bugtraq - Re: Re: W2K source "leaked"?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:11:36 -0500
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Allen/gore/SlackWareWolf <goreBOFH@...cast.net>
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com, full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com,
   Thor Larholm <thor@...x.com>
Subject: Re: Re: W2K source "leaked"?

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:06:41 EST, Allen/gore/SlackWareWolf said:
> I think they should release the source for NT anyway. They 
> are pretty much dropping it, and they say it is so badly 
> made they can hardly fix it, well, why not let the REAL 
> hackers out there who can make an OS, take a look at it. 
> Maybe they are a little nervouse? Maybe people would see it 
> was badly made? Wither way I know ALOT of people who STILL 
> swear by NT. With proper skill, NT can be made hard. 2,000 
> is similar, and I think it would be great if they finally 
> said "Ok, fine, here is the source".

They can't do that because of the truly astounding overlap between
the NT codebase and the Win200[03]/XP codebase.  Think MS04-07, and
ask if they can afford to have NT code out there.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped