Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #437

Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained

Followups directed to: comp.os.linux.networking

Show all headers | View raw

On Wednesday 20 July 2011 18:15 in comp.os.linux.networking, Charlie 
Gibbs enlightened humanity with the following words...:

> In article <j02kbf$4pd$1@dont-email.me>, stryder@telenet.be.invalid
> (Aragorn) writes:
> 
>> This is exactly why they have released Hyper-V as GPL'd.  They
>> got caught red-handed while hard-linking a GPL'd network driver
>> in Hyper-V.  They then put a spin on that story and claimed that
>> they were releasing Hyper-V under the GPL in order to allow the
>> Linux kernel to run on Hyper-V.  The Hyper-V support code was
>> briefly adopted in the mainline Linux kernel, but from then on
>> Microsoft no longer seemed interested in maintaining the code,
>> and eventually the code was dropped from the Linux kernel again.
> 
> Sounds like the Win98/Java fiasco all over again.  Some things
> never change.

Well, I don't really know about that one.  The only Windows versions I 
have used on my own computers are Windows 3.0/3.1 on DOS (for six 
months, pending the official availability of IBM's OS/2 2.0) and Windows 
NT 4.0 Workstation (for two years).  

In my opinion, Win95/98/ME were a scam.  And in hindsight, so was NT. :p

>> I'm not sure on the numbers, but yes, they have what they term a
>> "Linux Lab".  But their intent is of course not to develop Free
>> Software, or software that runs in GNU/Linux.  Their intent is
>> to try and steal from GNU/Linux, and possibly to look for leverage
>> for patent trolling, although the odds to that must be very small
>> or else they would already have done that by now.
> 
> They're probably also looking for subtle ways to break compatibility,

Oh, but of course!  If it doesn't have a Microsoft patent attached to 
it, they refuse to be compatible with it.  That's why they were pushing 
MS-OOXML as an internationally acknowledged document format.  It gave 
them an excuse to not be compatible with ODF.

> like the Win2K patch that would cause any attempts to connect to
> another machine for file sharing to first send an invalid command
> and examine the error message that came back.  That way it could
> detect whether the remote machine was running Samba and refuse to
> work if so.  (All hail the open source community; a patch that made
> Samba successfully spoof a Microsoft SMB server was out in days.)

And a UNIX machine running Samba actually outperforms a genuine Windows 
server, is more stable and robust, and can act as a Samba domain 
controller. ;-)

-- 
Aragorn
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

Back to comp.os.linux.networking | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Ipv6 vulnerability explained BigRedTruck <pberry2@cfl.rr.com> - 2011-07-18 11:54 -0400
  Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> - 2011-07-18 20:21 +0200
    Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained KR <kristian.rasmussen@broadpark.no.spam.com> - 2011-07-18 20:37 +0200
      Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-19 02:57 +0200
  Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-19 02:49 +0200
    Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2011-07-20 08:15 -0800
      Re: Ipv6 vulnerability explained Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-27 19:11 +0200

csiph-web