5 ms·

We already know windows is malware. There is no question: https://web.archive.org/web/20130622044225/http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2013/06/h

We already know windows is malware. There is no question: https://web.archive.org/web/20130622044225/http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2013/06/how-can-any-company-ever-trust-microsoft-again/index.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20130622044225/http://blogs.comp... more here: https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-microsoft.en.html

intern4tional 9y ago
Oh come on, this is stretching the accepting definition of malware a mile and then some. This is FUD plain and simple without facts to back it up. Microsoft releasing details of vulnerabilities in advance to premier customers is not something new. All software companies have that practice and we have seen it happen with recent OpenSSL vulnerabilities when CloudFlare has been given advance notice.
- devopsproject 9y ago
  There are no word games here. Malware means software designed to function in ways that mistreat or harm the user. If storing my disk encryption keys on Microsoft servers isn't harmful to my privacy and security, I don't know what is. https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-windows-computer-microsoft-probably-has-your-encryption-key/ https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-window...
  - intern4tional 9y ago
    Bullshit. I'm going to address your specific link. Microsoft has different classes of customers and the functionality that you don't want, many customers request and may even require. You aren't obligated to use their disk encryption or functionality. You can install your own WDE product, but you appear to want the features of a Ferrari for the price of a Ford Focus, which is not reasonable. Microsoft is not trying to mess with your system via that method. If anything, that is a blanket improvement prior by default there was no encryption. Could the design be made better? Maybe, with any implementation of a security feature there are always trade-offs. Microsoft could force users to store the key locally or print it, but then millions of people would simply turn encryption off or lose their key. This does not grant MS remote access to your system. There are plenty of things that are wrong with MS, but saying Windows is malware is FUD plain and simple.
    - devopsproject 9y ago
      Transmitting encryption keys is not a feature any sane person would want. It is convenient. But the fact that it does this in the background is ridiculous. And your cost comparison is equally absurd. It costs more money to store and manage our keys than it would to just leave them alone. > Microsoft is not trying to mess with your system via that method They use other methods to interact with your pc without your permission 1. http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-without-user-permission-apologizes/d/d-id/1059183 http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-wit... 2. http://slated.org/windows_by_stealth_the_updates_you_dont_want http://slated.org/windows_by_stealth_the_updates_you_dont_wa... Your core dumps are being captured. And then sent to a third party: https://betanews.com/2016/11/24/microsoft-shares-windows-10-telemetry-data-with-third-parties/ https://betanews.com/2016/11/24/microsoft-shares-windows-10-... Default settings let Microsoft capture everything you type and your browsing history: https://web.archive.org/web/20151001035410/https://jonathan.porta.codes/2015/07/30/windows-10-seems-to-have-some-scary-privacy-defaults/ https://web.archive.org/web/20151001035410/https://jonathan.... And don't forget about the NSA key buried in windows: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article40836.html http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article40836.html I am a windows user. I'm just not sure how anyone could claim that an OS that updates without your permission, sends and stores your encryption keys, captures browser history and all keystrokes, etc is not considered malware.
      - intern4tional 9y ago
        Quoting you, "I'm just not sure how anyone could claim that an OS that updates without your permission, sends and stores your encryption keys, captures browser history and all keystrokes, etc is not considered malware." I'm making that claim and I don't think you have a clue on how security works. 1. Transmitting encryption keys is something many people want as it removes the overhead of them having to manage them on their own. Businesses use this too (via the cloud) in many cases. As for doing it in the background - how else should it do it? Have a big flashy screen that will confuse the average user? This feature allows Microsoft to gradually raise the bar on its OS security and prevent data recovery from physically stolen devices; while still allowing the user to recover their data if they lock themselves out. 2. The cost comparison is valid. Disk is cheap, and key management should be (this I don't know) automated. Microsoft stores tons of data already (all major software vendors do). 3. Windows Updates should trend towards automation frankly for the consumer versions of the product. Those versions don't have sufficient security features to not get updated. 4. No PII is sent with the core dumps; it's debugging information and helps make the product more secure - that's kind of something you want right? 5. The NSA key is a known falsehood. I'm not even going to bother to address it. I'm honestly not sure if you're a troll or a rabid conspiracy theorist at this point.

