[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date /
thread ]
[ Next by date /
thread => ]
Over the years there have been rumours that M$ used some BSD code, which is not under the GNU licenece. If some of the M$ code is out there a bit of grep ing might be revealing.... -----Original Message----- From: owner-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Neil Williams Sent: 13 February 2004 16:36 To: list@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [LUG] The wrong kind of Open Source. On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 11:27:20AM +0000, Andrew Rogers wrote:
Apparently some MS source code has leaked http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3484545.stm The article says the leak "could provide a competitive edge to its rivals, who would gain a much better understanding of the inner workings of Microsoft's technology." This would be a very bad thing for the Open Source community. There is a risk that MS code would be used to improve projects like WINE which would have legal consequences. Regards Andrew
Doesn't it just add to the lack of confidence in 'security through obscurity' argument? GNU/Linux source code has been freely available for years - if Microsoft's code is so secure, so inline with 'Trustworthy Computing', why is the leak so dangerous? (Answers on a postcard to B Gates, Seattle.) "But the other threat to Microsoft is the fact that such access could provide a competitive edge to its rivals, who would gain a much better understanding of the inner workings of Microsoft's technology." And just what is so wrong with that???? (Wonder if it includes any NTFS read/write stuff?! - it was Windows 2000 and Windows NT code supposedly.) ;-)) Linux code has provided the same potential to rivals but it hasn't harmed Linux, although it may turn out to have bitten SCO through their own incompetence. Leaking the source code is NOT the issue. The problem that is worrying Microsoft so much is that the code isn't good enough to stand open scrutiny because too many exploits will become possible! "Hackers with the code could exploit the operating system and access machines running Windows." Duh? Then write better code, Bill! (Oh, I forgot, you don't write code anymore do you. Why's that Bill?) Open source code is not a threat - even if it is Microsoft code. This is a brilliant example of what is so bad with software patents - open code tends to better code because the developers cannot hide behind NDA's, DCMA, EULA's or patents. Developers are human and the path of least resistence is always the one to follow when a deadline is looming. If you don't NEED to write secure code, the chances are that you won't take the time to avoid possible exploits or even remove ones that are already known to you. Easier and quicker to hope that no-one else spots what you've already seen. Source code is NOT a trade secret and it should not be patented! Source code is a form of speech, it is created free and is created to be shared. (n.b. this is not anti-Microsoft for the sake of it - I believe it illustrates a classic problem for those who would try to shackle the freedom of any computer code, including SCO.) -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.codehelp.co.uk/ http://www.dclug.org.uk/ http://www.isbn.org.uk/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/isbnsearch/ http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?qs=0x8801094A28BCB3E3 -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.