Is this an accident ?
Heaps of Windows 10 internal builds, private source code leak online
A massive trove of Microsoft's internal Windows operating system builds and chunks of its core source code have leaked online. The data – some 32TB of official and non-public installation images and software blueprints that compress down to 8TB – were uploaded to betaarchive.com, the latest load of files provided just earlier …
COMMENTS
-
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Monday 26th June 2017 09:36 GMT John Sanders
Is this an accident ?
@kain preacher
Who cares? it is not as if you can use the code to improve anything or to create your own product. maybe this is useful for learning about the innards of windows? Something that has been possible for 20+ years if not more?
No one cares. oh yeah pirates and people who write malware may do.
Nothing to see here, move along.
-
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 19:21 GMT Ellier
Re: "Technically, it's the best news we will get all year"
You completely miss the reason why I say this. I'm for linux, more and more as time wears on. Microsoft has made some really horrible moves of late - did you even see Windows 8? I did, and it was complete garbage. What I am hoping this does is bring us closer to linux getting the driver support it deserves. I could tell you a story about a laptop upgrade to Windows 10 that failed miserably due to a graphics driver, but I digress. The point is, linux needs to unify, not segment, and this event could be the catalyst. I'm just hoping to get the application and driver support in linux that I get in Windows. By far, it is the best news I've gotten this year - one step closer to an unfragmented linux culture.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 20:55 GMT Updraft102
Re: "Technically, it's the best news we will get all year"
Hm, yes, I saw Windows 8.... seeing it now, as a matter of fact!
Obviously, it's a disaster as far as OOBE, but so is 10... but 8 (and by that I also mean 8.1 for the purposes of this message) can be made quite nice with things like Classic Shell, Old New Explorer, and Metro Killer in a way that 10 cannot. Metro was largely "tacked on" the outside of a Win32 core, and it's relatively easy to wall it off and live completely in the Win32 part. With MS removing more and more Win32 functionality and adding it to UWP, you can't do that on Windows 10.
Once all the de-dumbification of Windows 8 is done, you get an OS that allows the user control over updates, doesn't spy on you (same caveats as with Windows 7 about those telemetry updates MS pushed out), doesn't have advertising in it, doesn't uninstall your stuff without permission, doesn't install Candy Crush or other apps without your permission, doesn't change your drivers without permission, doesn't nag you endlessly to use their crappy Edge browser... things that we used to take for granted as being baseline-level expectations for OS behavior are now "features."
The best part of 8 is that it gets security updates for six more years. That's a very long time in computing, of course. By then, Windows as we know it may not even exist... or maybe MS will have seen the light and given us something that doesn't try to be a crappy phone and a PC at the same time. Whatever the outcome, that's six more years that a Windows user gets without being subjected to Windows 10.
Six years is more than enough time for the irrational exuberance over Satya Nadella's inane vision and how "innovative" Microsoft is now to come crashing back to reality (including their stock prices). As long as the stocks are up, they're not going to change direction, but everything about the current stock prices of MSFT screams "bubble." It's a lot of sizzle and not a lot of steak.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 23rd June 2017 21:55 GMT Destroy All Monsters
Re: Ooooh, goody...
How would any of the Windows source code give sensible users the OS they actually want?
You are too sensible for these parts. Begone!
Does the leak include versioned file? Much fun can be had in checking coding hotspots.
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 05:52 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Ooooh, goody...
"can we get at the bits of code that do the telemetry and forced updates and REMOVE THE F*****G THINGS"
Instructions on how to stop forced updates and hack out the other nasty bits are all over the webernet. You could have had the system running the way you like it at any time.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 07:36 GMT largefile
Re: Ooooh, goody...
No one on this thread is "we users!" You folks are all a bunch of computer geeks who hate Microsoft and have zero bearing on any reality other than your own. Few people in the world want a stripped down OS that doesn't update drivers, software and security. Reading your posts is my tech comedy hour.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 10:47 GMT Kiwi
Re: Ooooh, goody...
Few people in the world want a stripped down OS that doesn't update drivers, software and security
Actually, most people in the world hate updates. They slow the system down (on Windows, seldom noticeable on Linux), most people get along well with their existing drivers, same for their existing software (especially when said update means learning how to do things again, or features they use being removed), and most only "care" about security because of those who do their darndest to make them see sense.
Besides, the only "security" updates from MS in recent years have been the ones that break the networking or brick the machine so it can't get online. All the rest is just their usual bug-ridden filth.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 19:14 GMT Novex
Re: Ooooh, goody...
Few people in the world want a stripped down OS that doesn't update drivers, software and security.
Duh. it's not about NOT updating stuff, it's about having control of the updating instead of it being MS who just forces out updates as if PCs were XBoxes (which I have no problem with getting 'auto' updated due to the limited uses such gaming consoles are used for). PCs are tools of the trade and need to remain functionally capable of what the user needs them to do and without loads of adverts getting in the way. Had MS created a suitable, stable, secure version of Win 10 for small business and professional users (who all have confidential stuff to deal with in the shape of their business accounts) then this problem would simply go away.
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 09:08 GMT TheDarkFreak
Re: Long File Path support
It already exists, since Anniversary Update. Set HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\LongPathsEnabled to 1, reboot system.
Microsoft's been trying to get that added for years. Every time they try it, they get tons of reports from enterprise customers that it breaks <insert-important-and-private-internal-app-here>.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 10:25 GMT Kiwi
Re: Long File Path support
It already exists, since Anniversary Update. Set HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem\LongPathsEnabled to 1, reboot system.
So.. You have to futz around with the registry to get something that should've been there by default at least 20 years ago?
Microsoft's been trying to get that added for years. Every time they try it, they get tons of reports from enterprise customers that it breaks <insert-important-and-private-internal-app-here>.
Yet other systems have had it a lot longer, without said issues...
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 21:36 GMT Updraft102
Re: Long File Path support
I pretty obviously wasn't talking about hardware compatibility.
Linux devs change APIs with great regularity without any concern for backwards compatibility, and that's a pretty well-known thing. I can run ten year old binaries on Windows without issue now; on Linux, you're lucky if you can do that with binaries a third of the age. Don't let your Linux fanboyism blind you to the deficiencies of Linux; the problems it has can't be overcome by pretending they do not exist. There's little hope for Windows, but Linux at least can evolve in the right direction (and generally it is, if slowly).
