Robert Pogson

One man, closing all the windows.

Vulnerabilities Have Not Faded From the Threat Foreground, Larry

  • Nov 03 / 2008
  • 2
Uncategorized

Vulnerabilities Have Not Faded From the Threat Foreground, Larry

Larry Seltzer croons a fine tune for M$ over at eWeek. He goes on about how safe folks are running Vista…

This comes a couple of weeks after M$ was attacked by malware that could walk right in through the connection to the Internet with no user interaction. This comes after much of the world has panned Vista for being unusable and lacking any useful features over XP. Larry writes about an OS produced by a company who released ’95, ’98, and ME on the world while praising the long feature-lists. That other OS has so many rough edges that malware writers do not know where to begin. Any OS designed to execute images and other crap will never be as secure as an OS like GNU/Linux that places reasonable limits on the powers of users. M$, itself, has stated the UAC was designed to harass users and they have planned to tune it up in 7, now leaking all over the web. Larry praises a product even M$ does not like. Sad.

Read Cyberinsecurity, Larry. Any software maximizing complexity is extremely unlikely to be more secure than software designed to be simple and efficient like FLOSS. When we can see the source we do not tolerate such crap in it. M$ hid so much junk in Vista that it would not run on most PCs but suddenly 7 will… What useless crap did they throw out Larry? Think any of it may have had vulnerabilities?

2 Comments

  1. Robert Pogson

    I first used GNU/Linux in 2000 when ME was new. I had a cluster of five machines run flawlessly for six months on the same hardware that ’95 choked on hourly.

    If you have to attack me personally to make your point, your point must be pretty weak.

    That other OS is better than GNU/Linux for some things but running a PC is not one of them.

    I value efficiency and speed, not whether a particular OS runs with a particular piece of hardware I do not have. I have only seen two pieces of hardware I could not use with GNU/Linux: one printer, one modem and one NIC in nine years and hundreds of installations. In the same time, I have seen a similar number of peripherals that did not have a driver for that other OS: one was on ME, M$ no longer licensed a driver needed by the maker’s driver (USB thingy), another was a RTL8139 NIC that did not work with a re-installation of an XP machine (XP was new but the NIC was newer), and I have seen a few that needed a driver when a USB storage device was inserted… Sad.

    We all know there are old or new things that may never have a driver for a particular OS. That is not a figure of merit for an OS.

    Things that make a good OS are speed and efficiency. Phoning home is not efficient. Scanning for DRM and malware is not efficient. Reading through directories for search (as XP did for the longest time) is not efficient, and re-re-rebooting is not efficient. GNU/Linux, on the other hand, has had infinite care taken of the smallest details of scheduling, locking, security and throughput, publicly, for many years before M$ even mentioned the word, “security”. That makes GNU/Linux a better OS in my view. Something as bloated and bug-ridden as that other OS, with clear design flaws like integrating the browser, cannot be considered a good OS. On top of that, M$ is a despicable corporation with a long history of illegal trade practices with which I care not to deal.

  2. TheTruth

    “company who released ‘95, ‘98, and ME”

    And where was linux in the 90′s ? Haha it couldnt even run X11 properly on my Cirrus logic 2mb vram vga card. It was COMPLETELY USELESS at that time.

    As far as security is concerned you should head over to secunia to see the horibble mess linux is in.

    I understand that linux supporters have to lie to show linux is better, but maybe in your case you have to think like a primitive monkey.

Leave a comment