Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!



Ask Slashdot: Is an Open Source .NET Up To the Job?

benjymouse Re:I'm a Java developer (246 comments)

With the open sourcing of .NET, I wonder how far they've gone. Is it the exact same runtime used on Windows, now fully open sourced like the JVM?


Was the entire .NET platform open sourced, or just a subset?

The entire *server* stack - i.e. everything you need to run a .NET server application. They have even created a small-footprint webserver Kestrel for Linux based on libuv. The reason for libuv actually touches on a very important aspect/advantage of modern .NET (and to some extent, Windows Server) . More on that below.

Doesn't .NET require IIS to run web apps?

No. You have *always* been able to just self-host the ASP.NET bits. However, MS have taken it a step further and completely separated out the bits of the pipeline so that you can pick and choose. For a long time there have been plugins for Apache httpd and others that would allow you to run Mono. Those will work fine regardless of whether ASP.NET is provided by Mono or MS. Kremel mentioned above, but you can use any other way. ASP.NET vNext is "pluggable".

How will you run a .NET web app on Linux?

curl -sSL https://raw.githubusercontent.... | sh && source ~/.kre/kvm/kvm.sh

In the Java world, the entire platform and runtimes are open source.

In the .NET world, the entire platform and runtimes are open source, and the platform specification is governed by international standards organizations (ECMA and ISO).

Microsoft grants patent licenses for anyone who wants to create implementations of the specifications, and Microsoft *specifically* does not require paid testing suites and they do NOT assert that using the APIs constitutes copyright infringement.

And now for some reflections on the differences: Microsofts stack - especially with the latest .NET and Windows Runtime - have grown to become completely focused on asynchronous programming. Windows (the NT line) with the "overlapped IO" available from the initial version always had a very high-performing "completion" oriented async model for all types of IO. While this model could yield much better scalability, to leverage it you had to program in a "callback" style that were often at odds on how you think about a problem (sequentially) as well as poor match for constructs such as exception handling, looping/branching etc.

With C# 5.0 (and the equivalent VB.NET) async became an integrated feature of the language. This is not about smart synchronization primitives, multithreading or similar "low level" concepts. This is aboy having a language that effortlessly allows a programmer to express a sequential problem in a way that allow asynchronous processing all the way down to the system level where overlapped IO will be used. Without invading the way the solution is expressed.

This is huge. I am aware of only one other ecosystem that does something similar: node.js. Python has the capability, but there's no ecosystem built around it where the capability is the default way to design libraries and APIs.

In terms of enabling and supporting async programming style, C#, .NET (and F#) is the most mature option out there, along with the "new" kid node.js.

Java only recently acquired the ability to process web requests asynchronously (yielding the thread to process other requests) - but the language and APIs make it exceedingly hard to leverage this capability for anything useful. If you look up articles for how to do async in Java you will notice a strange tendency to "do nothing" while waiting for an synchronous operation complete. If you cannot do anything useful in the meantime - there really is no point.

In .NET I can follow a few basic rules: Mark WebAPI methods / MVC actions with async, return Task<T> instead of some type T and use await whenever waiting for something like a network request, database query, file IO etc. Then ALL of the processing will be asynchronous all the way down to where asynchronous capabilities of the underlying operating system is used. No multi-threading just to wait for completion. Much less overhead, and much easier tuning of the application (you generally do not need to compensate for IO blocking by spawning more threads).

It is going to be interesting to see how the platforms stack up when on equal footing. My bet is that even on Linux it will be *much* easier writing truly scaleable applications with .NET compared to Java, Ruby, PHP etc.

3 hours ago

New Destover Malware Signed By Stolen Sony Certificate

benjymouse Re:Why is the signing useful (80 comments)

Expect this certificate to be revoked in near future. This will close that avenue, and cause all machines infected drivers signed by the cert to refuse to load the malware driver.

And cause all machines with legitimate Sony drivers (if there is such a thing?) signed with the same cert to refuse to load those too.