In Linux, the typical dev attitude is that since the source code is available for the program in question, it doesn't matter if the APIs change, just recompile it with whatever is the newest version of gcc, Xorg, what have you (often systemd, to the chagrin of many). That's great if you're the kind of person who can recompile things at will and if the program in question is actually open source, but those two things are not always going to be true, particularly if Linux is ever going to exist in significant numbers on the desktop. It certainly doesn't work with things like proprietary video drivers from AMD and nVidia, with their binary blobs that prevent drivers a few years old from working with recent distros. A lot of older GPUs don't have Linux drivers newer than that, so you either run the open source driver (often slow and lacking in features, including power management on laptops) or use a distro release that's several years old.
The idea that requiring users to recompile their programs 'cause we done just broke all the APIs again isn't compatible with the way regular people use computers. As a niche hobbyist OS, that kind of thing is fine, but if the idea is to compete with Microsoft head to head on the desktop, it's not going to fly. Linux is going to have to work with closed-source precompiled binaries if they want to get any traction on the desktop. Precompiled binaries that people have to pay for means they are going to want to keep using them for years; no one wants to pay hundreds of dollars for a program (precompiled binary, as is the norm with closed-source) only to have it go out of date in six months because the APIs it relies on have changed because reasons.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 22:05 GMT Kiwi
Re: Long File Path support
Linux devs change APIs with great regularity without any concern for backwards compatibility, and that's a pretty well-known thing. I can run ten year old binaries on Windows without issue now; on Linux, you're lucky if you can do that with binaries a third of the age
That's the best part of your post. It's utter crap, and the rest descended quickly into something even worse, not worth reading further. And I seldom find a post so rubbish I stop reading.
Considering the number of articles on here in recent times about MS updates killing software because incompatible, the posts from coders about how much MS changes the goalposts (one in this very thread) - at least some of whom work for well known programming firms, and the general cries for help the web over about stuff that doesn't work anymore since the user updated Windows, and the great many articles and posts about people stuck with XP because they cannot run a more modern version of Windows again due to significant changes in the way things are handled, well you'll see your post for what it is. 2 words, one being the male form of bovine and the other being what the neighbours dog left on the back lawn.
As to that "recompile" bullshit you post.. Last time I compiled software on Linux, it was a program I was writing (in Pascal) to fix a problem in Windows (something went and added a number in brackets to ever filename in a folder, eg winlogon.exe became winlogon(25446).exe ). I don't know when I last compiled something for Linux but it can't have been since 2007. I do believe I've done it but not sure what or why. (ftr I just caught the phrase out of the corner of my eye, couldn't be bothered reading more becuase it's 1990's MS shill lies)
Icon - what should be done to MS HW, while they're have a party for all their fanbois.
-
-
-
Sunday 25th June 2017 11:24 GMT Dazed and Confused
Re: Long File Path support
> Developers of other systems don't concern themselves with backwards compatibility as much.
HP-UX had this issue before Windows was an OS. It simply made it a mount option and long filenames quickly became the default, but the option of limiting filename lengths existed for customers who suffered from old applications which didn't handle them.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 05:02 GMT JulieM
Re: Long File Path support
Linux does not have binary compatibility as a design goal. You might be expected to recompile software from time to time, and even edit Source Code in extreme cases (such as when a library function goes from "deprecated" to "removed"). Distributors will do all this for you, of course; and package management software will deal with multiple things having to be changed at once.
The alternative is to leave dangerous subsystems in place, just so old software will still work without being tweaked to suit a more modern OS, but which then leave the OS vulnerable to malware .....
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 11:24 GMT Ken Hagan
Re: Long File Path support
"Yet other systems have had it a lot longer, without said issues..."
These other systems have issues of their own. For one thing, they almost certainly don't run <insert-important-and-private-internal-app-here>. If that's not important to you, go ahead and run other systems, but you can hardly blame Microsoft for supporting their existing customers.
Actually the registry hack isn't safe. For 25 years, MS have promised developers that a 260-character buffer will be able to accomodate an arbitrary path. If you quietly raise that limit, all that happens is that end-users suddenly find that the filename they type is not the one that actually gets used by the program. At best, that's a bug. At worst, it is a security hole.
As an alternative to the registry hack, where developers have taken the trouble to support longer paths safely they can advertise that in the program's manifest. Users will then get the benefit where it is safe and be protected with legacy behaviour where it would not be safe. (Please note, however, that if your program uses a standard file open or file save dialog, you are potentially hosting arbitrary Explorer extensions, so you can't honestly write that manifest entry.)
And on a completely different tangent, 260 characters is over three lines of text. If your paths are longer than this paragraph, I'd say you were using the filename to write a short abstract of the document contents, which is an abuse of the metadata.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 11:55 GMT Kiwi
Re: Long File Path support
"Yet other systems have had it a lot longer, without said issues..."
These other systems have issues of their own. For one thing, they almost certainly don't run <insert-important-and-private-internal-app-here>. If that's not important to you, go ahead and run other systems, but you can hardly blame Microsoft for supporting their existing customers.
Actually they will. I have a number of <insert-important-and-private-internal-app-here> on my systems, usually small scripts to automate jobs I'm to lazy to do via typing a couple of command lines or things where I'd rather not have to remember/look up what I am supposed to be doing again. And I don't do Windows. Well not very often anyway.
Actually the registry hack isn't safe. For 25 years, MS have promised developers that a 260-character buffer will be able to accomodate an arbitrary path. If you quietly raise that limit, all that happens is that end-users suddenly find that the filename they type is not the one that actually gets used by the program. At best, that's a bug. At worst, it is a security hole.
I've had to clean that mess up often. I've seen something break with Windows where you get some recursive paths, which very quickly pass that tiny 260 char limit1. I've seen AMD drivers seem to do this a bit (or at least the AMD driver files/paths get messed up, not necessarily their fault, but they do have lots of little files (and I mean lots!) with long names in paths with long names). If you're lucky you can fix them by renaming some of the folders to single character names, once that's done you can delete the messed up folders. Otherwise you need to do something else to get the problem fixed. The only MS tool that can fix that issue is format2, but you can go in with Linux and delete the offending path without issue.
