According to Neowin, the source code for Microsoft Windows NT 4 and 2000 has been leaked. A number of universities and institutes already have legal access to the source code, distributed by Microsoft. It is still not confirmed by the software giant of Redmond – but in the wrong hands, this could result in a major security catastrophe and a huge threat against Microsoft’s 32-bit operating system. Update 11:37 PM EST by AS: danjr lets us know, it’s official.
“*cough* derivitive works *cough”
That means nothing. Copyrights only cover the details of implementation, not ideas. You can easily copy ideas but ignore the details. Take the concept of music for instance.
That is NOT a dumb question. It is an obvious question. One that corporate run new media being so enamered with the concept of IP never even thinks to ask.
no
I didn’t mean to single out new media.. this applies to all corporate run media.
I think you’re confusing bounds checking and buffers overflow checking. A c programmer will make sure that he doesn’t overflow his input buffer but doesn’t typically check every index of an array. In java or c#, if the compiler doesn’t optimize away the bounds check, then at runtime every index into an array is checked to see if is valid.
Maybe you already know that, but to suggest that a c programmer is going to compute a pointer offset into the array and check with a known valid range on every index into it is not going to happen.
Patches to bugs@microsoft.com apparently
Whaddaya mean they didn’t do this on purpose to let us fix their bugs for them? >:)
Let’s hope for full NTFS write support in Linux at last.
Yeah, i guess it depends on how “smart” the compiler is, but I remember a few years ago IBM had a protoype compiler that did away with bounds checking and they were getting huge performance boosts with it. IBM can probably write a pretty good compiler.
“- however, if you buy Solaris you get a copy of the source code (legally)
– but no one feels that this will hurts Sun
– after all, it is still copyrighted, and you cannot copy the code, though you can view”
AFAIK you have to sign a (dirty) NDA.
With OpenVMS you may code additions but you’ll have to send them to the OpenVMS developers who will review it and eventually implemenent it, if they want to. But they’re not obligated to do so and you may not spread your own version or source.
http://research.microsoft.com/collaboration/university/sourcelicens…
But which countries/governments?
From the file list someone posted:
0 11-18-01 14:23 win2k/private/genx/letter to children – 2.eml
Bet that one contains a huge security risk :O
“How does source code leakage correlate to security catastrophe?”
I asked myself the same question. This would mean that OSS is the most vulnebrale S/W one can get.
never mind the fact that it shows Microsoft’s security – whether campus of network – is a disaster as well.
As the person who said this:
An Open-Source Challenge to Messrs. Gates & Ballmer
http://www.linuxworld.com/story/35659.htm
I asked Microsoft to release the unsupported, end-of-line, discontinued source code, precisely to prevent this sort of shenanigan happening. If it is released freely, under the terms and conditions I proposed, Microsoft would lose a lot of their control of the market, which would put them in the position they were at at the beginning of the microcomputer/PC development – ie, their hungriest, and in return the terms and conditions I proposed would’ve permitted the open source community to start debugging Windows. Which could’ve then been rolled back into the mainstream Windows products, under the terms of the BSD/MIT license.
I might also say that I had the opportunity last year, when I was a student at the University of Canterbury, to get legitimate access to Microsoft’s Academic Shared Source.
I chose not to. Why should I encumber myself and risk damaging my future in the software environment I love?
No, this source code leak – if it has actually happened – is an unmitigated disaster. And just think, this is the company that wants to secure your desktop a la Palladium or whatever it’s called now, to control what happens in your computer.
It doesn’t give one confidence, does it?
Microsoft has just announced that the rumours are true:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/Feb04/02-12windowssou…
. Linux is on a huge upward trend,
. WINE keeps getting better everyday,
. Codeweaver recently set up the CodeWeavers CrossOver Compatibility Center to get help get more apps running under cxoffice.
. ReactOS recently booted in to a GUI for the first time
. SCO looks like its in more trouble everyday
….now this.
I wouldnt be suprised if this leak was on purpose, just to give MS a weapon agains Linux & FOSS in the future. It sees that it’s SCO puppet is losing, it sees Linux encrouching on its market more and more, and it sees open source projects that could enable millions to turn away from them and keep running the same software maturing at an ever increasing rate.
