http://tinyurl.com/yskgb

Microsoft Source Code Leaked Over Net

SEATTLE - Microsoft Corp. said late Thursday that portions of its
Windows source code ? the tightly guarded blueprint of its dominant
computer operating system ? had been leaked over the Internet.

Microsoft spokesman Tom Pilla said in an interview with The Associated
Press that some incomplete portions of the Windows 2000 (news - web
sites) and Windows NT4 source code had been "illegally made available on
the Internet."
--
wq!

Frostbite wrote:
Hmm, so the leaked code is for essentially obsolete software - not
Microsoft's current main products. I suppose they can always say, "It's
okay if you've upgraded to XP or 2003". Given the world's reluctance to
make these upgrades, could this be another way that Microsoft is
bolstering its case that:

* people having access to source code is a Bad Thing.
* 'open source' types are all malicious hackers bent on cyber-vandalism.
* spending a fortune on upgrading to XP/2003 is a smart move.

This really stinks.

But if the code really has been leaked, and if Microsoft really is
saying this is a bad thing for security, then surely M$ is leaving
itself open to law suits for lack of due diligence in keeping the code
secret?

And somewhere around the time of 02/13/2004 01:15, the world stopped and
listened as Dick Cheney contributed the following to humanity:

Not really, and here's why...

Microsoft itself keeps the source code so secure on its own network that
the NSA would be jealous. But, other corporations, governments, and
individuals, who under contract, have access to the source code under
non-disclosure agreements, similar to the NDAs that SCO uses with their
Unix Source Code licenses. In order to sue Microsoft, you would half to
prove that they leaked the code, which is highly unlikely that they did.
Personally, I would be looking at one or more of their customers who
signed a NDA as the source of the code. You can't go after them, but
Microsoft can. And considering their seemingly agressive stance on
this, it's a safe bet that they will if/when they find out who it was.

Of course, right now this is a rumor at best. But if it did happen,
then there security by obsurity approach is out the door.

--
Daniel Rudy

Remove nospam, invalid, and 0123456789 to reply.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:10:33 GMT,
Daniel Rudy <dcrudy@invalid.pacbell.nospam.net.0123456789> wrote:

Which of course explains the 6 month period that russian hackers had
access to the source code a year ago

If MS was smart, they bugged the code they gave out, with telltales that
will allow them to figure out where it leaked from. Expect them to make
some anouncement about who leaked it in a while.

Unless they weren't smart...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFALPGod90bcYOAWPYRAmh3AJ4vBMOEPf/Qj5ee3PQ/AIYJen1Y1QCcDGZn
vwg++L5P8CdH2KPnCpRDncw=
=EvKg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Nine out of ten of the voices in my head say "Don't shoot!"

Jim Richardson <warlock@eskimo.com> writes:

They'll have to announce *something* soon, the code is all over the
network.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Billy O'Connor wrote:

If you do an eDonkey search for "windows 2000 source code", you get
hundreds of hits, but strangely most of them have bitrate and codec
information ...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFALQzSd1ZThqotgfgRAjmeAJ91xm0VwcCLcf6/yPUPmTosa4ZVXgCfVkYl
KxwN+64FbNnDfOI5Bmgl/ks=
=7CtX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
PeKaJe

Television has proved that people will look at anything rather than each
other. -- Ann Landers

Peter Jensen <usenet@pekajemaps.homeip.net> writes:

The ed2k:// URI on slashdot yesterday was for
windows_2000_source_code.zip.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Billy O'Connor wrote:

So are most of the ones an eDonkey search finds. That, or some other
compressed archive format. It doesn't change the fact that they report
bitrates and codec information, thereby indicating that they're just
renamed movie files. It's simply a trick to get certain files into
broad circulation by hinting that they might be something that everyone
is searching for these days. I'm not excluding the possibility that one
or more of these files are the right stuff, I'm just saying that most is
definitely not.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFALSOjd1ZThqotgfgRAqKAAJ43lbPbCduiqxBScOj+HK G5J8OfpgCgoA77
yEeK7bEeBVw1YY2Kk3Ei6OE=
=TPf6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
PeKaJe

I am not afraid of tomorrow, for I have seen yesterday and I love today.
-- William Allen White

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 19:21:15 +0000, Peter Jensen wrote:

This:
<ed2k://|file|windows_2000_source_code.zip|213748207|34BB9 F3A3E8D3E0C4490A96EC30B9F3C|/>

is the leaked Microsoft source code.

It is most definately not a movie.

- Kay

--
http://kayfox.org/
contact info: http://kayfox.org/contact.html
Linux xheotris 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
10:10pm up 4 days 4:01, 7 users, load average: 2.45, 2.31, 1.92

Dick Cheney wrote:

What, you think XP was written from scratch? Probably 95% of anything
important is lifted straight from Windoze 2000. They just added
more fluff and stuff on top of that to produce XP.

chrisv wrote:
The point is, most people don't know that. If they can make the great
unwashed feel that moving up to XP or 2003 will make them safe from the
Linux bogeymen then they might actually start selling a few copies.