1 You're right. You can get a fair bit in 260 chars
2 Actually I never thought to try power shell when I came across those situations. Was quicker and easier3 to boot into Linux, delete the offending path, and reboot into Windows
3 From experience of course, could take longer to learn Windows power shell commands than it would just to use a familiar Linux GUI :)
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 12:32 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Long File Path support
- I was not talking about Windows apps in general, but the File Explorer application that ships with Windows.
- Applications written for other OSes commonly make files with paths that exceed 260 chars, why should Windows users be unable to handle those files ?
e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37880447/file-path-too-long-on-windows
- I have not heard a file's path called its "Metadata" before.
-
Sunday 25th June 2017 21:08 GMT Ken Hagan
Re: Long File Path support
"- I was not talking about Windows apps in general, but the File Explorer application that ships with Windows."
That would be the file explorer that has always supported third party extensions, written by people who read the docs and therefore know that a 260-character buffer is safe.
"- Applications written for other OSes commonly make files with paths that exceed 260 chars, why should Windows users be unable to handle those files ?"
Because Windows documentation has, for 25 years, consistently stated that a 260-character buffer is the maximum that you need to support, even if weird hacks are available to let you manipulate files created by other sub-systems.
"- I have not heard a file's path called its "Metadata" before."
Meh. It seems like a perfectly reasonable use of the term to me. It isn't part of the file's data, but is nevertheless *about* the files data. Would you have been happier if I'd followed the NTFS documentation and called it an attribute?
-
-
Monday 26th June 2017 15:03 GMT 2Nick3
Re: Long File Path support
"I wouldn't call it metadata because it doesn't tell you anything about the data."
The original post about using an overly-long path was alluding to using the path to describe the data. For example, I had a user once trying to restore a file with a path something like this:
C:\Users\User Name\Documents\Meeting Minutes\Biggest Project Ever - Never Delete This Data - EVER\Project Scope Meeting With Bob Bill Jonathan Matthew and Jessica\Meetings in 2017\Meetings in March\Meetings on the 19th\Meeting where we discussed the Project Scope with Everyone and Jessica too\Part of meeting where Angela was there\Minutes.doc
THAT is including metadata in the path name. And no, the restore would not work to the original location (yet somehow the file had been created and backed up) while a restore to C:\Users\User Name\Documents worked great.
-
-
Monday 26th June 2017 22:21 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Long File Path support
"That would be the file explorer that has always supported third party extensions"
So we are agreed that the problem is now confined to File Explorer extensions ?
Then we fix File Explorer when the user enables the Long File Path flag, and disable those extensions that are not marked as Long File Path compatible, and the rest of us can happliy use Long File Paths like any normal operating system and Windows is slightly less shit.
"Because Windows documentation has, for 25 years, consistently stated that a 260-character buffer is the maximum that you need to support, "
It does not matter what the crappy docs say. Files with longer paths will be on your drive and you need to handle them. File Explorer itself makes files with longer paths. AND CANNOT HANDLE THEM !
"Meh. It seems like a perfectly reasonable use of the term to me."
But only you actually use it like that.
"Meh" indeed.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 23rd June 2017 21:26 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Perhaps someone can use it no make the windows 10 we want
That was my first thought as well, but no reputable developers are going to go near this.
Looking at proprietary code you're not supposed to have and telling someone about it is a shitty career-move for devs and coders, it opens you up to very nasty IP / copyright allegations / lawsuits.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 07:08 GMT Destroy All Monsters
Re: Perhaps someone can use it no make the windows 10 we want
Looking at proprietary code you're not supposed to have and telling someone about it is a shitty career-move for devs and coders, it opens you up to very nasty IP / copyright allegations / lawsuits.
Then just don't tell someone about it.
-
-
-
Friday 23rd June 2017 21:24 GMT Anonymous Coward
MS should bite the bullet and
- just tell all developers that they are free to look at the sources, MS will not go after them for IP theft claims or copywrong infringement
- lay out sizable bug bounty rewards for bugs discovered via src code audit
Really not all that many good options out there, this might be the best way to limit the damages securitywise. This would at least give them the reputation of owning up.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 11:39 GMT Ken Hagan
"tell all developers that they are free to look at the sources"
I see where you are coming from but I think that would kill Windows as a platform.
Developers would look at the current source code and write apps that depend on behaviour that is currently true but which is merely an accident of the current implementation. Since Windows apps are typically sold as closed source and typically not updated for free by vendors to track OS changes, the result would be that each new version of Windows would break about half the software that you've paid for, with fixes only available if you pay the vendor again.
As readers of Raymond Chen's blog will know, this already happens to a debilitating extent. That's surprising because the only way to create such dependencies right now is to reverse engineer Windows. Apparently some programmers are smart enough to walk over assembly listings and reverse engineer how Windows currently works but not smart enough to realise how fragile this is. Worse, many of these programmers do this even when there is a documented alternative.
-
-
Friday 23rd June 2017 23:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
I'm done with Windows.
Forced automatic updates were the last straw for me. I completely purged it from my home boxen about a year ago and replaced it with Linux.
Now all that's left is my work laptop that was pre-loaded with Win10. I work alongside the IT guys and understand that Linux is a bit of a struggle to integrate with most of our tools, so I said to myself that I'd give Microsoft a little rope and leave it alone.
But this is completely different. This isn't WannaCry, you can't fix this shit with a patch. Complete inability to mitigate potential threats has made this OS the single biggest liability in any IT organization.
Fuck you Microsoft. Your very existence and ubiquity is just making everyone's job harder at this point.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 02:05 GMT red03golf
Re: I'm done with Windows.
Well said!!
I swap dozens of users over to Linux every year, now. They never return with problems, only an occasional question on how to do something - so satisfying.
Prior to that it was customers returning every 6 months, infected, or crashed, or missing files, or running slow, can't get on this site, can't open this file, or or or ...
I bet Gates secretly uses Linux so he doesn't have to worry about getting a virus, or hacked, or ransomware, lol.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 10:50 GMT P. Lee
Re: I'm done with Windows.
The funny thing is that all the IP laws around software are designed to stop people grabbing other people's work.
Then I tried to think of anyone who might have the slightest interest in stealing MS' code so they didn't have to code things themselves... and I came up blank. Who would ever want to steal MS' code?
All those IP laws and they only thing they could be used for is to stop people finding out about MS' bad coding.
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 05:02 GMT CheesyTheClown
Re: I'm done with Windows.
If you don't mind me asking, what do you mean by "this" when stating "But this is completely different."?