This smells fishy to me. My advise to anyone involved in WINE ReactOS, or any other linux project for that matter would be not to look at this code, however tempting that might be. It will only lead to a lot of trouble in the future!
<p>
< Heh. Another problem with using C for anything.
< Basically grep for “strcpy” or “memcpy” in the source
< and step through potential buffer-overflows one-by-one…
</p>
<p>Nice point. But I’d rather have potential buffer-overflows than have the kernel written in Java, no I’m serious.</p>
If the Java-based kernel were fast enough and could do whatever task a kernel should do, why did it matter to you what language it was written in?
“Dont know if its genuine but for everyones sake I suggest that all people here completly ignore it (same as I will be doing)” — Jonathan Wilson
http://www.winehq.org/hypermail/wine-devel/2004/02/0253.html
“No, I think this is actually bad for us. We now have to be even more careful about who we accept code from.” — Ge van Geldorp (posted as AC)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=96614&cid=8263093
the thing is IDEAS, how to get 100% (or even 80%) compatability… WITHOUT directly inputting MS code.
remember that printer that you have sitting in the corner (if you don’t think of other unsupported hardware) linux doesn’t have drivers for it… but windows xxxx does… source code COULD help to remedy that…
I guess
Buddy, don’t forget here where the EMPIRE lives..
got it?
That’s right china has invented nothing except:
paper, moveable type, gunpowder, porcelain, rocketry, banknotes and just about everything that western technology and society was originally based on.
There’s some posts on /. that indicate something:
“whats a little bit weird is a linux coredump at private/security/msv_sspi/core
it appears someone named eyala from mainsoft [mainsoft.com] used vim (VIM – Vi IMproved 5.6 (2000 Jan 16, compiled Mar 7 2000 12:18:07)) on a redhat x86 box under xfree86/kde on a w2k sp1 sourcefile, well until the box ran out of memory…”
“There is a core dump file inside the windows 2000 (sp1) archive, it clearly shows that the source was stolen from a system at Mainsoft. The following url confirms that they did have access to the leaked code. mainsoft.com… 01.html
The actual strings which confirm this:
PWD=/usr/ms/win2k_sp1/private/security/msv_sspi
DOMAIN=mainsoft.com
REPLYTO=eyala@mainsoft.com
ORGANIZATION=Mainsoft Co. Ltd.
MWBATCH_SERVER=lod:8000
MSOFTLM_HOST=@xor
MAINSOFTLM_HOST=@xor
XAPPLRESDIR=/il2/users/eyala/app-defaults
EDITOR=vi
BASE_LIBPATH=/usr/lib”
So, the source of the code seems to be at mainsoft.com
“Anyone remember NIMDA? The worm from 2002 I think? It had this exact same effect of sticking infected eml files all over your folders (by taking some names from your files, and others randomly). Opening those EML files or forwarding them would guarantee future and constant infection.
It’s clearly evident that this machine was infected by nimda and got port-scanned and found. The rest of the code is probably going to come soon enough, unless MS already found out and pulled the plug.”
And, apparantly, it has been lying around on a machine that has been previously infected with Nimda.
I doubt that there is anything wrong with the kernel, comunication with the kernel is done through well defined primitives. The security holes are on the thousands of userland APIs.
I don’t know how much of the kernel code leaked out but it would really be nice to see it, the NT kernel is very interesting in terms of architecture.
How does source code leakage correlate to security catastrophe?”
I asked myself the same question. This would mean that OSS is the most vulnebrale S/W one can get
No, it’s not. The difference is that open-source is _supposed_ to be open, and closed-source (guess what) is _supposed_ to be closed. Both systems depend on it to work.
On OSS, it’s like this: let’s say a programmer called Joe makes a new piece of software for his favorite Linux mp3 player. Joe submits the change on sourceforge or wherever, and other guys there (plus everyone else who wants to) can take a look on the code and say “Hey Joe, there’s a stupid instruction here that could cause problems”. One could even add “here’s the solution, blah-blah “.