Unfortunately, yes. Sony will have to re-issue those legitimate drivers and sign them with a new cert. That is actually a good reason why a code signing certificate for widely distributed software absolutely should reside within a HSM, which will make the private key impossible to steal.

about two weeks ago

New Destover Malware Signed By Stolen Sony Certificate

benjymouse Re:Why is the signing useful (80 comments)

What benefit does the attacker get by signing the malware with a company's certificate?

Windows has a mechanism where kernel-mode drivers must be signed. For certain mandatory, early-load drivers (e.g. anti-malware tools, measured boot tools) the drivers must be signed by Microsoft. But Windows allows other kernel-mode drivers to be loaded as long as they are signed using a valid, non-revoked code-signing cert from (IIRC) Verisign.

Kernel-mode drivers can obviously access memory in kernel-mode. This is a common way for malware to take foothold on a Windows machine. It is really hard to ensure that Malware is executed during boot otherwise.

Expect this certificate to be revoked in near future. This will close that avenue, and cause all machines infected drivers signed by the cert to refuse to load the malware driver.

about two weeks ago

New Destover Malware Signed By Stolen Sony Certificate

benjymouse Re:Here come the certificate flaw deniers....... (80 comments)

In practice, a certificate is nothing more than a long password that's impossible for a normal human to memorize. So it ends up in a file somewhere, if not several "somewheres", where it can be easily stolen.

If certificates are used correctly they are stored in some kind of certificate store where they cannot just be "stolen".

In the Windows certificate store, when you import a certificate, the default is to set the key to "non exportable". Non exportable means that you'll never get the key from that store - at least not from your user context (given that it is stored encrypted but on the local disk, an "root" user with access to physical disk sectors could theoretically reconstruct the key - but not without running with severely elevated privileges).

You can still use the certificate to sign with - but you'll need to go through the crypto api which asks the certificate store to perform the signing without giving the private key away. This works even if the key is held in a connected hardware secure module (HSM) which will add more guarantee that private keys *never* leave the device.

For better security you *should* use the cert store to generate the non-exportable private key to begin with. It can still be signed by an external entity like Verisign - even without the private key ever leaving the secured store.

There is no excuse for having the private key stolen. The private key of a certificate used to sign software/drivers from a corporation like Sony should *definitively* have been created by a HSM and there should be guarantee that the key never leaves that HSM. There are well known products which will still allow you to load-balance HSMs, synchronize and take backups where the key will only ever leave the box in an encrypted container that will only be understood by a box that have been paired with the originating HSM/cert store.

about two weeks ago

Highly Advanced Backdoor Trojan Cased High-Profile Targets For Years

benjymouse Re:Microsoft Windows only (143 comments)

Shell shock is not malware, it's a bug in Bash that can possibly be exploited if you have exposed Bash to the outside world through some poorly implemented service.

Yeah. Like Apache.

about a month ago

Regin Malware In EU Attack Linked To US and British Intelligence Agencies

benjymouse Re:How many bozos are screaming that Windows is sa (131 comments)

So many ppl come here and post that Windows is not only safe, but that it is targeted because of numbers. Yet, it is obvious that NSA and GCHQ targeted Windows. Why? I doubt that it was numbers, but ease of cracking.

If your targets use Windows it would be a real stroke of genius to distribute attacks against Linux, don't you think?


So, in the meantime, how many companies will start switching to *nix?

What is the *nix equivalent to secure boot? Signed kernel modules? What is the *nix equivalent to Measured Boot and Network Access Protection? How does an organization automatically and immediately detect and isolate potentially infected hosts?

Every operating system out there will experience exploitable vulnerabilities. Applications running on top of the operating systems will experience exploitable vulnerabilities. The most recent severe vulnerabilities that have been mass exploited are *nix vulnerabilities like Heartbleed and Shellshock. No operating system is immune.

That's why defense in depth is important. Windows starts it's defenses before boot, by using Secure Boot. This ensures that only approved bootloaders run. It prevents bootkits. Some Linux distros support a weak form of secure boot (it doesn't protect all types of resources, notably scripts and config files are not digitally signed). Windows loads all kernel components from signed "cabinet" files - protecting all assets used during boot. If a rootkit tampers with any of the files, the system will refuse to boot.

