×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Vista Post-SP2 Is the Safest OS On the Planet

CmdrTaco posted about 5 years ago | from the color-me-skeptical dept.

1010

pkluss noted Kevin Turner, COO of Microsoft making the proclamation that "Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the marketplace, is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever built. It's also the most secure OS on the planet, including Linux and open source and Apple Leopard. It's the safest and most secure OS on the planet today."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

1010 comments

I have a feeling.... (5, Funny)

Drakin020 (980931) | about 5 years ago | (#27577429)

That this thread will consist only of positive remarks, and supportive statements towards Microsoft.

Re:I have a feeling.... (4, Funny)

xmason (206262) | about 5 years ago | (#27577501)

That this thread will consist only of positive remarks, and supportive statements towards Microsoft.

Well, they make some dandy keyboards and mice, and I've always been a fan of Flight Simulator...
 
...but that's about all I got here. OS X FTW!

Re:I have a feeling.... (2, Insightful)

someone1234 (830754) | about 5 years ago | (#27577541)

Correct.
I commend Microsoft for doing an OS which no one uses (therefore it is the safest).
It is also a reason for wider Linux adoption (which is a very positive thing).
So, we all owe a big thanks to their developers for creating such a wonderful OS.

Re:I have a feeling.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577551)

I'm Invincible!!!!!

http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=MP3S&type=Movies&movie=Monty_Python&quote=mp5.txt&file=mp5.mp3

Re:I have a feeling.... (2, Funny)

DigiShaman (671371) | about 5 years ago | (#27577609)

Is it reliable (as in stable)? Sure. I have yet to have Vista bomb out on me that wasn't due to a buggy 3rd party driver or faulty hardware.

Is it safe? Heh, so says the wife beater of software...

Re:I have a feeling.... (5, Insightful)

whoever57 (658626) | about 5 years ago | (#27577805)

Is it reliable (as in stable)? Sure. I have yet to have Vista bomb out on me that wasn't due to a buggy 3rd party driver

That is a distinction without a difference. If you need those drivers to run Vista on your PC, then Vista has a problem. Users should not have to care who writes the drivers, unless you have some esoteric and unusual hardware in your PC.

Re:I have a feeling.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27578035)

Users should not have to care...

That is the dumbest concept I've seen someone support here.

It is pure socialism in its prettiest (still ugly) form. You should not have to care, precisely so someone else does? Fuck you and the free ride you rode in on.

Re:I have a feeling.... (5, Informative)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about 5 years ago | (#27577827)

People are always saying this on here (from NT 4.0 onwards) but how does the average user determine whether their hardware is faulty, their drivers are buggy or their OS is just a load of bloated crap? Vista is ok but I don't see any specific advantage over XP Home apart from being able to alter ACLs with a GUI instead of CACLS, and despite what apologists say, it is slower than XP.

Re:I have a feeling.... (2, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | about 5 years ago | (#27577719)

And if it's not, then I suppose you'll claim it's evidence that this site is biased... as opposed to the site the article [microsoft.com] is on, which is completely fair and balanced?

Re:I have a feeling.... (1)

CronicBurn (316845) | about 5 years ago | (#27577729)

That this thread will consist only of positive remarks, and supportive statements towards Microsoft.

...with truth, justice, and the American way!

Re:I have a feeling.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577979)

of course its the safest. no one uses it, so no one wants to hack it.

is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever built (5, Insightful)

b0ttle (1332811) | about 5 years ago | (#27577455)

He should have stopped here.

Re:is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever buil (3, Insightful)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 5 years ago | (#27577821)

No, he is probably right.

MacOS X isn't all that secure. Professional hackers have said that the implementation of ASLR/NX on Vista is far superior to Apples.

And as for Linux? Well, it wasn't that long ago that a certain high profile distribution accidentally disabled the pRNG in its core crypto libraries ... for two years. And then another high profile distro let attackers actually sign some rogue packages with their private key. I don't think anybody should be making smart comments about the security of Linux.

That leaves Vista, the result of many years of applying the Secure Development Lifecycle. Extensive fuzz testing on the APIs. Extensive security review of all features. IE uses a low privilege renderering engine like Chrome (and unlike any browser on Linux or MacOS).

This doesn't mean MacOS or Linux are bad. But Microsoft have been throwing enormous resources behind security for years now. Is it any surprise they are caught up and in many ways ahead?

Re:is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever buil (5, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | about 5 years ago | (#27577879)

That leaves Vista

...and all the security-designed systems. Do you really think Windows is safer than OpenBSD, let alone OpenVMS? Or whatever the NSA uses on their hardest systems? His quote is like saying that "the Ford Mustang is the fastest car on the planet".