Ok, maybe a “bad guy” will also see the code and write some kind of virus to exploit it, but since everyone can see/fix the code, it’s something easy to fix.
Once the code is tested over and over again, and seen by many people, it will be put on the “gold release”. So it’s quite hard for a stupid piece of programming to “survive” (of course the system is not perfect, and bugs exist; they’re just not so numerous). Basically because there are many eyes looking to the same piece of code, so even if one or another guy misses a bug, there might be a third guy somewhere else to catch it.
Closed source, by the other hand, goes like this: a guy called Jack writes the code, Jack’s boss take a look at it, maybe a few more guys too, but it’s still just a few people; then they compile the thing and distribute the binaries. There might a lot of bad pieces of code on the source, but not all of them will be discovered from the binary alone, and since no one can see the code, maybe that bad piece of code will never be “exploited”.
So closed-source counts on the fact that _few_ people can see the code as a way of assuring security; OSS counts on the fact that _many_ people see the code to assure that.
Well, about this code-leak especifically, I think it’s too much noise for nothing. It’s just a small piece of it, and the “real hackers” don’t need that anyway, they have other ways to discover holes in Windows.
“remember that printer that you have sitting in the corner (if you don’t think of other unsupported hardware) linux doesn’t have drivers for it… but windows xxxx does… source code COULD help to remedy that… ”
The entire driver tree is missing from the leaked source.
it appears someone named eyala from mainsoft [mainsoft.com] used vim (VIM – Vi IMproved 5.6 (2000 Jan 16, compiled Mar 7 2000 12:18:07)) on a redhat x86 box under xfree86/kde on a w2k sp1 sourcefile, well until the box ran out of memory…”
Which is not at all strange when you realise they write portability code for running windows on unix….
Quote = Port your Visual Studio based Windows C++ applications to Unix rapidly using Visual MainWin, Mainsoft’s application porting platform.
now all the NT4/2000 server setups will be migrated to a safer platform. no prizes for which platform will benefit the most from that
>Expect lawsuits. And anyone doing linux work needs to be very
>careful NOT to see any of the stolen Microsoft code, lest
>they get targetted by hostile lawyers.
Mmm…i thinks its better said this way..
“And anyone doing linux work needs to be very
careful NOT to see any stolen Linux/GPL code implented in the Microsoft code”
I think it goes both ways. the leak may also be a ploy of some kind, don’t know if it’s bait of some kind, or what, but do be careful. then again, to standard IT- it means they can point out, things the governments maybe too embarrassed, or not critical of their pet favorite mogul, to admit.
And yesterday’s determination by the FCC commissioners gave us no idea who the goons were in the group. Thank goodness for the Chairman’s sense of the VoIP situation. No sense in taxing it, rate hiking. It’s been around a while, the internet, and therefore, voip, are governed differently. Different set of rules, but rules nonetheless.
Though, that’s still a story that’s developing. Wouldn’t be a problem if the FCC told the Telcoms to mind their own business, which was getting optical from end of local loop, to end of local loop. A guarantee of 911 service? No problem. There is IANA emergency port. Look it up sometime. But, wiretapping issues and “heavy handed” regulation? no issues. It’s IP. We’re more effective at catching packets then they are at wiretapping. And, we, the internet peoples, are self governing. Thank goodness.
Some people really don’t see the danger of this, now do they? They might laugh about the source being leaked (IF that is true of course), but in the end, if this really leads to a lot of extra security problems, EVERYONE will be affected. What if your bank uses Windows based machines? What if your job uses Windows based machines?
Do you people ever think about that? The fact that you don’t have a Windows based machine in your own home doesn’t mean you won’t be affected in any way. I’d like to hear from you when you lose your job because your company has to cut back on personell after being hit yet another exploit/virus/worm.
“How come source code leak lead to security problems? How stupid is that. Linux source code is available all the time, do we see security problems all the time? Suggesting that there is going to be big danger is quite stupid. It is like arguing that Linux is less secure because source code is available.”
