Getting Things Wrong From The Beginning…

“a severe security issue in its implementation of the NetBIOS protocol that affected all Windows versions ever released”
 
See BadTunnel Bug Hijacks Network Traffic, Affects All Windows Versions
How many times do you have to see “affects all versions” before you decide that M$ should not be running your information technology? I made that decision in November 1999 when I had five PCs in my classroom that I wanted to be my “major domo” but they randomly needed to reboot every few hours… I replaced That Other OS with Caldera eDesktop GNU/Linux and never had any problems with software the rest of the school year. I’ve been using GNU/Linux ever since and have had no regrets. It’s been the right way to do IT. My wife saw the light a few years ago. She was tired of years of TOOS failing every now and then and needing re-installation. Once her business started using a web application, she had no more need of TOOS, none.

If you want to try GNU/Linux, read all about it at www.debian.org.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Getting Things Wrong From The Beginning…

  1. oiaohm wrote, “Blind backwards compatibility kills security”

    That’s the thing about TOOS, the OS designed by salesmen. They just don’t care about security. They just care they have something “new” to advertise, even if it’s just another coat of paint. I remember the hype over Lose ’95. That crapware had tons of bugs and zero security. It was the single cause of me going to GNU/Linux. Since then, I’ve uncovered the whole mess of the Wintel monopoly revealed in US DOJ v M$, endless waves of malware and vulnerabilities in patches of vulnerabilities. I regret not having migrated sooner.

  2. oiaohm says:

    joepf Backward compatibility is a hard thing. Some of the first generation coff binaries for Linux yes stuff for Linux kernel in its early alphas still works on current day Linux.

    Blind backwards compatibility kills security. Note the key word some. Features found to be security risks are gone so those executables no longer work. Windows has in lots of cases done shims are other things to prevent breaking old executables.

    https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/cjacks/2010/10/20/shims-are-they-really-such-nasty-bits/
    Before I get into a discussion on this, let me make sure that my position is absolutely clear: nobody looks forward to using shims. It’s not something that I recommend that anybody go out of their way to use, or keep around any longer than absolutely necessary. It’s not something that you have to use in order to be successful, nor is it necessarily your first choice.
    Even Microsoft staff are very clear you should avoid the shim solution where ever possible. Few reasons.
    1) Program buggy needing a shim to work most likely contains other bugs.
    2) Shim can in fact be allowing application to perform actions that were removed on security grounds in the first place.
    And there are a few more.

    Now lot of programs under windows have shims automatically applied and the user never informed that they are in fact playing with fire. This action in fact kills security as users are not informed the application they are using is technically broken.

    Linux world has historically been overly nasty and gone the other way. Its security broken we snap it method. Flatpak and snappy both have to be looked at as shim like solutions at least they will be more in face then Microsoft shim system.

  3. joepf says:

    It is Windows, what do you expect from that operating system still supporting executable programs from Windows 1 or Windows 95 for 64 bit version and is influenced by CP/M. Backwards compatibility kills security.

Leave a Reply