And which threats has MS not addressed lately?
And, the lack of mitigation of threats? Is this only when you avoid forced upgrades? Did you want more secure software or to stay with older and less maintained software which might not be patched? Did you not want the Windows update which blocked wannacry?
You are very excited about Linux. Do you keep it up to date? Do you run antivirus? Do you allow network applications access via SE Linux and later close the holes when you no longer use the app? Have you configured different network profiles for home or public? Do you continue using apps with dependencies on libraries with known vulnerabilities? How do you manage your private keys?
Linux is fun. I spend most of my Linux time reading driver and network stack source looking for rootkits for fun. I love finding nifty things like code injection opportunities in the forwarding tables. Or better, methods of replacing openssl.so with a copy that backdoors the private keys.
Linux's greatest weakness is its dependency on C for everything. It's like placing a welcome mat on the floor and leaving the key beneath it. As such, Linux, GTK, Gnome... not even a challenge.
So... back to "This"?
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 13:53 GMT bombastic bob
Re: I'm done with Windows.
"Linux's greatest weakness is its dependency on C for everything."
Uh, *WHAT* *THE* *FEEL* is *THAT* supposed to mean?
Linux's greatest weakness is (most likely) LACK OF MARKETING. Otherwise we wouldn't even have this article.
The C language might as well have been created by THE PROGRAMMING GODS. It is SUPERIOR to most other languages in just about every way, in its simplicity AND flexibility, and applicability to both low-level "hardware" coding, and high-level "UI" coding.
If you code in languages like C-pound and think that '.Not' is GOOD in any way, then I'll just sit back and laugh at you, really really hard.
So thanks SO much for the FUD. It echos like a Micro-shaft propaganda ad for NT4 server from the 90's.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 07:11 GMT Destroy All Monsters
Re: I'm done with Windows.
It is SUPERIOR to most other languages in just about every way, in its simplicity AND flexibility, and applicability to both low-level "hardware" coding, and high-level "UI" coding.
Absolutely.
But today, we have Typed Assembly Language. It is time to go all the way and leave kid stuff behind.
-
Monday 3rd July 2017 00:27 GMT CheesyTheClown
Re: I'm done with Windows.
Ohhh... I'm glad I came back here.
C is a great language and it's extremely diverse. It's absolutely horrifying for something like the Linux kernel though. Consider this, it has no meaningful standard set of libraries which means that support for things like collections and passing collections is a nightmare. Sure you have things like rbtree.[hc] in the kernel, but as anyone who has studied algorithms knows, there is no single algorithm which suites everything.
Let's talk about bounds, stacks, etc... there's absolutely no reason you can't enhance the C compiler to support more memory protection as well. C itself is a very primitive language and it's great for writing the boot code and code which does not need to alter data structures. But there are severe shortcomings in C. Yes, it's 100% possible to add millions of additional lines of repetitive and uninteresting code to implement all those protection checks. But a simple language extension could do a lot more.
Let's talk about where I find nearly all of the exploits in the kernel. This is in error handling and return values. It's amazing how you can cause problems with most code written at two different times by the same person or by two different people. The reason for this is that there's no meaningful way to handle error complex error conditions. Almost all code depends on just returning a negative value which is supposed to mean everything. The solution to this is to return a data structure which is basically a stack of results and error information and then handle it properly. The reason this isn't done is because people get really upset when implementing anything resembling exceptions in C. And yet, nearly every exploit I've found wouldn't have been there if someone implemented try/catch/finally.
Let's talk about data structure leaking and cleanup related to the above. Better yet, let's not... pretty sure that one sentence was enough to cover it all.
This is 2017, not 1969. In 2017, we have language development tools and technologies that allow us to make compilers in a day. This isn't K&R sitting around inventing the table based lexical analyzer. Sticking with the C language instead of creating a proper compiler designed specifically for the implementation of the Linux kernel is just plain stupid.
More importantly, there's absolutely no reason you have to use a standardized programming language for writing anything anymore. If your code... for example an operating system kernel would profit from writing a new programming language for it... do it. You can base it on anything you want. It's actually quite easy... unless you write the language itself in C. Use a language suited for language development instead. Get the point yet?
The next big operating system to follow the Linux kernel will be the operating system which leaves 95% of the C language in tact and implements a compiler which :
a) Eliminates remaining dependencies on assembler by implementing a contextual mode for fixed memory position development.
b) Provides a standard implementation of data structures as the foundation of the language
c) Implements a standard method of handling complex returns... or exceptions (possibly <result,errorstack>)
d) Implements safe vs. non-safe modes of coding. 90% of the Linux kernel could easily have been done in safe mode
e) Offers references instead of pointers as an option. This is REALLY important. Probably the greatest weakness of C for security is the fixed memory location bits. Relocatable memory is really really useful.If you read the kernel and see how many ugly hacks have been made because of it not being present, you'd be shocked. The Linux kernel is completely slammed full of shit code for handling out of memory conditions which exist purely because of supporting architectures lacking MMUs. References can be implemented in C using A LOT of bad and generally inconsistent code. It can be added to a compiler with a bit of work, but when combined with the kernel code, can implement a memory defragmenter that could fix A LOT of the kernel.
And since you're kind enough to respond aggressively, allow me respond somewhat in kind. You're an absolute idiot... though maybe you're only a fool. C# and .NET are actually very good. So is C, Java, C++, and many others. Heck, I write several good language a year when a domain would profit from it. I you don't know why C# and .NET or even better, Javascript are often better than plain C, you probably shouldn't pretend like you know computers.
Did you know that Javascript generally produces far faster and better code in most contexts than C and Assembler today? If you understood how microcode and memory access function, you'd realize there's a huge benefit to recompiling code on the fly. Consider that Javascript spends most of its time recompiling code as it's being run. This is because the first time you compiled it, it was optimal for the current state of the CPU, but as the state of the system changed (that's what happens in multitasking systems) the cache has changed and the CPU core being used may have changed (power state, etc..) and the Javascript compiler will reoptimize the code. It's even possible with Javascript that if you're on a hybrid system containing multiple CPU architectures or generations, the code can be relocated to a CPU which is better suited for the process.
