Microsoft gets tough - no more mr. nice guy
Vista will be uncrackable - you just wait!!
Thinking of pirating a copy of Windows Vista? Think again. The fearsome security experts in Redmond will be laying in a smackdown no hacker will ever be able to break:
Microsoft has fired the first salvo in this war on pirates—according to The Associated Press, the Redmond crew will be taking “much harsher steps to curtail piracy” than in years past. First, the company will “deny access” to some of the “most anticipated features,“ including Windows Aero, the new GUI. Then, Vista will start issuing ransom demands (we’re not kidding about this part), demanding that a legitimate copy be bought within 30 days, or else. What would such consequences entail? How about limiting Web access to an hour at a time? Further, what about not being able to open documents from the desktop or “run other programs such as Outlook e-mail software” ? However, the article goes on to say: “Microsoft said it won’t stop a computer running pirated Vista software from working completely, and it will continue to deliver critical security updates.“
- Engadget: Microsoft will cripple PCs running pirated copies of Vista
By “ever”, of course, I mean “it will be hacked in about four hours” after the first hackers check out the new protections. There will be legitimate users seeking out the hacked versions after the OS de-registers itself for some reason.
As for disabling “the most anticipated features” on a Vista PC, be still my heart. I’ve seen ‘Aero’ and it’s eye-candy for kids with much better eyesight than I have. Unable to use Outlook? Oh, no! I’ll have to suffer along with Thunderbird or Evolution! The horror.
Or I could run XP, or buy a Mac, or run Linux, or get a hacked version of Vista. The only danger is choking from laughter the first time they hit me with a “ransom demand”.
What? You mean I’ll have to wait until a week before its official release to get a cracked version to avoid Internet deprivation!? That’s terrible!
Posted by Candice on 10/05/06 at 12:36 AMMan for a minute there DOF I thought I was going to have to smack you straight. MS believing they can win the WAR ON HACKING!! is as stupid as Bush thinking a 500lbs bomb can spread prosperity and peace.
They only way MS can stop hackers is if they put their OS on a server in Redmond, and anyone that uses the MS OS connects to the OS server in dummy terminal fashion and pulls the OS down.
Posted by webs05 on 10/05/06 at 08:04 AMMS can stop hackers… if they put their OS on a server in Redmond, and anyone that uses the MS OS connects to the OS server in dummy terminal fashion and pulls the OS down.
Nope. Hackers set up proxy servers that handle the authentication and make cut-rate OS service of their own. Some hacking will always take place unless there’s some kind of quantum encryption hardware key. They’ll go to that eventually.
Posted by george.w on 10/05/06 at 08:13 AMI guess, don’t find hackers nearly as amusing as some people.
Posted by james old guy on 10/05/06 at 09:43 AMNope. Hackers set up proxy servers that handle the authentication and make cut-rate OS service of their own.
In the scenario I gave the only way hackers could break into the OS is if MS didn’t secure their OS server. Since the model is a dummy terminal one, the OS people bring down from MS can be hacked all it wants, but the hackers aren’t breaking into the MS OS they are breaking into the dummy OS brought down from the OS server.
This would essentially stop the hackers from breaking into the root OS, but would do nothing to stop hackers from breaking into people’s thin clients. This model would also esentially stop OS viruses and spam, since all someone has to do is restart their system and get a new OS image. The only thing it doesn’t stop are viruses that attack hardware. If some has a hard drive, then viruses have a place to sit. Solve one problem create another.
But for home users, at least those running Linux, you could do the same thing essentially. You could create your Linux OS on a server in the DMZ of your network. You secure this server with everything you have. Then you create another box that you put the most ram in it that you can afford. Take the hard drive you would normally put in this system and instead put it in the server. Create a Linux boot CD that looks for a Linux kernel on the server and loads the kernel to ram. Then you have a Linux system that is essentially fool proof for viruses and spyware. What about storage you ask? Just set up the image so it automatically maps the hard drive in the server. Or don’t map ip automatically, and only on an as needed basis. Music can also be streamed across the network, so you can still listen to tunes. And if there is enough ram in the system, you can still watch videos and such on YouTube.
You can actually do the same thing with Windows, it is just a little more cumbersome. Talk about security though…
Posted by webs05 on 10/05/06 at 10:12 AMWebs: Assuming:
- The routers between Redmond and the client aren’t hacked
- Inside information from MS isn’t leaked
- MS doesn’t do anything abysmally stupid in the security modelJames: Can’t blame you. I’m not keen on hackers either, having had to restore a couple servers from backup after hackers got ‘em. I guess I prefer laughter to anger. I’m gonna die anyway so I might as well go out laughing.
Posted by george.w on 10/05/06 at 01:38 PM- The routers between Redmond and the client aren’t hacked
- Inside information from MS isn’t leaked
- MS doesn’t do anything abysmally stupid in the security modelFor the first two point, if either one of these are true, we got major major problems. Much more than someone worrying about their OS being hacked. For the first one specifically, anyone who enjoy’s using the Internet could quickly be f***ed. Reason being, these routers that make up the Internet are not just some router sitting in the middle of a corn field, these routers are the border routers of an ISP backbone. Very important and heavily secured networking devices. If one goes down or is hacked, I hope you aren’t sending anything important in clear text.
Third one… well I had a point for this one then I remembered it was MS we are dealing with here.
But regardless, these three point are something you should worry about even with the current model we use of none dummy devices. Do I like the idea of MS using a dummy terminal connection for their OS. HELL NO! Then they can control anyone that uses that OS. Which essentially equates to them controlling the World! I like the personal dummy OS using Linux that I mentioned above. In fact, when I get some money and do my hosting from home, I will probably use that exact model for my web server.
Posted by webs05 on 10/05/06 at 02:21 PMI mentioned the possibility of hacking routers because 1) it has happened and 2) we’re still on IPv4 while the rest of the world is moving to IPv6. :-(
Posted by george.w on 10/05/06 at 02:27 PMWe are the only ones not using IPv6. I thought no one was yet. I guess I misheard that no one in the US is using it yet. Regardless, it’s a shame. It would save us a lot of trouble, and should help drop the price of getting an Internet connection from the ISP, since all you paying for is the IP address.
Posted by webs05 on 10/05/06 at 02:36 PM
Next entry: Mud volcano
Previous entry: More fear itself