During boot, before loading *any* kernel module, Windows will compute a hash of the module and record it in the TPM hardware module along with name, size, dates and other metadata. Upon successful boot (but before other hosts will accept traffic from the system) the OS asks the TPM for a signed "health" record. The TPM will issue a signed document with all the recorded info that the host can present to a health certificate server. The health cert server can investigate the list of loaded modules and compare against known whitelists and/or blacklists. If everything checks out, the health cert server issues a certificate the booting host must use when communicating with other hosts. Unless it can present such cert, the other hosts will refuse to communicate with the host.

Does 'Nix support such security in depth?

Such targeted attacks will target whatever operating system is being used by the target. Targets must consider the possibility that any host can be breached through an application or OS vulnerability. With that recognition, they must ensure expedient diagnosis and isolation. In that area, a Windows server infrastructure can be set up to become extremely strong.

about a month ago

Critical XSS Flaws Patched In WordPress and Popular Plug-In

benjymouse Re:Attackers take control of websites? (41 comments)

"New security updates released for the WordPress .. fix cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities that could allow attackers to take control of websites ."

Embedded javascript in a comment box could trigger exploits on Microsoft Internet Explorer running on Microsoft Windows desktops.

Source? Or just trolling?

about a month ago

Highly Advanced Backdoor Trojan Cased High-Profile Targets For Years

benjymouse Re:Highly advanced computer worm? (143 comments)

This 'highly advanced' computer worm will only work on Microsoft Windows:

It is not a worm. It is a trojan, i.e. the user has to invite the trojan (the "dropper") inside for it to work.

A worm is an automated infection which propagates automatically from system to system. Like the Shellshock worms, Code Red, Nimda.

Any particular reason you chose to call it a worm, despite that it was described as a trojan in the summary as well as in TFA?

about a month ago

Highly Advanced Backdoor Trojan Cased High-Profile Targets For Years

benjymouse Re: Microsoft Windows only (143 comments)

Current strain of Microsoft Windows? Which ones?

All of the current Windows versions are derived from Windows NT. The security model was developed for Windows NT. It is the very same extensible (through SIDs) model that has later been extended for AD and later for UAC (mandatory Integrity Control) in Windows Vista.

about a month ago

Highly Advanced Backdoor Trojan Cased High-Profile Targets For Years

benjymouse Re:Microsoft Windows only (143 comments)

It's the world's biggest target for malware, it's a monoculture, and it has a security model that tends toward convenience over security

Yes - the "dragnet" attacks tends to go after the most victims. If your attack has a certain chance of succeeding (like a social engineering attack), you'd be stupid to go after the 1% instead of the 90%. Now, in a *targeted* attack where the attacker singled out a specific victim or group of victims - the attacker will go after whatever those targets use.

and was actually bolted on after-the-fact.

Nope. The current strain of Windows was created from scratch with the present security model from the get-go. The security model is based on tokens and it was designed to be extensible from the start. Also from the start, the designers envisioned that a process or even a thread could have a token *different* from the user token - i.e. a process could run with permissions/privileges different from the user.

The Windows security model also goes beyond the naive file system-focused model where only file system-like objects were seen as important to secure. In Windows - from the start - all system objects (files, directories, windows, processes, threads, shared memory regions, mutexes, users, groups etc) are accessed through object-oriented handles. When you open a handle you specify the access you request, where each object type has it's own access types. The security check is performed right there when opening the object - instead of on each syscall. If the access you request is granted, a system object is created with a jump table (think virtual method table) where the functions you requested access are mapped to the actual system functions, and the other functions mapped to "denied". The upshot of this is that even though Windows has a much more advanced security model which could make security checks more involved, it will usually perform better because it does *not* have to check security permissions on each syscall.

Contrast that with Unix/Linux where the security model initially only considered file system objects. There were only 2 levels: regular users and root, and a large number of functions could only be performed by root. When it was realized that other system types might also need security descriptors, the existing file system was "adapted" by "mapping" non-file system objects to become file system-like. Talk about bolted on!

The Unix/Linux security model is also the only one with a deliberate drilled hole: The SUID/setuid. Here you have a too limited model where regular users are unable to perform perfectly reasonable functions, like changing their own passwords. So what do you do? You let them run as the only user that *can* perform the function, and pray that the process somehow prevents them from performing any of the other functions root can do while running they are running as root. This is a blatant violation of the least privilege principle, but it is now deeply engraved in all Unix systems. Needless to say that this is the most common path for pwning Unix/Linux systems, going all the way back.

The Unix/Linux model was so bad that NSA had to create SELinux (talk about bolted-on!) which creates it's own competing security "context" (a token). When you want to audit the security of a Unix/Linux system you have to consider 3 competing models: 1) The "original" file-system oriented discretionary model with the SUID hole, 2) the sudoers and 3) SELinux/apparmor or whatever has been bolted on the top.

Especially 1) and 2) are worrying, because it is neigh impossible to audit those sufficiently as long as just a single SUID/sudo command is allowed: How do you (as an auditor) know *what* the SUID/sudo command can actually do? Did *you* install the executable, did *you* monitor the compilation from source? What *other* things can ps or even ping do that you don't know about? If I hold up a file or point to a process on your system as asks "who can access this" - you cannot give me a conclusive answer - because the original file system discretionary permissions may not tell the entire story. There may always be a SUID or sudo utility that can access the file *despite* the discretionary access control.

On Windows there are no deliberate holes in the security boundary: If an auditor points to a file or a process or any other object type, you can give a conclusive answer to who can access the object with what access level. It is all in the ACL. If a user is not in that ACL - he cannot access the object.

When considering the desktop it is even worse: Windows actually has meaningful user interface privilege isolation. On Unix/Linux there is *no* isolation. X is about as promiscuous as can be: Any process and snoop on *any* other process keyboard, mouse moves etc. Which means that is an attacker slips by and get to run his code in e.g. Firefox - he can snoop on *anything* you type in *any* window - including terminal where you type sudo or root passwords. Go figure. Windows security model (since Vista) prohibits lower-integrity processes from snooping on higher-integrity processes. Even a normal integrity process cannot snoop on other normal-integrity processes unless a number of conditions are met (it has to declare it's intention in the manifest, it has to be installed in Program Files or System32 etc). And then there's the stupid password caching for sudo...

Unix (Linux) is about as far from a monoculture as you can get while still remaining reasonably compatible between distributions, and it was built with security in mind.

Shellshock, Heartbleed, ...

Not to mention that a common reason to run Linux is LAMP - The P of which is PHP - the swiss cheese monoculture of web programming languages.

about a month ago

Visual Studio 2015 Supports CLANG and Android (Emulator Included)

benjymouse Re:We all dance in the streets (192 comments)

I know this is is meant as a jokey comment, but it's worth noting that VS2015 has native Git support as well so Github etc. works without any plugins.

VS 2013 (including Community) has Git support out of the box and works just fine with GitHub as well.

Ahem. It works. Sorta. It's slow, mildly confusing and it totally screws up if you use subrepositories. Looking forward to VS2015.

about a month ago

Microsoft To Open Source .NET and Take It Cross-Platform

benjymouse Re:Open, but will it run? (525 comments)

disclaimer: I'm on the VB/C# language team.

Question: PowerShell is implemented using .NET. Will we see PowerShell on Linux?

about a month ago

Microsoft To Open Source .NET and Take It Cross-Platform

benjymouse Re:Open, but will it run? (525 comments)

Excuse my ignorance but is there such a thing as plain ascii conf files in the Microsoft world? Or will the proprietary binary registry be ported/required too for the .NET libs to access app/system settings? How will it adhere 100% to the *nix security conventions? TIA.

.NET does not rely on the registry, except for some of the COM that will not be ported. In .NET the config files are XML files, e.g. a program called MyStuff.exe will have a config file called MyStuff.exe.config - which must contain XML configuration according to the (extensible) schema. Pretty sweet, actually, if only they would modernize it a bit. I'm hearing that they are doing exactly that - making the config system even more "pluggable".

Config files for server applications can "inherit" base config files: First, the base config file is applied and then the more specific config file. The specific config file can remove, replace, change or add items from configured collections/items, unless explicitly forbidden by the base file.

about a month ago

Microsoft To Open Source .NET and Take It Cross-Platform

benjymouse Re: RIP Java! (525 comments)

Can you explain?