Linux doesn’t have a big red target painted on their back.
Why would anyone want windows source code when they have FreeBSD and Linux source code available for free. Both are highly scalable much more advanced systems that windows! The leak of the windows code is pointless. It may help people like ReactOS or WINE or something understand things better but they wouldnt copy and paste code. This is bad PR for microsoft and will give them an excuse to sue some open source company (probably a tiny one) and then run a PR campaign against open source. Who knows, they’ll probably make up lies and file a stupid lawsuit- they have enough money to. their arguement could be “well it works with windows and it became more functionable when that source code was leaked so they had to have used it” sue for trade secrets and copyrights and what not I dont know.. they’re just stupid. Who would want Windows souce code anyway unless if its an OS or some kind of platform that runs on an OS that aims to be windows compatible? There’s much more powerful FREE things out there.
security will be an issue, people will get to look for security holes rather than find them.. this will make windows more secure in the long run and show how windows is insecure in the short term oppose to an open platform or open standard like solaris, *bsd, linux, other unix, etc. So, I’m guessing it will mean more exploits and people switching.. hmm.. maybe this is good after all.. “Windows Services for Unix, anyone?”
I hear that it’s only w2k SP1. Lots of stuff has changed / been fixed since.
Still I think that if someone where to fork some open source projects and “improve” them from somewhere outside of US copyright etc control that could be very interesting.
Let’s hope for full NTFS write support in Linux at last.
Yeah, and let’s prove to SCO and the US court that Linux programmers are just a pack of rogue thieves.
NTFS support is really not a big deal. Only dual-booters need this. There are far better filesystems for Linux.
I believe I saw an implementation for running the Windows NTFS driver under WINE so you can try that if your really desperate. Sorry I don’t have the link.
I used to work at Mainsoft (from nov 1994 – nov 1996) and worked with the mainwin toolkit. Part of my responsibility was to mine the Windows NT source code we had to port some parts into the mainwin toolkit.
Mainwin began life as a reverse-engineering of the win32 API’s. What they found over time is what the Wine and Mono teams are finding the hard way; Microsoft has jillions of programmers, and are very willing to keep rewriting their platform, and to add tons of new modules, at a rapid pace. You simply cannot keep up if you’re reverse engineering, because Microsoft will outpace you 10 times over.
Since Mainsoft is a commercial enterprise the then President convinced them to get a source license, using the above argument. Jeff got laid off the same time I did (nov 1996).
At the time I was there, we had source trees to DOS 6.xx, Win 95, NT 3.51, and NT 4.0 beta 2. Remember this was in 1995-6 timeframe, and those were the then-current releases. We also had source for Internet Explorer v3.x and were working to port it to Unix. Mainsoft later collaborated with Microsoft to port IE v4 to Unix, and Microsoft made that port available on their web site.
I was the first one to port any source code from NT into the Mainwin product. We had a number of listbox related bugs, and I had a theory that since our Listbox.c was 2000 lines, and Microsoft’s list{1,2,3,4}.c source was over 8000 lines, that we were missing a few pieces of functionality, and got permission to experiment with moving Microsoft’s source to the Mainwin source tree. It was a successful experiment, and let us close out a whole slew of listbox related bugs.
With having our own copy of the source tree, we were also able to port various modules like WINSOCK and COM directly from their source code. COM was especially important because it was, at the time, 2 million lines of code, and a totally daunting prospect of reverse engineering the functionality.
In any case, I was wanting to give a little background since you guys are talking about Mainsoft. It shouldn’t be a surprise that Mainsoft has a Windows source license.
– David Herron
“Linux doesn’t have a big red target painted on their back.”
Which is why Webservers running Apache in Linux arent targetted, and servers of course are never targeted by hackers.
What are you thinking man? Linux is the biggest target for hackers because its what servers use.
“believe I saw an implementation for running the Windows NTFS driver under WINE so you can try that if your really desperate. Sorry I don’t have the link.”
It’s called Captive and it uses the NT (XP) kernel, ntfs.sys, parts of ReactOS, parts of WINE. One needs a Windows license for this one.
http://www.jankratochvil.net/project/captive/
http://www.winehq.com/?issue=208
Curiousity.
