full-disclosure - M$ - so what should they do?

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0406211328080.2970@stratigery>
From: eballen1 at qwest.net (Bruce Ediger)
Subject: M$ - so what should they do?

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Michael Schaefer wrote:

> Well, lets see, moving away from the Registry (single point of failure)
> would be a good step.
>
> Separating the operating system from programs would be great, I don't
> like the fact that everything and it's brother thinks it can or should
> dump files into the system directory.

How about changing the ".exe" convention?  Making a file executable by
it's "extension" probably causes a lot of opportunities for problems,
doesn't it?

Also, the magic file names, like "CON" and "AUX" should go away.