I'm not the GP and I'm a self-proclaimed C# fan, but: The Java collections seems to have been more well thought out from the beginning with abstract types (interfaces) for different types of collections, such as bag, list, set, stack, queue, vector etc and then concrete implementations with separate characteristics, such as hashed, sorted etc. .NET is catching up, especialy in the 4.x versions, but Java (IIRC) still has proper priority queues that has no equivalent in .NET.

If you see comparisons between .net and java, it's usually that the past 10 years .net has evolved and java sometimes catches up a tiny bit.


I always thought that java collections were weaker since in .net even an array is also still a collection, they have collections for just about anything you need, and with LINQ you've got an incredibly powerful way of manipulating/creating/accessing collections.

I always found the Java collections a bit stronger conceptually. For instance, it really bothered me that there was no hashed set (there is now), and I had to play tricks with HashTable by using the same value for key and value to mimic a set. It was particularly annoying as I went from C++ to Java to C#. Java seemed to have lifted the collections from STL where they seemed to have been very well designed. C# collections always stroke me as having been "thrown in there". Thankfully they have improved a lot since then.

and with LINQ you've got an incredibly powerful way of manipulating/creating/accessing collections.

LINQ cannot be overestimated. Large parts of code is actually manipulating collections, and LINQ is just awesome. Also the fact that C#/.NET generic collections were always properly reified, unlike Javas fake generics (type erasure) which causes all kinds of strange corner cases and problems. C# generic collections allow primitive types to be used for type parameters, and always without performance loss due to runtime downcasting like in Java.

about a month ago

Denmark Faces a Tricky Transition To 100 Percent Renewable Energy

benjymouse Re:Are renewable energy generators up to task ? (488 comments)

This is Denmark, yes? You know, the country that is surrounded by oceans that have some of the strongest tides? I think Denmark could produce almost all of it's power though tidal power plants. The only real trick is how to buffer the power during the lull of high and low tide.

You are mostly correct solar (fotovoltaic) is a dumb idea, but there are more renewable power sources than solar and wind.

There is no tide to speak of in Denmark. I'm not sure that we'd classify the sea between the islands (Denmark is basically an island nation) as "oceans". The tides are usually 1m or less, most pronounced in the eastern part facing the North Sea, much less pronounced in the western parts that sits in the Baltic Sea.

But the flat topology and the fact that most of Denmark is islands, there's a *lot* of coastline, and wind is a much preferred as renewable energy source here. I don't think people realize how much it is blowing here. Damned wind!

It is correct that generating most energy from wind runs the risk that prolonged periods with high pressure (which means little wind and clear skies == frezzing cold during winter) can not generate enough wind to meet the demand.

Another problem is that in large parts of Denmark (e.g. the entire Copenhagen metropolitan area) most households get their heating from centralized "surpluss" heat from electricity production - burning coal at the moment.

It is commendable not to waste heat,and as you can probably imagine, Denmark has a huge investment in this centralized heat distribution system.

But I'd like to know, where will we get the heating from once electricity is produced from wind and solar?

about a month ago

Worrying Aspects of Linux Gaming

benjymouse Re:Ultimately... (265 comments)

The OpenGL API is fundamentally opposed to an efficient implementation. It allows developers to do fundamentally inefficient things (like dramatically changing configurations at the last second, before rendering, requiring the driver to recompile/reoptimise shaders and/or reverify states) immediately before rendering. Furthermore, it doesn't allow developers to do fundamentally efficient things (i.e. giving the driver a heads up about exactly what state/shader combinations it's going to use, so that they can be made ready at compile/launch time).

Good points. But while the API may not coerce you into writing performant code like (perhaps) the alternatives, it does not make it impossible or practically unobtainable. I will readily admit that I know very little about 3D programming, shaders and the like.

However, modern games are all built upon some form of game engine that in turn is typically used in multiple games. Few game developers write to the API anyway, so if the few (relative to number of games they support) game engines were optimized, wouldn't this difference go away?