Of course C could be compiled into Javascript or WebAssembly and have the same benefits. The main issue is that you lose support for relocatable memory as WebAssembly to support C/C++ is flat memory. But at least for execution, it's very likely your C code will run faster on WebAssembly than on bare metal. If you then start making use of Javascript/WebAssembly libraries for things like string processing, it will be even faster. If you move all threading to Javascript threading, it will be even better.
This does not mean you should write an operating system kernel in Javascript. Just as C is not suitable for OS development anymore, Javascript never will be.
-
-
-
Monday 3rd July 2017 00:43 GMT CheesyTheClown
Re: I'm done with Windows.
Windows 10 Serial driver (C code, based on the same code you've seen... still works) : https://github.com/Microsoft/Windows-driver-samples/tree/master/serial/serial
Windows 10 Virtual Serial driver (C++ code, based on the new SDK with memory safety consider) : https://github.com/Microsoft/Windows-driver-samples/tree/master/serial/VirtualSerial
Mac OS X Serial Driver (C++ code... runs in user mode) : https://opensource.apple.com/source/IOSerialFamily/IOSerialFamily-91/IOSerialFamily.kmodproj/
Using a domain specific language for a kernel which can implement the core kernel code in "unsafe mode" and then implementing the drivers, file systems, etc... in a "safe mode" language meaning memory references instead of pointers (see C11 which makes moves this way... but refuses to break with tradition by doing it as library changes instead of a language feature).
In reality, this is 2017 and if your OS kernel still has a strict language dependence for things like file systems and device drivers, you probably aren't doing it right. These days most of that code should be user mode anyway. And no, user/kernel mode discussions stopped making sense when we started using containers and Intel and AMD started shipping 12+ core consumer CPUs
-
-
-
-
-
Sunday 25th June 2017 09:51 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I'm done with Windows.
@Ken Hagen - "As has been widely publicised on these pages, those instructions don't work for Windows 10. Apparently you were too smug to do a simple search."
Apparently you didn't look for the updated instructions, or aren't able to figure out how to navigate the new windows settings menus. Been working fine on several systems at our office, even ones with the new creators update. There's both an updated registry hack, as well as the old "metered connection" setting readily available for your use if you want them, although the metered connection setting has moved.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 08:05 GMT Wayland
Re: I'm done with Windows.
Andy P, obviously turning off updates is an ongoing battle. We have enough battles with the bad guys without having to battle with the good guys too. Don't you think this means that Windows is not for people who have to keep fighting it? Surely the effort would be better spent customizing their own version of Linux. At least the improvements could be shared and not wiped out by someone in an update.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 13:50 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I'm done with Windows.
I don't personally enjoy having to hack a Windows laptop to bits to get it to run in the way I prefer. But MS isn't worried about me. They're worried about Joe Schmoe who doesn't know a registry entry from a hair dryer. I don't blame them for forcing updates on the hundreds of millions of sheep. Any more than I blame Apple for auto updating iPads, or Google for auto updating Chromebooks.
As we all know, if you want fine-grained control of a computer system, you are going to be using Linux or some version of BSD. No sense complaining that Windows doesn't fit the bill when it was never meant to in the first place.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 22:08 GMT Kiwi
Re: I'm done with Windows.
They're worried about Joe Schmoe who doesn't know a registry entry from a hair dryer.
That's true, and I have no problem with that (and with all my Linux oldies I tell them to update when they see the blue icon). But often the level of their updates is an issue. Does a working device need the latest drivers, other than where there is a security issue? Does every bit of software need to be at the latest version, especially when there isn't an update for security? Performance improvements are fine, and adding functionality can be fine, but removing stuff?
During updates, W10 deletes programs people use. I don't know if it's that common but it's common enough to be getting a lot of complaints. Settings that people may find hard to locate get reset to MS's preferences, and reportedly (even by MS supporters) get moved to other locations. Manufacturer's drivers get replaced with MS ones, which may not be as good (maybe in some instances better, but I have not yet heard someone thank MS for that). They make the system restart when they want to, rather than when the user wants to (and most home users don't leave their machine on 24/7!).
While I can understand the desire to make stuff more secure, forcing it on people in this manner is not a good way to do things. When people lose work, their internet connection, and sometimes even lose their system, forced updates are a problem.
Making security patches forced, and others optional (especially driver and software/feature removal) would go a long way to addressing these issues.
Making your update process something that doesn't involve a ton of pain would go a long way to helping encourage people to do it. My Linux oldies? They see the blue icon. They click on it. They click on "Install updates" (the program is up in a second or two with a list of updates already ready to go), and type in their password (you don't do day-to-day work in an admin account!). The updates start downloading, and a few minutes later (at most) are installed. The update program closes. They can click on the window behind the update one to go back to what they were doing previously, and will not even notice the rest of the process. At the end of their session they turn their machine off, and a few seconds later (usually within 15 and I cannot recall a Linux machine taking more than a minute to shut down) it has powered down. Next session they turn their machine on and start up is as normal, maybe a little faster if an update did something to improve start up speed. And if there is a restart desired, there is an icon left on the taskbar to let them know that when they're ready, their computer would like a restart.
It is a quick, easy and painless process on Linux. If MS worked on making their updates less noticeable, and only requiring a few moments to do, then people would be happier with them.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 08:05 GMT h4rm0ny
>>But I have to say it couldn't have happened to a more deserving company.
Haliburton (backer and opportunist of the Iraq war), Goldman Sachs (fiddled figures to get Greece into the EU exacerbating massively the financial crisis for those of us in Europe), DeBeers (works people to death in mines), FoxConn (doesn't work people to death because they have safety nets to catch jumpers, now), BAE (so in control of the British government that they can get Number 10 to order the Serious Fraud Office to drop investigations into it), Keurboom Communications / Gregory Rudd (99.5 million nuisance calls in the UK).
But yeah - darn that evil Microsoft selling their software! ;)
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 08:55 GMT Ben Tasker
> But yeah - darn that evil Microsoft selling their software! ;)
To be fair, if you take your list (and add Microsoft to it), out of those you've only really got Microsoft and BAE where a leak of their software is likely to be a big deal to them (possibly Goldman too to some extent).
So if you start at a position of "Someone's software is going to leak (or has leaked)", then Microsoft is one in a list of two, and their business is based on the software itself, so they probably are at the top of that list.
All the others may well deserve to have something happen, but a software leak for them is unlikely to achieve the fuzzy feelgoods you want when saying "good, they deserve it". In fact, for some of those companies, it wouldn't be that different to hearing someone had broken a window in their building.
So OP was probably right, in that out of your list, there are 2 people who's business relies on the sale of software, Microsoft are the most dependant on it, so they probably deserve this the most.
But, you're right too - had your list been a list of companies in the same industry, Microsoft may not have been at the top (are they more deserving than Oracle?)
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 00:05 GMT Captain DaFt
So how'd they get it?
32 TB is a freakin' lot of data to down load, to say the least.
And nobody at MS saw a thing? Really?
So, stored "securely" on an Azure cloud?
Internal git left open to world + dog?
Somebody hung at the favorite MS watering hole with a crate of harddrives going "Psst, buddy, wanna make some big bucks quick?"
Mind boggled that someone pulled this off!
-
-
-
Monday 26th June 2017 10:38 GMT Kiwi
Re: So how'd they get it?
"IME Win 10 takes about 48 hours to copy 8Gb over USB 3. "
Takes a couple of minutes to do that on Windows 10. Faster copying large files than the latest Ubuntu I note from benchmarks....
I used the one and only benchmark that really counts - real world experience, rather than listing to some bullshit artist on MS's payroll.
Now... Lets say that there is a speed difference though. Lets say that, to copy 10Gb on a booted MS machine would take 20 minutes compared to say 2 hours on Ubuntu. From a turned off state, which would be the fastest? Why, Ubuntu of course. You'd spend a week waiting for that idiotic "Please wait, installing updates" stupidity from the early 90's that MS insists of sticking with.
Face it, windows is slow and rubbish. Get yourself a nice, secure, stable and responsive machine. Get Linux. Get your life back. And your sanity.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 12:36 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: So how'd they get it?
"You'd spend a week waiting for that idiotic "Please wait, installing updates" stupidity from the early 90's that MS insists of sticking with."
It does that automatically overnight / when the computer is not being used these days...
"Get Linux"
I play commercial games and need an Office suite that actually works, Neither of which Linux is suitable for.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 12:52 GMT Kiwi
Re: So how'd they get it?
"You'd spend a week waiting for that idiotic "Please wait, installing updates" stupidity from the early 90's that MS insists of sticking with."
It does that automatically overnight / when the computer is not being used these days...
What, when the computer is often turned off completely? (admittedly I do deal mainly with older people who actually turn stuff off at the wall, so maybe other people who can afford electricity to be wasted and don't care so much about safety/aren't paranoid by the rather low fire risk tend to leave them on). If that's when it does it, then there's a lot of people complaining about stuff they never actually see!
I play commercial games and need an Office suite that actually works, Neither of which Linux is suitable for.
So do I, which is why I wouldn't use windows. I like my system to be stable and actually function.
As to the games, odds are it'll run better under wine than doze. I have a HP DV7 laptop with 1G ATI graphics, Linux and Win7 installed. SOASER (playing right now in another workspace), Home World (all 3 + the remastered stuff), C&C Generals (+ Zero Hour) and Tib 3 all run far better under Linux/Wine than they do under Windows (7). I also have run several bits of commercial software happily under Wine, again often faster (especially the graphics side) than with Windows, including some of the offerings from Coffee Cup, some data recovery tools (Linux is far superior in file handling, including reading/writing NTFS partitions) and a whole swag of other stuff.
I don't promote stuff I don't believe is better. There is no incentive for me to prefer Linux over Windows other than it does a better job, period. Actually in a couple of cases I have suggested Windows may do some things better or easier, and if I believe it is the more suitable product I would suggest it, though that was broken with 8+.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 14:08 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: So how'd they get it?
"What, when the computer is often turned off completely?"
Recent Intel chipsets have a feature that powers up the computer to check for updates. Probably doesn't work under Linux though...
"as to the games, odds are it'll run better under wine than doze"
Now you are just showing your ignorance. Windows 10 is simply by miles the fastest platform for gaming. Direct-X 12 is a long way ahead of other close-the-metal driver models - not to mention that people actually use it, and loads of games won't even run on Linux at all.
" it does a better job, period. "
Over what period? I use Windows because I need high end gaming and Office type applications. Linux is utterly crap in comparison for both those uses.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 22:09 GMT Kiwi
Re: So how'd they get it?
"What, when the computer is often turned off completely?"
Recent Intel chipsets have a feature that powers up the computer to check for updates. Probably doesn't work under Linux though...
Doesn't work very well when the machine is turned off at the wall either!
" it does a better job, period. "
Over what period? I use Windows because I need high end gaming and Office type applications. Linux is utterly crap in comparison for both those uses.
I don't know what you consider "high end office applications" but if you want office that works reliable, you cannot use MS office. The features will be removed on a whim, the layout will change, every other week they'll make it incompatible.
Oh, and I have some quite large (>1gb) presentations that simply cannot be don on Windows, MS office chokes on handling larger files.
Yes, a lot of games don't run on systems they're not designed for. As to your "need high end gaming", maybe you "need" to re-think some of your life if gaming actually is a "need"? There's a great world outside, with incredible graphics and animations that don't stop or stutter. Sticking to gaming can lead to depression, social anxiety, and all sorts of other problems that are not in the least "fun". This I am writing from personal experience. Don't let it happen to you (and apols if I am reading your meaning wrong)
-
Tuesday 27th June 2017 15:32 GMT Charles 9
Re: So how'd they get it?
"Yes, a lot of games don't run on systems they're not designed for. As to your "need high end gaming", maybe you "need" to re-think some of your life if gaming actually is a "need"? There's a great world outside, with incredible graphics and animations that don't stop or stutter. Sticking to gaming can lead to depression, social anxiety, and all sorts of other problems that are not in the least "fun". This I am writing from personal experience. Don't let it happen to you (and apols if I am reading your meaning wrong)"
Guess you never heard of smog, muggers, or Major League Gaming.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 00:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
Wake up call
So did this come from some disgruntled rogue insider or was it a Cloud hack, or was it a Server misconfiguration leak? Surely this question has to be answered... Either way, anyone using any kind of Cloud source control: VSTS, Git LFS, Perforce, SVN etc... This is the 'mother' of all wake up calls, no?!!!!
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 01:14 GMT Herby
Maybe they will fix the bad parts
So, the users (not me, thankfully), will get a better performing OS. We can only hope, but I won't hold my breath.