Besides, as much as Windows has problems there is a reason for it. Microsoft does things in some interesting ways. Some are kinda cool, some are pretty damn stupid. So no matter how good or bad code is, if there is enough to provide an operating system you can definitely learn from it.
Besides, I want to compile it with gcc and see if it runs faster! Prolly not, I think M$ uses Intel’s compilers.
A part of me wonders if Microsoft didn’t release their own code in an effor to ram palladium down our throats.
—
Two thing stand out when I read this report.
1) “Vulnerabilities in Windows NT and Windows 2000 will likely….”
2) “The potential economic damage to the company would be incalculable.”
Potential economic damage? What? Huh?
Maybe it’s simply a ploy for the next upgrade wave?
Who in their right mind would want these old vulnerable OS running on there system now? Simply throw those old disks away and buy the latest version of Windows 2003 so you can sleep at night.
This is one of the best thing that could happen to MS. They will reap billions from those freaked out customers who will now prop up those slumping sales figures by buy those wonderfully new non-vulnerable disk.
If this causes a dip in their stock, its a buy.
but the nimda virus is a good theroy… so mabye soon.
after all I have been at my bandwith cap for 10 days… only 20 more to go…
so all I have seen was the Files list
and geez was it a-little short
This will teach Microsoft to be a little more carefull when writing their software. They will be forced to spend more time planning good code and de-bugging, and the end result will befifit all.
Now with much of the source code leaked 13+ million lines, if hackers were to get their hands on some of this code and write malicious code, hopefully MS will quickly release patches to fix the new vulnerabilities. Either way, I hope that this event makes Windows OS into a better product. God knows, MS needs incentive to innovate or they will simply stagnate cause I don’t think the company’s heart was ever in the right place.
However, unlike most of the population that posts on various tech forums, I reject the notion of simply wishing ill-will on Microsoft and jumping on the bandwagon. Hey people, let’s focus on some innovation here . . . I don’t care if it’s MS, Linux, IBM, Sun, SGI, HP, Apple, what have you . . . I sincerely hope that developers both in and out of those major companies start focusing on innovation because it is the right thing to do . . . that is inspiration. We can talk all day long about how we want MS to go down, but at the end of the day we could have focused all our energies in building better products, whether open-source or closed.
First, I mentioned Linux not open source apps like you mentioned.
Most of the problems that have happened to Microsoft lately have been with the apps and not the OS or have been caused by the stupidity of users running programs that come in as email attachments. If everyone were running Linux instead of Windows you could send out an attachment that installs an SMTP program and start spamming.
MrPillows, I couldn’t agree more.
I also agree with you MrPillows.
We run Linux, Solaris, AIX, Win2K, and OSX. We use the solution from the company that solves the problem.
Most of the problems that have happened to Microsoft lately have been with the apps and not the OS or have been caused by the stupidity of users running programs that come in as email attachments. If everyone were running Linux instead of Windows you could send out an attachment that installs an SMTP program and start spamming.
Most – if not all- Linux e-mail programs doesn’t allow you to execute attachements. Furthermore, you couldn’t start spamming unless you’re logged on as root or a privilegied user that can use ports < 1024.
…Then again, I suppose that most home users would run as root and developers would allow the execution of attachements for the users’ convenience…
http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1076674118
The source code was taken off of a Linux computer. How ironic that a Linux company just so happens to have the Windows source code and its a Linux company that leaked it. I can see it now, drop it into a shared folder and walk away saying OOPS. I just question whether this was sone on purpose and I think it would be good for MS to revoke Mainsofts SSI credentials till they clear it up.
Alot of people who hear about these security issues will naturally want to upgrade their OS. That will just mean more people buying more Microsoft products. Doesn’t it seem odd that all of this information is just pouring out. So, what I’m trying to say is, wouldn’t it not be so farfetched that Microsoft released it’s own source code?
