The depths some people sink to...

[Urwumpe]

Home again:

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20081228

 

[Notebook]

My Sinclair 1000 has no disk drives. You use a mono cassette player to load and save code and data via an 1/8" jack. It has 2k internal memory, but I got the 16k expansion module. Now I'm cooking with gas! It uses an old-style RF connection to hook up to a TV through a game switch like the Atari 2600 used to. I have a flight sim program for it, but I haven't tried to load any of the program cassettes for years, and I fear the cassettes may have all deteriorated. It has built in BASIC and an OS so you can always wrote and save your own programs. I plugged it in about 2 years ago to make sure it works. The video RF generator puts out a lot of static, but I have a plan to tap the video signal directly and send it to the TV via RCA plug. I just haven't the heart or the urgency to crack open the case and put a soldering iron to the irreplaceable mother board yet.

Any chance your modulator may have drifted? Or your telly isn't tuning into the output?

N.

 

[Andy44]

Well, even bran new in '82 it never had a very clean RF signal. I think it gets noise from the power supply. I have always had to turn the contrast way up on the TV to get a best picture. There's a website out there where a guy details how he tapped the direct video signal like I described, and it makes for a much cleaner picture. Certainly sounds easier than finding a new modulator, removing the old one from the motherboard, and soldering on a new one. Less soldering is less risky.

One reason I haven't goten off my butt to do it is because I don't have any practical use for the machine. I've been trying to think of something Orbiter-related to do with it; I could write a set of useful programs to aid in astronavigation, but what I can do on the Sinclair I can do quicker and easier in Excel, which is on my laptop.

 

[Notebook]

Always the way with old gear, not much you can do with it now, but don't want to throw it away! Back in the cupboard then. Good luck with your video mod, especially in these days of "lead-free" solder. I think that used to be called Tin.

N.

 

[Omhra]

I started with a programmable texas instruments calculator, bright red leds...
then I had as a present, from my parents, a trs80 pocket with the printer and cassette adapter. Then came the apple II and latter the apple III with massive disk drives... (dear). And then an IBM clone made by Sperry. followed by a dell "laptop" with windows 3.1.1 and latter my first Pentium, a Toshiba Infinia, a fine machine with 64 megs ram... but it was counting megs now... not kb... a whoper 2 gig HD...
the rest is history...
I am now on quad cores pushing fsb of 1200 plus... its been a good ride... I remember programing punch cards in the 9th grade... and now... well its different.
now we must deal with microsoft in order to do most things universal... blagh!

 

[Lunar_Lander]

We still have our first Computer, an Acorn A3010, which is in my younger brother's room right now. He really likes to give Pacman a spin !

I once heard from somebody who has changed all his computers to Linux, that Microsoft has some kind of killswitch which they could use to kill all Windows computers (as far they got an Internet connection) if they wanted to. Is that true?

 

[Everyone PANIC!!!]

I once heard from somebody who has changed all his computers to Linux, that Microsoft has some kind of killswitch which they could use to kill all Windows computers (as far they got an Internet connection) if they wanted to. Is that true?

of course not. what would be the point?

there much more likely have some hidden line of code that records everything you do lol

 

[Urwumpe]

There is such a function, but it is not hidden. It is accessible over the infamous RPC interface. This interface is responsible for about 50% of all security holes in Windows in the last years.

 

[agentgonzo]

Well, Windows also is used on computers at Mission Control Houston... Using Linux or a different software would not guarantee less risk, or even no risk at all.

But it does not matter, because such news/discussion is about image, not about software. Windows is as useful, or as less useful just as any other OS

Why the Windows bashing? Because it's the cool thing to do?

this kind of thinking isn't new....

This is nothing new to whats happening on surface vessels and surveilance aircraft.

