source program?
    >
    > And will this lead to more leaks of dumps?


    Almost all discussion online has been of the opinion that this move by
    Micro$oft was designed to prevent it from needing to actually comply with
    the EU's requirement to hand over complete and accurate documentation of
    its server communications protocols.

    However, it looks very likely that the EU will still be requiring
    compliance with its directive.

    It's different from the shared source programme in that the code can be
    used - for a massive fee. But the code cannot be used, or even viewed, by
    the free software movement.


    Undeniably Sluttish

    --
    Adam L. Penenberg: "The next time Bill G. promises to make software that is
    so fundamentally secure that customers never have to worry about it, ask him
    what decade he plans to release it."
     
    Mr Undeniably Sluttish, Jan 28, 2006
    #3
  4. Shane

    Peter Guest

    Mr Undeniably Sluttish wrote:

    >
    > Almost all discussion online has been of the opinion that this move by
    > Micro$oft was designed to prevent it from needing to actually comply with
    > the EU's requirement to hand over complete and accurate documentation of
    > its server communications protocols.
    >

    People who work in the industry, but not involving Microsoft code do not
    even want to set sight on Microsoft code, otherwise a presumption may come
    into play in the future that they have 'pirated' the code in other work
    they do.
     
    Peter, Jan 28, 2006
    #4
  5. On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 08:42:11 +1300, Peter wrote:

    >> Almost all discussion online has been of the opinion that this move by
    >> Micro$oft was designed to prevent it from needing to actually comply with
    >> the EU's requirement to hand over complete and accurate documentation of
    >> its server communications protocols.
    >>

    > People who work in the industry, but not involving Microsoft code do not
    > even want to set sight on Microsoft code, otherwise a presumption may come
    > into play in the future that they have 'pirated' the code in other work
    > they do.


    IOW, Micro$oft has offered something that people don't want in the place
    of something that people need.


    Undeniably Sluttish

    --
    Buffer overflow attacks. By flooding a program with too much data, a hacker
    can track and manipulate the overflow and trick the system into following his
    instructions as if he were the sysadmin. The technique has been known for
    decades, yet Microsoft still hasn't come up with a way to defend against it.
     
    Mr Undeniably Sluttish, Jan 28, 2006
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Author Tarun Tyagi
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    738
    Author Tarun Tyagi
    Dec 29, 2004
  2. 123
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    518
    Petit Alexi
    Sep 22, 2003
  3. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    523
    Don_Luciano
    Mar 19, 2006
  4. =?Utf-8?B?d2xzNTA4?=

    checking "Show Updates" doesn't reveal any Windows XP updates

    =?Utf-8?B?d2xzNTA4?=, May 24, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    715
    Martin S.
    May 26, 2006
  5. dstvns

    Parts parts....PARTS!!! ARGHHH

    dstvns, Dec 29, 2003, in forum: A+ Certification
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    584
Loading...

Share This Page