Of course the conspiracy theorists will have all sorts of explanations on how this was done, probably involving all sorts of three letter agencies (from many countries) and Microsoft itself.
Prometheus modem for sale (a reference that goes back a ways).
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 01:36 GMT GrapeBunch
Mischief aside, this might be useful. 1. MS is famous for "undocumented features" which back in the day favoured its own apps. Will this release see the documentation of all undocumented features? 2. other OSes are at a disadvantage because MS + manufacturer release Windows-only drivers. With source to said drivers, will it now be a walk in the park for the other OSes?
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 11:51 GMT Ken Hagan
1. I don't think MS need undocumented features in quite the same way anymore. There is a mind-boggling array of documents concerning APIs, file formats and network protocols used by Windows and other MS software. (e.g. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd208104.aspx.) The problems these days are firstly can you find the document you want and secondly does the MS implementation actually match the document? (And if it doesn't, tempting you to follow the current implementation instead, will they just fix it in the next release leaving you looking like the idiot who couldn't follow a spec?)
2. I think the drivers in this leak are the bus drivers, implementing (hopefully correctly) protocols that are fully documented and already supported by other OSes. The drivers you want are the vendor-specific layers on top and these aren't included here. In most cases, MS will not have that source.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 14:00 GMT bombastic bob
With source to drivers, will it now be a walk in the park for the other OSes?
I'd like to think so, but then again I'm not really happy about the *quality* of MS-written drivers [or else we wouldn't need so many 3rd party drivers maybe...]
What I'd like is a nice WORKAROUND or BACK DOOR to Micro-shaft's IRRITATING driver signing policy for kernel mode drivers.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 21:51 GMT Updraft102
Re: With source to drivers, will it now be a walk in the park for the other OSes?
Did you try booting into Windows with driver signing enforcement disabled and then installing the unsigned driver(s)? That's how I got my modified nVidia driver for my laptop to work. I had to change the PCI ID in the .inf file to work with my card, and of course, any modification causes the driver to become unsigned. It's working fine, though, in 8.1 x64 (it worked also in 10 x64 when I was using it).
Once it's installed, there's no more signature checking; it appears to only be done at installation time.
-
Sunday 25th June 2017 19:53 GMT bombastic bob
Re: With source to drivers, will it now be a walk in the park for the other OSes?
"Did you try booting into Windows with driver signing enforcement disabled"
I've done that for ME, while doing driver development (in 7, not win-10-nic - I don't do win-10-nic).
But I want to release an open source kernel driver to do something that's cool. And giving people the necessary build/install instructions to make that work is impractical, at best.
And it's obviously a *SICK* *JOKE* that NOW you basically have to give the damn binary to Micro-shaft and have THEM sign it, for Win-10-nic anyway. At least, that's what I remember reading last year.
I've mostly given up on windows development. may cancel my MSDN subscription, even. Their tools suck, their moving target for development UI stinks, and I haven't jumped on their bandwagon since they introduced ".Not". In fact I've had to go OUT OF MY WAY to make sure that DAMN THING isn't included in my project. It's bad enough I had to add a 'manifest' to an executable to keep vista and later from treating something as AN INSTALLER by accident, based on it's name. And the 2D FLATSO FLUGLY just makes me want to VOMIT. Devstudio after 2010 is FILLED with that kind of crap.
Basically I do NOT want to tie my career to the TITANIC as it goes STRAIGHT for the ICEBERG.
And I know how "easy" it is to work around their signing requirements. Except for end-users. And they'll see the "debug mode" watermark on the wallpaper, etc.. That's not the way to release open source software, ya know?
-
-
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 05:21 GMT Kiwi
Re: 32TB?
How much is left if you skip all the #ifdef BUGS code?
Oh, that was covered in the article : "...compress down to 8TB..."
Well, removing junk is a type of compression..
(I see by the regular single downvotes on almost all of these posts that we are in the presence of a singular MS shill. Must be getting lonely, and this must be so bad for them only one bothers to show up to do their duty)
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 15:02 GMT James O'Shea
Re: 32TB?
"(I see by the regular single downvotes on almost all of these posts that we are in the presence of a singular MS shill. Must be getting lonely, and this must be so bad for them only one bothers to show up to do their duty)"
you went and provoked him into creating two more accounts.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 21:34 GMT Kiwi
Re: 32TB?
you went and provoked him into creating two more accounts
Y'know, if they put as much effort into learning how to code1 instead of FUD/targetting people who dare to say nasty things about their stuff, they'd have a half-decent2 OS.
1 Actually yes, I could code to save my life. However, you'd have to give me time. A lot of time. Like, a couple of decades or so and 2) an internet connection or a very very good collection of snippets, well documented and so on. And a keyboard with extra strong ctrl, C and V keys.
2 What, you don't think Windows could ever be "fully-decent" do you?
-
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 04:26 GMT Kiwi
About time..
About time someone open-sourced Windows.
Wonder if this was deliberate. Rather than pay a team of programmers to hunt for bugs, open-source it and wait for the exploits. Then charge people for
bugfixesnew versions that are immune from the malware that makes use of the exploit.Charging done by older, suddenly "incompatible" hardware needing to be replaced. That it was perfectly compatible before the "update", and the "update" changed nothing relating to the hardware at all but somehow the machine is forever broken.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 08:07 GMT keithpeter
Re: About time..
@Kiwi
"Wonder if this was deliberate. Rather than pay a team of programmers to hunt for bugs, open-source it and wait for the exploits."
I was thinking more of a leak to cover tracks... any future major hacks/exploits that were secret - perhaps even sponsored by certain actors - can now be tracked back to this code release. Very convenient.
Or possibly a canary: someone inside saying "read this and discover, we can tell you because they would know who we are then"
Icon: we've had a couple overhead for hours
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 11:34 GMT Kiwi
Re: About time..
Icon: we've had a couple overhead for hours
Had that a while back - military one(s) circling my area.
Pretty sure it was just a training thing, certainly nothing else has come of it. But can be unnerving,
Especially when you can hear one passing overhead as you post...
(Though, sadly, I believe it is the Westpac Rescue helicopter - sadly because that thing going out means someone is badly hurt and needs a chopped ride to hospital)
-
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 04:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
Windows sounds awesome
I'm a coupon cutting cheap ass. I love my shitty Windows machine, riddled with security issues and disfunctional UI... it was worth saving a few bucks. Those Apple fanboys sure look stupid with their kinderprice toys. Hahahaha I saved 300 bucks - what will I spend my 35c daily savings on?