Re:is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever buil (0, Offtopic)

dragonxtc (1344101) | about 5 years ago | (#27578095)

Hey my old 73 mustang a 351 cleveland and NOS was pretty damn fast.

what? (3, Interesting)

Tumbleweed (3706) | about 5 years ago | (#27577483)

"Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the marketplace, is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever built. It's also the most secure OS on the planet, including Linux and open source and Apple Leopard. It's the safest and most secure OS on the planet today."

See any serious problems with this story?

Do I see any serious problems with this story? Uh, yeah, maybe one or two...

I'm not sure why this is news - MS says this about every OS release they put out...

Re:what? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577569)

But it IS the safest - it now fails to boot.

See a problem? Check Vista SP2's release date (5, Interesting)

number6x (626555) | about 5 years ago | (#27578105)

"Do I see any serious problems with this story? Uh, yeah, maybe one or two..."

How about the fact tha Vista SP2 is not "in the marketplace" at all.

It hasn't been released yet and is still an RC candidate [windowsteamblog.com] in beta testing!

If Microsoft wants to compare imaginary not yet released software to actual software, I set let them and Google play games with beta releases. The rest of us have actual work to do.

today.... (5, Insightful)

SIR_Taco (467460) | about 5 years ago | (#27577487)

It's the safest and most secure OS on the planet today

Until tomorrow when all those pesky exploits come out

Re:today.... (2, Funny)

networkBoy (774728) | about 5 years ago | (#27577819)

5 bucks says some exploits launch just to poke holes in their statement.

Next major worm will only target Vista and will spam MS addresses with

EPIC FAIL
This spam was sent from a compromised Vista machine.

HAHAHAHA (0)

GNUbuntu (1528599) | about 5 years ago | (#27577491)

So when the newest Windows viruses/worms come out on Vista SP2 and they don't infect either Linux or OS X is that just because the other two operating systems were just too insecure to receive them?

Re:HAHAHAHA (2, Insightful)

blueg3 (192743) | about 5 years ago | (#27577659)

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that it'll be because they, just like nearly every other piece of malware out there, are only capable of running on a single platform -- regardless of the actual security of that platform.

Safest? (4, Insightful)

Jhon (241832) | about 5 years ago | (#27577495)

Even if it is, it's too late. Vista is already perceived as the new Windows ME. With Windows 7 coming up soon, I doubt there will be much sales increase for MS.

Please don't (5, Funny)

Daimanta (1140543) | about 5 years ago | (#27577497)

In the history of man there have been several cases of fatal hilarity(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_Hilarity) and this article might inflict this seemingly comical effect on technically concious people.

Posting an article like this without thinking about the consequences might actually hurt and kill people. Please don't.

Insurance adjuster will not believe this one! (1)

rts008 (812749) | about 5 years ago | (#27578071)

No kidding!
It was touch and go there for a bit.

Just reading the headline I swallowed my dentures while spewing soda across my keyboard and crt monitor, which dutifully shocked me senseless onto the floor...that's when uncontrollable ROFLCOPTERS struck and I ended up with a dislocated shoulder, broken leg, and a concussion.
Whew!
Then while I was still dazed, bleeding, and drooling on the floor, my neighbor calls...she is claiming that my cat is ass-raping her dog!

Keep watch, Kevin Turner, I owe you one!!!

I have a feeling those words will come back to haunt/taunt him...

ORLY? (5, Insightful)

Just Some Guy (3352) | about 5 years ago | (#27577513)

It's also the most secure OS on the planet

Trusted Solaris would like to have a word with you.

Re:ORLY? (1)

drspliff (652992) | about 5 years ago | (#27577767)

I'll take your Trusted Solaris and raise you with Linux + GRSecurity, yay for randomized address space and many other hardening and/or anti-exploitation techniques that Trusted Solaris doesn't have...

Re:ORLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27578069)

yay for randomized address space and many other hardening and/or anti-exploitation techniques that Trusted Solaris doesn't have...

... but Vista DOES have. Oh, snap!

Re:ORLY? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577995)

*cough*OpenBSD*cough*

Quotation marks for the title? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577539)

The title needs to be in quotes, we wouldn't need to rtf summary.

EVERY release is the safest... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577553)

Isn't every Microsoft OS release the safest and most reliable OS that they've ever built?

And didn't they spend a massive amount of capital marketing the security benefits and lower TCO of having Windows Server 2003-based servers as opposed to Linux-based servers?

I can't wait until the black hats get a hold of this one.