Which brings us back to the developers of the game engines: If the developers of the game engines would invest the effort to create engines with high performance on Linux, multiple games would benefit from it immediately. OTOH, if the game engine developers *do not* optimize their code for Linux, there is very, very little actual game developers can do about it, short of creating their own game engine. Which is a monumental task.

about a month ago

Will HP's $200 Stream 11 Make People Forget About Chromebooks?

benjymouse Re: No (232 comments)

So microsoft's relationship with the govt is relavent here but google's is not?

Yeah, the NSA hacked Google to get at their data, Microsoft was a willing collaborator.

Since you so dishonestly quoted text from an article without linking back to it, here is the link: http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

This concerns the "Prism" program - which since the initial bruhaha has been revealed to be little more than an automated way to comply with (presumably) lawful requests from law enforcement agencies. (Note: I strongly disagree with the constitutionality of having a secret court issuing secret orders; it totally undermines the democracy)

The participation in the automated system (aka Prism) does not require a company to comply with more FISA requests, nor does non-participation allow a company to *not* comply with FISA requests. It simply has no bearing on it.

Importantly, the automated system does NOT(!) allow the agencies more access to users' data. Each FISA request will STILL have to be considered on a
case-by-case basis, and lawyers for the company will STILL have to review all material sent to the agency through PRISM before hitting the "send" button.

And conspicuously absent from your quote is the fact that while Microsoft was mentioned in the title, Skype, Apple, Google, Facebook and Yahoo were also mentioned.

Little information is available on the actual design of PRISM, and basically all of the speculation was based on this single slide from the Snowden leak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

From that slide you can see that Microsoft was indeed the first company to comply with FISA orders through PRISM, but that Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk(?), YouTube, Skype, AOL and Apple all followed.

So you are grossly misrepresenting facts, being dishonest and out lying about the information in a transparent attempt to taint Microsoft while letting Google of the hook. Now, why would you do that? Anonymous cowardly liar.

about a month and a half ago

Denmark Plans To Be Coal-Free In 10 Years

benjymouse Re:I don't know what they are doing to burn coal n (332 comments)

Also note, very few people in Denmark uses electric heating as you can get hot water from centralized production into your home (not clean only for use in radiators). My parents gets their heating from a power plant 20km away.

Not to nitpick, but danes refer to that centralized production as "surplus heat". The "surplus" heat is heat generated as a bi-effect from producing electricity.... - from coal. So, when the electricity all comes from wind, the danes need to find some other way to heat their houses during winter.

about 2 months ago

Drupal Warns Users of Mass, Automated Attacks On Critical Flaw

benjymouse Re:PHP (76 comments)

How do prepared statements handle the not uncommon situation where you want to include an "in" clause? For example:

select * from customers where city in ?citylist

This was the problem they tried to solve by dynamically creating a statement like:

select * from customers where city in (?city-1, ?city-2, ?city-3)

So, to generate the -1, -2, and -3 parts they relied upon the index of the array.

Only in PHP an array will turn around and bite you with it's dual personality as a hash table. A hash table where one key was not "-1" but rathersomething like (pseudo):

-1); drop table students; --

You cannot really fault the Drupal developers for trying to support this commonly occurring pattern, for which there are no good solutions with plain prepared statements. After all, if they could write secure code for a common problem that could prevent less experienced developers for falling back to error-prone and insecure string interpolation.

Don't get me wrong: The drupal developers is at fault. But they were set up by the criminally insecure PHP.

about 2 months ago



VLC threatens Secunia with legal action in row over vulnerability report

benjymouse benjymouse writes  |  about a year and a half ago

benjymouse (756774) writes "Following a blog post by security company Secunia, VideoLAN (vendor of popular VLC media player) president Jean-Baptiste Kempf accuses Secunia of lying in a blob post titled More lies from Secunia. It seems that Secunia and Jean-Baptiste Kempf have different views on whether a serious vulnerability has been patched. At one point VLC threatened legal action unless Secunia updated their SA51464 security advisory to show the issue as patched. While Secunia changed the status pending their own investigation, they later reverted to "unpatched". Secunia claimed that they had PoC illustrating that the root issue still existed and 3rd party confirmation (an independent security researcher found the same issue and reported it to Secunia)."