People have been saying that this shouldn’t be a security catastrophe since Linux is open source and there aren’t really much security worries there. However Linux programmers aren’t notorious for writting insecure code and making fundamental design flaws that lead to security vulnerablilities. Having Windows source code would just open the damn on how many flaws there are and this is gonna be a field day for hackers & virus writters.
Im just noting all of this, Im not a very active Linux user as I use Mac OS X most of the time myself. Im telling everybody to be cautious on windows from here on out.
It seems that the small bits of code that were leaked aren’t anything importent, some site say it’s bits of task manager, some say it’s mostly the code for MS Paint. I think if it was something really importent like the kernel that we would know already for sure, how many people ahve seen the code already? you think someone would say what it is exactly if it was big.
They can actually bennefit from this leak. The reason this leak is so dangerous is not that people can develop more viruses, worms, backdors, etc. but because those who find any exploitable bugs cannot submit patches. Should M$ redesigned their license a bit and allowed people to check the code for bugs and submit their patches the code might improve. M$ would defenitely have to put some clauses that would protect their code from being used by their competition, but it might be worth it
My last post was a bit of fantasy. M$ will never adopt any development model similar to the ones used by open source community.
I wonder if the Linux box the source originated from was compromised, or if the owner decided to release it. Either way, it bodes poorly for the Linux community.
Which do you think sounds better?
“Sorry Microsoft, our Linux box was broken into by an unknown vulnerability, and Microsoft source was stolen.”
-or-
“Sorry Microsoft, one of our crazed GPL advocates attempted to open source the part of Microsoft Windows we had access to.”
I hope Microsoft will think twice before trying to place nice with the Linux nuts.
Given how microsoft has been actively copyrighting file allocation table technology, copyrighting xml technology, licensing network protocol code, slandering the linux crowd with research-for-hire propaganda, slandering the open source crowd as viral, known to be involved in a yet to be determined role in the SCO scandal, known to engage in blatantly illegal activity (anti-trust) to monopolize the market, and still getting their butts kicked in the server market and on the verge of getting their butts kicked in the desktop market…
I don’t think it is much of a stretch to see that this “leak” has been planned by microsoft in order to attempt to further damage the credability and reputation of the open source community. Think about the timing of this announcement: just when the SCO scandal is collapsing.
No tinfoil hats necessary – Microsoft has already settled out of court with Caldera for such activity; and they have been found guilty in a court of law for such behaviour. The only ones wearing tinfoil hats now are the ones who are in denial.
Who gives a monkeys about WINE and all these other runarounds to read/write MS stuff. Just do without MS period. Who needs that stuff. Sure in your office you may do. Elsewhere no way.
Linux stuff is brilliant. Tex, Latex, MySQL, Open Office, Morphix Games, mpg321 and so on…..there are hundreds of very useful tools, a lot of which operate outside a graphical user interface. All it takes is a little time to learn. The reward is total freedom from the bloody madness of windows.
WHY on earth do we need to be slaves to Microsoft???????????????
“Given how microsoft has been actively copyrighting file allocation table technology, copyrighting xml technology, licensing network protocol code…”
For one thing, copyright does not cover FAT. They only cover how you implemented FAT. So unless someone copied directly from the source code, this will not help MS. However if they have softare patents pending, then we will be in big trouble in a few years.
And another thing. Copyrights are AUTOMATIC, you only register them w/ the copyright office as definitive proof you created the work first.
Another problem with using C for anything. Basically grep for “strcpy” or “memcpy” in the source and step through potential buffer-overflows one-by-one…
I would rather
grep -i bsd
grep -i linux
grep -i gpl
grep -i nsa
grep -i sco
🙂
egrep -i “bsd|linux|gpl|nsa|sco”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RE:Paranoic Mode
By Anonymous (IP: —.cust.tele2.ch) – Posted on 2004-02-13 21:12:39
Who gives a monkeys about WINE and all these other runarounds to read/write MS stuff. Just do without MS period. Who needs that stuff. Sure in your office you may do. Elsewhere no way.
Linux stuff is brilliant. Tex, Latex, MySQL, Open Office, Morphix Games, mpg321 and so on…..there are hundreds of very useful tools, a lot of which operate outside a graphical user interface. All it takes is a little time to learn. The reward is total freedom from the bloody madness of windows.