Waving red in front of the bull. (5, Insightful)

m0nkyman (7101) | about 5 years ago | (#27577555)

Waving red in front of the bull. Always a good idea.
Pity that it will be MicroSofts' customers, not MS that will suffer when the hackers, script kiddies and miscellaneous ne'er-do-wells inevitably trash the security for their latest offering.

Pity that it will be MicroSofts' customers, not MS (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | about 5 years ago | (#27578061)

Pity that it will be MicroSofts' customers, not MS .....

It will be those who support ans enrich MS that are punished. This does not seem a pity to me.

Fools? (3, Funny)

JJman (916535) | about 5 years ago | (#27577565)

Checks current date. No, not the 1st.
Checks date on the article. No, still not the 1st (though eight days different).

Well, somebody's a fool.

time machine (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577581)

What did he compare to, System 7 and Linux kernel 1.0?

post SP2? (4, Funny)

mugnyte (203225) | about 5 years ago | (#27577585)

  Did he mention that Vista post SP2, there is no network stack? Fwoppies FTW!

Re:post SP2? Computer Abstinence! (1)

Logic Worshipper (1518487) | about 5 years ago | (#27577989)

Computer abstinence. No network stack, no USB driver, no floppy drive. It's the only way to keep Micro$oft OS safe. Only trusted files from your Linux partition can run on Windows.

It's possible (-1, Flamebait)

El Lobo (994537) | about 5 years ago | (#27577589)

While it's very possible that this is true, I find this kind of statement incredibly arrogant and tasteless (and I've seen those from Apple, OBSD, as well). That said, Vista post-SP2 is an extremely secure system.

That's great... (1)

PhantomHarlock (189617) | about 5 years ago | (#27577597)

except for the fact that after I boot vista up on a 2GB machine, there's only a few hunded megs of RAM left. On XP, there's only a few hundred megs of ram USED after booting.

I immediately uninstalled it on a new PC after finding out what an unbelievable resource pig Vista is. Good lord.

XP is the most reliable and long lived OS they've ever made. Unfortunately XP32 cannot take advantage of 4GB+ of RAM, so its days are numbered.

--M

Re:That's great... (4, Informative)

aster_ken (516808) | about 5 years ago | (#27577871)

Would you rather that RAM sit there doing nothing? Windows Vista has many features that utilize RAM to its fullest extent. Any free RAM on my system is RAM that is sitting on its lazy ass doing nothing. Windows Vista is actually smart enough to user it (Super Prefetch comes to mind) when my applications are not.

I'm actually typing this in Internet Explorer 8 on Windows Vista Business SP1 32-bit on a Pentium M 1.4 GHz with 1 GB RAM, and it's actually quite snappy.

Re:That's great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577977)

i think you may not understand how vista manages memory vs xp.... google may provide you the answers. it will guide you to resources that will explain it better than i.

Hahahahahaha (1, Redundant)

^Case^ (135042) | about 5 years ago | (#27577601)

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha....

*deep breath*

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha....

*another deep breath*

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha....

No seriously.

It is also... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577607)

The slowest (p)OS on the planet!

The winner of Pwn2Own seems to agree (5, Informative)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | about 5 years ago | (#27577611)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pwn2own-mac-hack,2254-4.html [tomshardware.com]

'The NX bit is very powerful.When used properly, it ensures that user-supplied code cannot be executed in the process during exploitation. Researchers (and hackers) have struggled with ways around this protection. ASLR is also very tough to defeat. This is the way the process randomizes the location of code in a process. Between these two hurdles, no one knows how to execute arbitrary code in Firefox or IE 8 in Vista right now. For the record, Leopard has neither of these features, at least implemented effectively. In the exploit I won Pwn2Own with, I knew right where my shellcode was located and I knew it would execute on the heap for me.'

And this was with Vista SP1. No one knows how to exploit Firefox or IE on Vista due to NX and ASLR.

This seems to be a pretty powerful statement, from someone who would stand a chance of knowing.

My only question is, where is Vista SP2? Last I checked, it was not yet released.

Re:The winner of Pwn2Own seems to agree (5, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 5 years ago | (#27577747)

Thing is, NX and ASLR are not unique to Vista.

Linux, and the BSDs have, at least optionally, had them for some years now. I'm not sure about OSX.

There is a very large difference between saying "most secure MS OS ever" and "most secure OS".

Re:The winner of Pwn2Own seems to agree (2, Informative)

Lennie (16154) | about 5 years ago | (#27577825)

What I've heared is, the people who do that work, like any hobbiest or professional for that matter, doesn't want to use Vista.