These are the only three on-topic posts that are informative in the entire thread. The rest are on-topic or the standard jokes when you see that any Microsoft product is being used in Mission-Critical military system. In all honesty, it's entirely predictable, dull and generally grossly ill-informed. You don't get security updates because it's an entirely isolated system, the operators don't have access to the desktop/task-bar/start-button/task-manager. Basically, it has none of the functionality that you use on your desktop version of windows. It runs the command system and that's it. I've worked more closely with other command systems than SMCS-NG and in all honesty, the only thing that gives it away that it's running Windows is the style of the cursor and Window borders. Pretty much any question that you could think of that goes along the line of "Does it have x like my Windows PC at home?" would be answered as "no". I don't even think that the three-fingured salute works on it.

 

[movieman]

You don't get security updates because it's an entirely isolated system, the operators don't have access to the desktop/task-bar/start-button/task-manager.

Does it have USB ports and auto-run enabled? If it does, it's toast against any half-determined attacker.

 

[Pilot7893]

"Sir, awaiting order to defend the sub!"
"Fire the torpedoes!"
"Yes sir!"
*torpedo_launch.exe has encountered a fatal error and needs to close. we are sorry for the inconvenience*
"Crap."
*boom*

 

[RangerPL]

"Sir, awaiting order to defend the sub!"
"Fire the torpedoes!"
"Yes sir!"
*torpedo_launch.exe has encountered a fatal error and needs to close. we are sorry for the inconvenience*
"Crap."
*boom*

More like
"Contact, Kirov class bearing two-zero-niner"
"Flood tubes"
"Prepare to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles"
"Fire"

Meanwhile:

*Mk 117 Submarine Fire Control computer has encountered a fatal error and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience.
Click here to report this problem to Microsoft.*

The sub guys also need to be careful not to leave any windows open when diving:rofl:

 

[Usquanigo]

Does it have USB ports and auto-run enabled? If it does, it's toast against any half-determined attacker.

.....who must first get INSIDE the military vessel/post/building and gain physical access to the system, unobserved.

Hacking isn't as easy as the media, the movies, sci-fi authors, and you guys make it out to be. And systems like these are, as gonzo said, more often than not isolated. That's where physical security comes into play.

ANY system can be compromised or be vulnerable, however MOST of that vulnerability comes in the way of physical access.

Other OS's are NO more secure than Windows. The difference is, nobody uses them so nobody bothers to hammer on them. In fact, Windows has actually been forged into a rather secure and robust system DUE to the fact that it is hammered on so often (which is a factor of both how much it's used, and how much M$ is hated). Security through obscurity is what you get with the other ones, and that only does you any good until someone decides to target you.

Most hacking, on any system, takes place on a personal and personell level. Either gaining physical access to the network/system, or getting an employee to activate something (via email or some such). And most of THAT sort of stuff that actually works, only works because company politics tie the admin's hands.

It's not Windows. It's the people using it, the politics that determin just how well and securely it can be configured, and on the other side (stability), poorly coded drivers.

I've got an NT 4.0 production server that has been running since 1999. Hasn't been rebuilt or crashed (power failures notwithstanding). It's being phased out, but only because what we use it for is not needed anymore.

 

[agentgonzo]

Does it have USB ports and auto-run enabled? If it does, it's toast against any half-determined attacker.

Seriously, how stupid do you think the developers are? Of course it doesn't. You don't even have physical access to the machines when you are using them.

I repeat myself:
Pretty much any question that you could think of that goes along the line of "Does it have x like my Windows PC at home?" would be answered as "no".

 

[cjp]

I repeat myself:
Pretty much any question that you could think of that goes along the line of "Does it have x like my Windows PC at home?" would be answered as "no".

That leaves the question: why windows? Why buy windows licenses instead of using a free Linux system? Usually, the answer is "because everybody is used to windows", but this is no longer an argument if you're right.

I don't think windows is a security issue if it's truly isolated, as even microsoft wouldn't be able to give it the "shutdown" command. Only already built-in trojans of the type "self-destruct at a certain date, unless I get an update" could be a theoretical issue.

The only real problem would be the stability of the system, but for truly essential systems Linux would also be insufficiently reliable. There, you'd typically use special hardware and programming languages that allow for provable absence of bugs.