intern4tional 9y ago

Oh come on, this is stretching the accepting definition of malware a mile and then some. This is FUD plain and simple without facts to back it up. Microsoft releasing details of vulnerabilities in advance to premier customers is not something new. All software companies have that practice and we have seen it happen with recent OpenSSL vulnerabilities when CloudFlare has been given advance notice.

devopsproject 9y ago
There are no word games here. Malware means software designed to function in ways that mistreat or harm the user. If storing my disk encryption keys on Microsoft servers isn't harmful to my privacy and security, I don't know what is. https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-windows-computer-microsoft-probably-has-your-encryption-key/ https://theintercept.com/2015/12/28/recently-bought-a-window...
- intern4tional 9y ago
  Bullshit. I'm going to address your specific link. Microsoft has different classes of customers and the functionality that you don't want, many customers request and may even require. You aren't obligated to use their disk encryption or functionality. You can install your own WDE product, but you appear to want the features of a Ferrari for the price of a Ford Focus, which is not reasonable. Microsoft is not trying to mess with your system via that method. If anything, that is a blanket improvement prior by default there was no encryption. Could the design be made better? Maybe, with any implementation of a security feature there are always trade-offs. Microsoft could force users to store the key locally or print it, but then millions of people would simply turn encryption off or lose their key. This does not grant MS remote access to your system. There are plenty of things that are wrong with MS, but saying Windows is malware is FUD plain and simple.
  - devopsproject 9y ago
    Transmitting encryption keys is not a feature any sane person would want. It is convenient. But the fact that it does this in the background is ridiculous. And your cost comparison is equally absurd. It costs more money to store and manage our keys than it would to just leave them alone. > Microsoft is not trying to mess with your system via that method They use other methods to interact with your pc without your permission 1. http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-without-user-permission-apologizes/d/d-id/1059183 http://www.informationweek.com/microsoft-updates-windows-wit... 2. http://slated.org/windows_by_stealth_the_updates_you_dont_want http://slated.org/windows_by_stealth_the_updates_you_dont_wa... Your core dumps are being captured. And then sent to a third party: https://betanews.com/2016/11/24/microsoft-shares-windows-10-telemetry-data-with-third-parties/ https://betanews.com/2016/11/24/microsoft-shares-windows-10-... Default settings let Microsoft capture everything you type and your browsing history: https://web.archive.org/web/20151001035410/https://jonathan.porta.codes/2015/07/30/windows-10-seems-to-have-some-scary-privacy-defaults/ https://web.archive.org/web/20151001035410/https://jonathan.... And don't forget about the NSA key buried in windows: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article40836.html http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article40836.html I am a windows user. I'm just not sure how anyone could claim that an OS that updates without your permission, sends and stores your encryption keys, captures browser history and all keystrokes, etc is not considered malware.
    - intern4tional 9y ago
      Quoting you, "I'm just not sure how anyone could claim that an OS that updates without your permission, sends and stores your encryption keys, captures browser history and all keystrokes, etc is not considered malware." I'm making that claim and I don't think you have a clue on how security works. 1. Transmitting encryption keys is something many people want as it removes the overhead of them having to manage them on their own. Businesses use this too (via the cloud) in many cases. As for doing it in the background - how else should it do it? Have a big flashy screen that will confuse the average user? This feature allows Microsoft to gradually raise the bar on its OS security and prevent data recovery from physically stolen devices; while still allowing the user to recover their data if they lock themselves out. 2. The cost comparison is valid. Disk is cheap, and key management should be (this I don't know) automated. Microsoft stores tons of data already (all major software vendors do). 3. Windows Updates should trend towards automation frankly for the consumer versions of the product. Those versions don't have sufficient security features to not get updated. 4. No PII is sent with the core dumps; it's debugging information and helps make the product more secure - that's kind of something you want right? 5. The NSA key is a known falsehood. I'm not even going to bother to address it. I'm honestly not sure if you're a troll or a rabid conspiracy theorist at this point.