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 08:39 GMT Boris the Cockroach
Will
anyone from the open sauce area of expertise be going through the code looking for the bits of code lifted from linux et al and covered by the GPL .....
Imagine the fun that will start when the open sauce lawyers land on m$ with "cease and desist" leteers followed by "we're gonna drag you into court and sue the arse off you " letters....
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 09:44 GMT Anonymous Coward
Even pro-Microsoftie Thurrott...
Even pro-Microsoftie Thurrott described Windows 10 CU S as the Windows 10 'Shit' version. It must be truely ill-thought out, in terms of user experience to say that.
"Windows 10 C reators U pdate (N ew T echnology) S hit" Edition.
Microsoft marketing what were you thinking?
If Microsoft wanted to do Windows 10 S right and proper, they would have used the open source code base of Linux for it's underlying core, with a Windows 10 UWP platform+Win10 user inferface bolted on top.
Now that's something that might entice.
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 14:08 GMT bombastic bob
Re: Even pro-Microsoftie Thurrott...
"with a Windows 10 UWP platform+Win10 user inferface bolted on top."
except THAT is the lipstick being painted on the non-oinky end of the Win-10-nic BOAR.
You can put Linux underneath, but if it LOOKS like WIn-10-nic, SMELLS like Win-10-nic and causes me to reflex-vomit if I attempt to TASTE it (like Win-10-nic), then WHY do it?
[yeah don't get me started on everything I *HATE* about Win-10-nic, which are all contained in the UWP 2D FLATSO FLUGLY "the METRO" CRAP-UI. I have few grips about the bottom end; it's the UI that I *HATE*]
Anyway, I'll take Linux with Mate instead. Or better still, FreeBSD! A "Win-10-nic" desktop manager would *JUST* *SUCK*.
-
-
Sunday 25th June 2017 20:01 GMT bombastic bob
Re: Even pro-Microsoftie Thurrott...
"how will you run the windows APPS that are the main reason people stick to Windows"
THIS is where _MARKETING_ comes into play...
Linux needs MARKETING. You get people to run it, and get used to "windows within a VM" for when they MUST have windows for something.
Simultaneously you get the 'big boy' vendors to do one of two things: either they SHIP LINUX VERSIONS (I hear Quickbooks is done in Java, so for Intuit it might be pretty simple!) or else they do a "Wine certification" so that they CERTIFY their applications will run under Wine.
Do this enough, and it will gain a life of it's own.
The problem is that NOBODY is doing that kind of marketing work.
HOWEVER, if we can manage to convince a few of the BIG BOYS (let's say Intel, AMD, Lenovo, Dell, and some of the others that will SELL HARDWARE AGAIN if a decent OS is available) that they need to invest in this kind of marketing, it MAY become practical enough that "it happens".
Yes, it takes MONEY and EFFORT to unseat a monopoly. I just described one way it can be done.
-
Monday 26th June 2017 02:28 GMT Charles 9
Re: Even pro-Microsoftie Thurrott...
"HOWEVER, if we can manage to convince a few of the BIG BOYS (let's say Intel, AMD, Lenovo, Dell, and some of the others that will SELL HARDWARE AGAIN if a decent OS is available) that they need to invest in this kind of marketing, it MAY become practical enough that "it happens"."
It'll work AGAINST hardware companies since the odds are it will LOWER requirements instead of raise them. Plus, virtualization is not an option for everyone (like those with custom HARDWARE that can't be virtualized).
-
Monday 26th June 2017 11:38 GMT Anonymous Coward
"Yes, it takes MONEY and EFFORT to unseat a monopoly"
Exactly, and you invest money and time ONLY and ONLY IF you see a return - usually more MONEY.
Explain how your plan investing money into Linux marketing will make the above companies earn more, especially hardware ones, why people would buy more hardware because of Linux?
Otherwise, sorry, you win an "underpants gnome" award.
-
-
-
-
Sunday 25th June 2017 21:17 GMT patrickstar
Re: Even pro-Microsoftie Thurrott...
Uhm, the kernel is the GOOD part of Windows. It's a masterpiece as far as kernels go. The coding style is a bit too militant for my taste, but it's certainly easier on the eyes than most of Linux.
Whatever your issues with Windows are, chances are the kernel isn't where they stem from.
-
-
Saturday 24th June 2017 11:08 GMT Anonymous Coward
Aw boo hoo,
"Anyone who has this information can scour it for security vulnerabilities, which could be exploited to hack Windows systems worldwide."
So what, Linux source code is there for all and sundry to see and are not ashamed of coding cock-ups which can be reviewed and fixed rather than get the interns to do it and pretend there is nothing wrong. Security through obscurity is a fallacy as it's been proven time and again. I wonder just what schoolboy coding errors are now going to be shown up ?
-
-
Tuesday 27th June 2017 18:16 GMT TheVogon
Re: Open Source Good
"As many eyes on the source code improves Linux, right?"
This is what we were always told. However Linux doesn't have a lower bug count than other OSs and major holes have been found that were a) apparently obvious, and b had been there for years.
The problem I have with it is that there will always be bugs somewhere, and a well funded attacker will presumably find it easier to find and exploit them with the source code than without it.
Of course it's also common knowledge that security by obscurity isn't really security. And that holes can be found by fuzzing, reverse engineering, etc. But imo that does make it a bit harder for the attacker.
-
-
Monday 26th June 2017 23:41 GMT moonpunk
Am I the only one...
...that actually likes Windows 10?
Works great for me. As does Office 365 (Teams, OneDrive, Skype 4 Business, and all of the usual Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook applications).
I accept that you pay your money and make your choice, and it wouldn't do if we were all the same, but it all works fine for me!
-
Tuesday 27th June 2017 18:16 GMT TheVogon
Re: Am I the only one...
"Works great for me"
Me too. And if you care about the telemetry and / or want it to look like Windows 7 - which seem to be the main complaints, it's just 2 free apps to install to fix that. Personally I don't care what info they collect just so long it isn't used to target adverts in the browser, or is sold to others for any sort of marketing / sales activity. Which Microsoft do not do.
If you haven't yet upgraded to Windows 10, it must be because you are blind and missed all the popups - and therefore you still qualify for a free upgrade! https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility/windows10upgrade
-