 

[Usquanigo]

That leaves the question: why windows? Why buy windows licenses instead of using a free Linux system? Usually, the answer is "because everybody is used to windows", but this is no longer an argument if you're right.

I don't think windows is a security issue if it's truly isolated, as even microsoft wouldn't be able to give it the "shutdown" command. Only already built-in trojans of the type "self-destruct at a certain date, unless I get an update" could be a theoretical issue.

The only real problem would be the stability of the system, but for truly essential systems Linux would also be insufficiently reliable. There, you'd typically use special hardware and programming languages that allow for provable absence of bugs.

You've never done any development, nor actually used anything yourself. You're repeating heresay and lies, revealing an utter lack of personal experience.

 

[cjp]

You've never done any development, nor actually used anything yourself. You're repeating heresay and lies, revealing an utter lack of personal experience.

WTF?

 

[agentgonzo]

That leaves the question: why windows? Why buy windows licenses instead of using a free Linux system? Usually, the answer is "because everybody is used to windows", but this is no longer an argument if you're right.

When you're talking about the development of a multi-million pound system, 12 or so Windows licences in inconsequential. It also depends on who you are referring to as "everybody". As you state, it doesn't make much of a difference to the user, but if the development team already has a lot of knowledge of Windows, its configuration and components, then it's a lot cheaper, easier and safer to develop on something you know than something that you have to learn. Then there is also the addition of modules that are already built for that platform and existing code-base or alignment with future strategies and platforms.

 

[cjp]

About an earlier post of you: I agreed to the rest of that post, but I'm having some trouble with this part:

Other OS's are NO more secure than Windows. The difference is, nobody uses them so nobody bothers to hammer on them. In fact, Windows has actually been forged into a rather secure and robust system DUE to the fact that it is hammered on so often (which is a factor of both how much it's used, and how much M$ is hated). Security through obscurity is what you get with the other ones, and that only does you any good until someone decides to target you.

Windows has been made increasingly secure, but its initial design (I mean windows 95) had no security at all. It's very hard to make a system really secure if it hasn't been designed to be secure from the beginning.

There are more secure systems than Windows, but Linux isn't the best example for this. The Linux/windows security discussion is too complicated for a simple "this is better than that".

And "security through obscurity" is more often used for windows than for anything else, as microsoft used to have a closed source policy, where it was hard for people outside m$ to find security flaws (both for good guys and for bad guys)

 

[Usquanigo]

About an earlier post of you: I agreed to the rest of that post, but I'm having some trouble with this part:


Windows has been made increasingly secure, but its initial design (I mean windows 95) had no security at all. It's very hard to make a system really secure if it hasn't been designed to be secure from the beginning.

There are more secure systems than Windows, but Linux isn't the best example for this. The Linux/windows security discussion is too complicated for a simple "this is better than that".

And "security through obscurity" is more often used for windows than for anything else, as microsoft used to have a closed source policy, where it was hard for people outside m$ to find security flaws (both for good guys and for bad guys)

To answer your WTF question, read Gonzo's post above the one I quoted. You don't know what you are talking about.

You have security through obscurity totally backwards. Its not a matter of the open or closed nature of the source code. It's a matter of how many people use and know the system. Nobody uses Macs, for example, so it's an obscure OS and is (seemingly) "secure" both because of that, and because it's not worth trying to break when Windows is universal.

Windows 95 is DOS based and that was dropped with Windows Millenium (which was really just 98c). Windows 2000 uses the 95 interface, and incorporated multimedia and game playing capability, but that's where the similarities ended. 2000 was an NT based OS. As has every version of Windows since then (XP, and now Vista).

NT and DOS/Win 3.x were totally different developments. NT was built around security from the outset, DOS obviously was not. NT actually came from when IBM approached M$ about making a new OS, which actually became OS/2, but M$ kept much of the work and developed their own version in their own direction from that work and that became NT. NT4 was a very good OS, 2000 is basically NT5, and is also very good. XP was even better, and Vista better still.