WHY on earth do we need to be slaves to Microsoft???????????????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
who has the monopoly?
win=programs/games
why is there WINE?
some ppl are so closed minded
Seriously, don’t make the assumption just because someone throws some crap up on sourceforge that there are going to be hordes of uber programmers looking at the code and submitting bug fixes. There’s so much crap on sourceforge its not even funny.
“real hackers” find it a lot easier to look at source code than disassembly
“And another thing. Copyrights are AUTOMATIC, you only register them w/ the copyright office as definitive proof you created the work first.”
Very true, in the USA this has been true since somewhere in 1989 since when new copyright laws were approved. Before that, it was different.
To everyone who blames Linux’s security (remember: “dipstick sysadmins don’t exist”): can you explain me why there are traces of the NIMDA worm in the source?
” WHY on earth do we need to be slaves to Microsoft??????????????? ”
because Windows is reliable, has many more applications available for it and many major apps run on Windows, not to mention good industry hardware support. If you dont like to use MS apps, all those applications you mentioned advocating Open Source are all available for Windows as well. I use MySQL with Apache on Windows Server 2003.
If you can just think a little, you will realize that it is the accuser who has to prove beyond reasonable doubt, not the one who is accused. If you have any proof of GPLed code on the leaked code let us know, otherwise I don’t see your point. Pure speculation is the same thing as claiming that Microsoft is working on a secret bomb that will blow up all linux developers. I mean, it is certainly a possibility, but not something we are going to discuss about, not at least people who are serious.
But based on these stupid speculations, I don’t see how automatically Microsoft become guilty. Obviously for someone who believes that Microsoft is building secret labs, it makes perfect sense, but I just don’t see how is it legally correct. For Microsoft to sue, they should search the GPLed code, which is a daunting task and there is absolutely no motivation right now. You are talking about these speculations not out of some common sense, but out of your stupid hatred against Microsoft. This speculation is so stupid that, even the news organizations which talked about security speculations, which are themselves stupid anyway, didn’t mention about this issue. Thousands of people already had access to the windows code, they could easily see if there was a violation already. So what’s the point? You wish Microsoft copied some code from GPLed software and you would be happy to see that they suffered or embarassed by it. That is not going to happen.
Finally, you forget the fact that, even though Microsoft illegally put GPLed code into its products, it doesn’t necessarily mean a big issue. The owner of that code has to sue Microsoft, but nobody knows how much money they can get out of that court proceedings. Microsoft will definitely remove the code and write a patch to remove it from the existing programs, but they are not going to vanish because of such a mistake. It would be also stupid to believe that any GPLed code is placed there because Microsoft is evil. The only evil people here are some few zealots who thinks that they own the Linux community and everybody working on open source projects and that somehow everybody who is using Linux is doing that because they are against Microsoft. Many people are not against Microsoft. I like open source but I also like Microsoft, not as much as I like open source stuff, but still I think they are a good company. Better than Apple imho. I hated Microsoft once, but I am unable to find a serious reason to hate them now, cause everything I heard about them are pure lie.
that is EXACTLY what I said but in more words… , I should have made note that someone else was small-minded…
I apologise!
Small minded! Aah well everyone to their own opinion.
As I said I don’t care what you use. Linux software does everything I need, why would I want to go back to MS stuff?
I did agree with one poster though who says security is a matter for the user. If the user is unaware or just plain ignorant of such issues, you will get comprised PC’s.
However, when a company has such a stranglehold on the market as does MS, I stand by what I say, that is bad for MS as well as everyone else.
I don’t say Linux software is better OR worse than MS stuff, I just say I am sick to death of MS and its software – for me Linux is the way forward.
Myself included.. I am glad that you are MS free… but I run a business where ALL I see is WINBLOWS (mostly 98se)
and I wanna kick my own head in
hope that clear thins up
The scariest thing is that if the code leaked contains
code from other 3rd party software companies, MS might be
in for another ride to the federal court rooms.