[MLB-WIRELESS] This is scary if it's true <-- on topic! really! well sort of.

[Justin]

Ahh.... it's all making sense now. MS never had a full TCP/IP stack like
unix etc, so you could not do nasty things like DDOS attacks with spoofed
source IPs. Now MS has included a full TCP/IP stack so that people can do
spoofed source DDOS attacks which then gives MS the chance to say that
TCP/IP needs to be fixed to stop this from happening.....and just look we
have the solution.

 So, create the problem then offer the solution to fix it that locks people
in to your product.

Regards,
Gaz.







-----Original Message-----
From: owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au
[mailto:owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au]On Behalf Of Nath
Sent: Tuesday, 9 July 2002 7:19 PM
To: melbwireless at wireless.org.au
Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] This is scary if it's true <-- on topic!
really! well sort of.


Microsoft has already had a go at a proprietary protocol.. ever heard of
NetBEUI ? well, that was microsofts semi successful attempt at a proprietary
protocol. notice how its been phased out of windows XP? though that article
brings up a good point about exploitable TCP/IP stacks. until XP microsoft
had never fully implemented the TCP/IP stack... but who can see the whole
internet crashing because of windows having a real TCP/IP stack finally?
nuff my crap.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Tchia" <robert.tchia at palantir.com.au>
To: <melbwireless at wireless.org.au>
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:49 PM
Subject: [MLB-WIRELESS] This is scary if it's true


> Don't know if there is any truth in it, but...
>
>
> Robert X. Cringely is easily one of the most well-written and
> shockingly intelligent columnists I've ever read. His latest column
> takes on Palladium, and it sure made me do a double-take. Microsoft
> releasing a proprietary version of TCP/IP? Oh my - smells like trouble
> to me! Go check out the article - very interesting stuff.
>
> "Last August, I wrote of a rumor that Microsoft wanted to replace
> TCP/IP with a proprietary protocol -- a protocol owned by Microsoft --
> that it would tout as being more secure. Actually, the new protocol
> would likely be TCP/IP with some of the reserved fields used as
> pointers to proprietary extensions, quite similar to Vines IP, if you
> remember that product from Banyan Systems. I called it TCP/MS in the
> column. How do you push for the acceptance of such a protocol? First,
> make the old one unworkable by placing millions of exploitable TCP/IP
> stacks out on the Net, ready-to-use by any teenage sociopath. When the
> Net slows or crashes, the blame would not be assigned to Microsoft.
> Then ship the new protocol with every new copy of Windows, and install
> it with every Windows Update over the Internet. Zero to 100 million
> copies could happen in less than a year.
>
> This week, Microsoft announced Palladium through an exclusive story in
> Newsweek written by Steven Levy, who ought to have known better.
> Palladium is the code name for a Microsoft project to make all
> Internet communication safer by essentially pasting a digital
> certificate on every application, message, byte, and machine on the
> Net, then encrypting the data EVEN INSIDE YOUR COMPUTER PROCESSOR.
> Palladium compatible hardware (presumably chipsets and motherboards)
> will come from both AMD and Intel, and the software will, of course,
> come from Microsoft. That software is what I had dubbed TCP/MS.
>
> The point of all this is simple. It may actually make the Internet
> somewhat safer. But the real purpose of this stuff, I fear, is to take
> technology owned by nobody (TCP/IP) and replace it with technology
> owned by Redmond. That's taking the Internet and turning it into MSN.
> Oh, and we'll all have to buy new computers.
>
> This is diabolical. If Microsoft is successful, Palladium will give
> Bill Gates a piece of every transaction of any type while at the same
> time marginalizing the work of any competitor who doesn't choose to be
> Palladium-compliant. So much for Linux and Open Source, but it goes
> even further than that. So much for Apple and the Macintosh. It's a
> militarized network architecture only Dick Cheney could love."
>
> <http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020627.html>
>
> Taken from... Pocket PC Thoughts
> (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1899)
>
> To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
> with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message
>
>



To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message




To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message