full-disclosure - Comment on Microsoft's leaked memos, and the unofficial end of Microsoft 'Trustworthy Computing'

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 Nov 18 01:39:50 2005
From: mattmurphy at kc.rr.com (Matthew Murphy)
Subject: Comment on Microsoft's leaked memos,	and the
	unofficial end of Microsoft 'Trustworthy Computing'

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Dinis Cruz wrote:
> Why don't we have an IIS 7.0 for windows NT? and IE 7.0 for windows
> 2000? an Windows Firewall for all windows under the sun?
> 
> And if Microsoft changed fair prices for them (for example a fiver ($5)
> for IE7) I'm sure they would have enough buyers to justify the
> investment (humm... 200 million users * $ 5 a pop is 1 $billion), and
> (probably more important to Microsoft) they could give them for free for
> the companies that subscribe to the 'Microsoft software assurance'
> licensing model.
> 
> Here would be a nice positive model which would create more secure
> software, give the users a better deal AND keep the shareholders happy :)

We don't have an IIS 7 for NT because Microsoft builds its applications
atop new system functionality.  It also offers them a way to muscle
their product into a market.

Do you think IE's user count would be anywhere near 200 million if
Microsoft hadn't made the marketing-oriented decision to integrate the
browser into the Windows operating system?

Aside from that, Microsoft would have a hell of a time charging for what
is now legally an "operating system component" as decided by the U.S.
courts.  The government's lawyers would be all over them like a pack of
wild dogs.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDfTDXfp4vUrVETTgRA1DoAJ9DpMZE/no0iEJX0r80C19RDCagcgCfRvym
sBT4F/Mc/E/Tsy2MFhlFOls=
=Aj54
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3436 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20051117/f57f2b69/smime.bin