Re:The winner of Pwn2Own seems to agree (3, Informative)

GNUbuntu (1528599) | about 5 years ago | (#27577953)

And this was with Vista SP1. No one knows how to exploit Firefox or IE on Vista due to NX and ASLR.

Wow with Vista SP1?!??!?! Gee that totally beats out the fact that the Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD kernels had support for that back in 2004 with OpenBSD having support in 2003 and Solaris having NX support as early as 1997 in Solaris 2.6, right?

Re:The winner of Pwn2Own seems to agree (1)

John Hasler (414242) | about 5 years ago | (#27577999)

> My only question is, where is Vista SP2? Last I checked, it was not yet released.

Which is what makes it so secure.

Let the games commence! (1)

jordanjay29 (1298951) | about 5 years ago | (#27577615)

Uh, how long would one of those Pwn-to-Own sessions take to break this new "safest OS on the planet?"

I though Microsoft would have learned its lesson by now. Maybe I'm just being too optimistic.

In related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577623)

52 new zero-day exploits for Vista SP2 were posted to IRC channels all over the internets.

I felt a tremor in the Force (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577625)

Is this a challenge?

In further news... (4, Funny)

Jason Earl (1894) | about 5 years ago | (#27577637)

Richard Stallman announced in a press conference today that Emacs is the safest operating system on the planet. According to Stallman Emacs is safer than Linux, Windows Vista, or Apple's Mac OS X.

Re:In further news... (5, Funny)

SkinnyKid63 (1104787) | about 5 years ago | (#27578083)

Richard Stallman announced in a press conference today that Emacs is the safest operating system on the planet. According to Stallman Emacs is safer than Linux, Windows Vista, or Apple's Mac OS X.

Yes, but it's missing a decent text editor.

New Laptop please.... (0, Redundant)

s0litaire (1205168) | about 5 years ago | (#27577667)

... It was covered in a burst of lager from my nose and mouth as i read this:
"Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the marketplace, is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever built. It's also the most secure OS on the planet, including Linux and open source and Apple Leopard. It's the safest and most secure OS on the planet today."

oops (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577701)

"..It's also the most secure OS on the planet, including Linux and open source and Apple Leopard. It's the safest and most secure OS on the planet today.... oh...uh.... i mean NOT including.. NOT including, sorry i misread that part, it actually says NOT including so.... can i start again please?"

Consumer Activists: +1, PatRIOTic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577705)

Dear Mr. Turner:

Please provide some evidence to support your outrageous
claim.

Yours In Communism,
Kilgore Trout [youtube.com]

OpenBSD wants a word with you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577751)

Laughing Rat Man.jpg

aktually... (1)

Orbijx (1208864) | about 5 years ago | (#27577753)

By "planet", he was referring to an old, old copy of the Weekly Planet (commonly called The Planet) that they had a Vista SP2 DVD sitting on top of.

By a technicality, this makes the statement true.

Unfortunate... (1)

Yankumi (807658) | about 5 years ago | (#27577765)

This may be true... but unfortunately, for Vista to be usable without driving a person crazy you must first disable the features that make it safe (ie. User Account Control). Luckily MS has fixed this annoyance to a fair degree with the UAC changes in Win7.

For a given value of "safe"... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577771)

Oh well...

The safest MS "operating system" is probably DOS 6.2 on a stand-alone 286. Just don't share floppies with anyone!

The safest Microsoft OS.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27577803)

that Microsoft was involved in would have to be OS/2.

What planet are they on? (1)

gethoht (757871) | about 5 years ago | (#27577847)

"Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the marketplace, is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever built. It's also the most secure OS on the planet, including Linux and open source and Apple Leopard. It's the safest and most secure OS on the planet today."

Umm... what planet are they on?

Awesome! (3, Funny)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 5 years ago | (#27577855)

"Vista today, post-Service Pack 2, which is now in the marketplace, is the safest, most reliable OS we've ever built.

Security through obscurity?

Brilliant!

I guess that z/OS isn't an OS afterall? (1)

Steeltalon (734391) | about 5 years ago | (#27577899)

Seriously, MS... We know that you're excited about being even a little secure, but let's be a little realistic in terms of what "the planet" consists of. I think that anyone who's ever worked on a real mainframe would dispute your little claim, cute though it is.

The most secure OS would be... (4, Insightful)

Targon (17348) | about 5 years ago | (#27577951)

one that allows the user to decide not to install potentially insecure software during the initial OS install. This is the biggest problem with Microsoft Windows when it comes to security, the huge amount of crap that gets installed automatically without the ability to decide DURING the install what features you want or do not want.

Linux as a whole does provide the ability to make a very minimal install with only those applications that you want on the machine. Solaris used to have this ability as well, though I am not sure if you can go package by package during the initial install to decide what you want or do not want on the machine.

You hear about Linux problems, but then it only applies to a specific Apache version that comes with a "typical" RedHat install, or some other issue which only applies to a certain software package. When a problem can be traced to the kernel or some other core component, that is when it applies to the OS as a whole.

So, saying that Vista is the most secure after SP2 means nothing if garbage like Internet Explorer is still open to all the exploits that Microsoft doesn't like to talk about.

Put it online without a condom ... (0)

Skapare (16644) | about 5 years ago | (#27577959)

... err ... I mean without virus protection. Let's see just how safe the OS ... by itself ... really is.

Safe on paper, worminfested swiss cheese IRL. (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | about 5 years ago | (#27577963)

While the technologies in Vista sounds promising on paper all they really do is take away one attack vector out of many possible. Windows has been extremely easy to own historically wich has made the exploits for it pretty trivial. As the arms race continue hackers will still be ahead of Microsoft and all the companies doing applications for windows. The hackers will have to dig deeper into Windows but as always there will be plenty of bugs to go around. As long as Microsoft has a reactive aproach to security instead of a proactive one the hackers have the upper hand.

DRM is what has brought a bit more security but mostly as a side effect and not as an intended goal. Also keep in mind that UAC puts the blame for every possible breach on the user regardless of whos at fault wich is the reason Microsoft makes theese kinds of statements. "Its not a security hole, the user has to press ok for it to work!"

When every possible action demands that keypress UAC is utter useless from a security standpoint.

Yeah, and I'm seeing those flying pigs in the sky (1)

helbent (1244274) | about 5 years ago | (#27577997)

You know, M$ has always been behind the curve when it comes to security and structuring their OS to be secure from the ground up; security has been a real afterthought for over a decade, and that's simply not acceptable. I don't envision this changing anytime soon, either with Vista or whatever other junk they're peddling.

In other NON-News... (4, Funny)

killmenow (184444) | about 5 years ago | (#27578009)

Today Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, proclaimed "Google search is the best search on the planet!"

Also, Tom Long, CEO of Miller Brewing Company announced, "Our beer is the best tasting beer in the world!"

Here's a template: [Insert Person's Name Here], [insert title here] of [insert company name here] [announced|proclaimed|stated|declared|quothed] "[insert company's product here] is the [insert positive attribute here] in the entire [world|planet|universe]."

Repeat, ad infinitum.

Aahh I Needed a Laugh (2, Interesting)

Greyfox (87712) | about 5 years ago | (#27578029)

Tell ya what. I have a cable right here that will connect your computer directly to the internet. Lets plug in a computer and kick off a Vista SP2 install (I assume you can get an installation disk that's pre-patched to SP2, right?) Then we'll measure how long it takes for the system to get taken over. Then we'll do the same thing with a stock Debian install CD. Then we'll post our results on the Internet. If your operating system is indeed so secure, you should have no problem with this, right?

It may be true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27578037)

It may truly be the safest OS MS has made yet- by a fine line.

Regardless, it's still not saying much.

Its secure, but time will tell (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27578103)

With Windows, the problem lies less with the OS itself than who runs it.

There are a few glaring holes in Windows which need to be addressed. Things autorun/autoplay functionality need to be completely re-engineered to minimize the attack profile. On a lot of systems, one hacked U3 USB flash drive can wreak a lot of havoc. Microsoft has been decent at addressing issues. IE8 has come a long way for example.

Is it significantly more secure than OS X, or Linux? This is hard to say because OS X and Linux are not under the microscope of numerous well funded criminal organizations 24/7 looking for the smallest flaw to exploit. Comparing operating systems to locks (as opposed to cars), it is hard to compare the security of two different types of locks if one is holding an expensive bike to a pole in a seedy neighborhood at night, on a day by day basis, versus another lock which keeps shut a gate on some house in the middle of rural Montana. Any flaw on the bike lock will be found and used immediately while the lock on the gate may see a long time before someone pries at it.

Is it on par with OS X, Linux, or other UNIX variants for security features, such as signed executables, NX addresses, ASLR, user/admin separation, storage of user credentials in a secure manner, and other items? Definitely. Especially the 64 bit version.

Would I use it on a publically facing production server if needed? Of course. The OS used should be determined by the task being done. Of course, no servers should be directly connected to the Internet regardless of OS and should be behind some sort of packet filtering mechanism.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...