Pwn2Own 2009: Safari, IE8 and Firefox all pwned!

benjymouse benjymouse writes  |  more than 5 years ago

benjymouse (756774) writes "In a matter of seconds, Charlie Miller, last years winner of the PWN2OWN contest did it again at CanSecWest and successfully exploited a fully patched Safari running on a Mac. He came prepared, directed the operator of the browser to browse to a rigged website and it was all over.

He took the $10.000 first prize and the macbook home with him.

Last year he was quoted as saying "Every time I look for [a flaw in Leopard] I find one. I can't say the same for Linux or Windows. I found the iPhone bug a year ago and that was a Safari bug as well. I've also found other bugs in QuickTime.".

As I wrote this submission news came in that all of IE8, Safari (again) and Firefox was pwned by a researcher going by the name "Nils". So far only Chrome remains standing.

These were all drive-by exploits against fully patched browsers, not 3rd party plugins. Be careful out there."

Vista Capable lawsuit loses class action status

benjymouse benjymouse writes  |  more than 5 years ago

benjymouse (756774) writes "In a big setback for plaintiffs, a federal judge has stripped the class-action status from the Vista Capable suit against Microsoft.

Computerworld writes

The consumers who brought the original lawsuit, and those who followed as members of the class action, will be free to continue their cases, but they will have to do it individually, not as a group, Pechman said. "Approximately one year ago, this Court certified a class in this matter and allowed Plaintiffs 'to further develop their price inflation theory'," Pechman said. "It is now apparent that class treatment is no longer appropriate."

"Dr. Leffler did not attempt any regression analysis, much less an econometric analysis of the impact of 'Vista Capable' on demand," Pechman said. "It is ... critical to Plaintiffs' theory of proof to isolate Microsoft's purportedly deceptive efforts to increase demand from promotions OEMs had in the run up to the holiday season."

Presumably the lawyers for plaintiffs were expecting a good chunk of the potential damages. This will make it much more costly and risky to retrieve such damages. Will this effectively spell the end of the suits, or will the lawyers press on? IANAL so I wouldn't know whether they can appeal this ruling or not."


Microsoft urges Windows users to shun Safari

benjymouse benjymouse writes  |  more than 6 years ago

benjymouse (756774) writes "The Register has picked up on a recent Microsoft security bulletin which urges Windows users to "restrict use of Safari as a web browser until an appropriate update is available from Microsoft and/or Apple". This controversy comes after Apple has officially refused to promise to do anything about the carpet bombing vulnerability in the Safari browser. Basically, Apple does not see unsolicited downloads of hundreds or even thousands of executable files to users' desktops as being a security problem.

The MS bulletin speaks of a possible "blended" attack. This is obviously recognizing that having the desktop carpet bombed with executable files does not imply that they can be executed. However, once the files are on the desktop all an attacker needs to do is to find some social engineering attack vector or a way to launch one or more of the files through some other vulnerability. At the very least it does not take much imagination to come up with scenarios where this vulnerability can be used by spammers or skiddies out to annoy users.

It is unprecendented for Microsoft to recommend Windows users to abstain from using a mainstream software product, especially a competing product. Could it be that Microsofts security response team have grown sensitive over Apple TV ads ridiculing Windows users over security while at the same time Apple software products, especially Quicktime, and now Safari threatening the security of those very same users? Surely the "Apple software updater" push of Safari haven't exactly earned them points in Redmond. Surely MSRT realizes that this may be controversial. Is this a "stab" back at Apple and/or a way to shine light on Apples own security problems?"

Netcraft: Microsoft IIS may soon overtake Apache

benjymouse benjymouse writes  |  more than 7 years ago

benjymouse (756774) writes "From the latest Netcraft web server survey:
In the August 2007 survey we received responses from 127,961,479 sites, an increase of 2.3 million sites from last month. Microsoft continues to increase its web server market share, adding 2.6 million sites this month as Apache loses 991K hostnames. As a result, Windows improves its market share by 1.4% to 34.2%, while Apache slips by 1.7% to 48.4%. Microsoft's recent gains raise the prospect that Windows may soon challenge Apache's leadership position."


benjymouse has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?