Sayonara Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 I will be interested to see then if a user successfully sues M$ for backdooring their system after they installed without 'agreeing' to the EULA. Mwuah-hah-haaaaah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrIVIAL/\bLue Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 Hi, I think that this is somewhat off topic...but is there any way that WinXP Pro and Mandrake 8.2 can do a dual boot with XP as the boot loader? I did not like the LiLo bootloader...and I have noooo clue what I am doing with GRUB. Which is better. Additionally can WinXP do a dual linux boot while it is running NTFS cause I had no luck with it when I tried with Win2k...then I had to write my disk to all zeros and it took like 9hrs (100GB disk) in order to install Windows again...cause it is stupid. Yah I am not very good with Linux but I greatly dislike M$. The ironic thing is my mom's boyfriend works for Gates. ummmmm...please direct me in the correct direction. I am lost:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr Blonde Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 TrIVIAL/\bLue: I suggest you try boot magic. Its included in the latest partition magic. It works fine for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpat1023 Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 windows is the most unstable operating system thier is...Lindows isnt very much better. I dual boot Windows Me (unfortunately) and RedHat 9 on my desktop and only have RedHat 9 on my laptop. I only use Windows when its the absolute only thing i can use, which is when i want to play a game, otherwise its linux all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Windows ME is a godawful piece of crap. 98 SE is a bit more stable; and Win2K, NT and XP are about 10,000 times more stable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Windows XP Pro is one of the best OS's out. All versions of Linux\Unix are decent but not as stable as they like to claim. Mac to me is a joke and only worthwhile if you work in advertising. Someone said that Linux was great for it having modules--in that if something goes down your OS is not killed. Well I have to say XP does the same thing except its not called modules its called services, and the same thing applies too it. If something crashes in XP you do not crash the whole OS. Sayonara³ I have yet to see any backdooring in XP. Also about your friend's copy automatically updating itself without his knowledge; please explain to him/her that on your first install XP gives you the option of setting the auto update on or off. It’s not done by itself, unless of course he bought an OEM computer which is in itself a very bad and evil thing. In any case he/she only has to turn auto update off and does not have to firewall anything. Better yet you could also disable the auto update service all together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 newbie said in post #31 :Sayonara³ I have yet to see any backdooring in XP. It was widely publicised in all the IT pages, I don't know how you could miss something like that really. Entire websites exist just to tell people how to configure XP to get rid of all the 'nasties' MS pulled in conjunction with the EULA. As far as my friend goes, he knows what he's doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Sayonara³ said in post #32 : It was widely publicised in all the IT pages, I don't know how you could miss something like that really. Entire websites exist just to tell people how to configure XP to get rid of all the 'nasties' MS pulled in conjunction with the EULA. As far as my friend goes, he knows what he's doing. No need to read IT pages I write them. I did a search on yahoo to try to find any backdoors in XP and still come up empty. Did you mean Backdoor Trojan's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 No, pre-assigned bandwidth for discrete functions that are allegedly part of XP's wonderful interoperability. Or something. I'll try and hunt down some articles later when I get home from work. As I recall I used the term "backdooring" as a verb, rather than the noun "backdoor" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Sounds like the "10% of your bandwidth is reserved for QoS. That nobody uses" thing to me. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;316666 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 That's one of 'em yeah, think most people know about that one. It was Paul who had the automatic connection problem - I'll ask him about it later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 newbie said in post #31 :Mac to me is a joke and only worthwhile if you work in advertising. Would you like to qualify that? Have you actually used one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Indeed ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 An XP backdoor fix for a port 5000 exploit. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microsoft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q287/6/78.asp&NoWebContent=1 Just as an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 The link seems to be for a problem with Exchange server, not XP..... http://packetstormsecurity.nl/filedesc/ms03-043v2.c.html That one is a fairly recent XP exploit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Rermember chaps we were discussing MS sneakies allowed by the EULA that nobody ever reads, and not just the usual exploitations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Well, it was an example of a backdoor exploit on XP. http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/vulnwatch/2001-q4/0031.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 LuTze, I have used a mac before and I stand by what I said. It seems the "backdoors" then are nothing more than vulnerabilities that all OS's have. Just MS is hated by many and it gets in the headline the most. Also the Quality of Service (QoS) is actually not a bad thing; the only thing that should have been done different is it should not come enabled on a recommended install. QoS is good for corp. networks that have a heavy load and should not be used on a home PC. Even Cisco uses the technology. Besides that the rumor of the 10-20% of your bandwidth being locked is false even when it’s enabled. The exploit you posted atm does not harm your system. I misunderstood what you were trying to get at with the backdoor. I thought you were referring to MS getting into your system without the owner's knowledge with the auto update feature enabled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 Does not harm your system? Hello? Maybe not by itself, but the guy with full remote admin privilages might be something to worry about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 LuTze, I don't want to sound rude here, but what are you talking about? Did you read the page atm posted? That page CLEARLY STATES: "The vulnerability would not enable the attacker to gain any administrative control over the server or to alter any data on it." Please read before you post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 I was talking about the one I posted. Which does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 7, 2004 Share Posted January 7, 2004 LuTze, I was talking about atm's link so why the reply to me? (post 45) I will say it again, please read before you post. What seems to be a misunderstanding here is the reference to backdoors and the EULA. I see nothing of that sort in the EULA. I was under the impression that the arugment here was Microsoft the company having access to your personal information online by means of WinXP. These exploits that have been posted have been patched. And the odds of them affecting a lone PC is the same odds as you being on a boat and getting hit by a plane. All OS's have exploits, you should be happy that MS actually fixes them quickly; more than I can say for linux. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuTze Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 newbie said in post #48 :LuTze, I was talking about atm's link so why the reply to me? (post 45) I will say it again, please read before you post. Uh, i'm not sure. Maybe it had something to do with you starting your own post with "LuTze, ". If you're talking about one link in particular please quote it, instead of speaking to me like you would 10 year old child. All OS's have exploits, you should be happy that MS actually fixes them quickly; more than I can say for linux.I'd like to see where you came up with that information. Anyone who regulaly reads lists dedicated to this subject (bugtraq, full-disclosure. The archives are available all over the place) would know that MS are often slow to respond to bug reports, sometimes taking months before a fix is forthcoming. Here is a long list of unpatched IE vulnerabilities, that MS knows all about, for you to have a look at: -http://www.safecenter.net/UMBRELLAWEBV4/ie_unpatched/ On top of this, they do not publish detailed information on vulnerabilities, simply because they believe it will slow down the development of malware. MSBlast, Nimda, Code Red, Slammer, I could go on. In the open source world, fixes are usually in place before the vulnerability is even announced, and in the cases where it isn't i've observed very quick turnarounds on patches, the latest problems with OpenSSH being a very good example. Flippant comments like "more than I can say for linux" show you up for the troll you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 8, 2004 Share Posted January 8, 2004 LuTze, I did not quote him but in my orignial post I did refer to what I was speaking about; let me show you. Did you read the page atm posted? See you stand corrected, I told you what I was talking about but you chose to not read or ignore it. As for MS fixing exploits quickly I will only give a quick example which you yourself said; MSBlast. Also here is a good link for Linux since its so much better than XP right? Linux Anyways its a good read and shows that both OS's are good. Its just whichever one makes you feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now