Hmmm?? NSA helped Microsoft make Vista secure ???

Ok, I just got a little more info on the new vista OS. Apparently if you receive a file from someone using a pirated version of a microsoft product, it will not only not allow you to open it, Microsoft will come knocking on your door wanting to know the info of the person you got that file from. what a bunch of crooks, they stole most of what they use!!!!!!

[edit on 3-2-2007 by XphilesPhan]

Originally posted by Truth4hire
offtopic
My essential tools are: Office suite (OpenOffice?) and Photoshop, Putty (SSH), Dreamweaver, Frontpage (?), Outlook Express.

Can I switch to an Alternative like Linux without buying another damned XP license? How about OSX running on an Intel dual core?

Yes and yes.

If you go with Linux, you might want to consider buying Crossover for Photoshop, and maybe MS Office. At about $40, it's a lot cheaper than Windows. The rest can easily be replaced.

For Dreamweaver/Frontpage (why are you using Frontpage?!), there's Quanta and/or NVU.

For OE, there's Kontact/Kmail or Evolution--both of which are easily far better than OE.

For Office, by all means do check out OpenOffice.org. It's not completely compatible with Office documents (so take caution when opening or saving Office documents), and there are certainly features in Office not available in OpenOffice.org (not that I consider those Office extras to be of any great importance). The most important features are available in both office suites, and that's what's really important, but I do advise some caution. Things should hopefully get easier now that Microsoft has adopted XML for Office, and are even sponsoring the development of conversion software, but that's still not a guarantee.

I guess, in the end, I would just recommend getting a Mac. There's even a version of Crossover for it if there are still Windows applications you'd like to run (check their compatibility database to be certain the application you want to run works with Crossover). At the least, you could get Parallels, but that would still entail buying Windows on top of buying Parallels for Mac at $80.

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Ok, I just got a little more info on the new vista OS. Apparently if you receive a file from someone using a pirated version of a microsoft product, it will not only not allow you to open it, Microsoft will come knocking on your door wanting to know the info of the person you got that file from.

what a bunch of crooks, they stole most of what they use!!!!!!

[edit on 3-2-2007 by XphilesPhan]

As an advocate of GNU/Linux and non-Microsoft software in general (I'm looking at you, Apple), I'm glad. I hope that pushes people off Windows. Nothing could be better for the ecology of the Internet.

Originally posted by sky1

Originally posted by funky monk

Originally posted by sky1

Originally posted by TheBandit795


I already don't like Vista that much, now I find this accusation.

Vista......just a heavy version of XP. Now I'm wondering what else they put in it (besides the graphics, lol) to make it so damn heavy. It runs slow on quad cores...so anyone with less than that will definitely be forced to upgrade if they want to use this crap.

before you start saying stuff like that get you info correct. Vista has a new kurnel, new gui and has basicaly been written from the ground up. Its also contains many many more new features under the hood to haelp make it more relyable and easy to use. Its not just a cosmetic update.

Its much more then a 'heavy version of XP'

[edit on 3-2-2007 by funky monk]

You might want to read all of the posts before responding...check the first page of posts and read my last one. It has a UNIX Kernel, a MAC (Linux) GUI, and it has NOT 'basically been written from the ground up'. Anyone who knows anything about making an OS knows this. It is NOT more reliable and it's the SAME as XP....just a little prettier and a lot heavier.

What branch of IT do you specialize in? What program languages do you code in?

Anyway, the point of the thread is not to tell me that I have no idea what I'm talking about, (We've been running Vista for almost a year because we write software that must be compatible). The thread topic is the NSA working on the OS.

[edit on 3-2-2007 by sky1]

sorry, i made a bit of a mistake, longhorn was ground up, Vista was based of server 03.

I am a programmer working in C, C++ and on the odd ocasion I do web programming in CSS and html.

I have also beeing running Vista since beta one and some of the later versions of longhorn. I will have to disagree that vista is not more reliable because in all the times I have worked with it I have had a conciderable decline in random app shutdowns and all that.
I cant believe you think that vista is the same as XP with just a cosmetic update after using it for that long, it clearly has a lot more then that done to it.

Also Vista is much much faster then XP, boots faster, runs faster, does other tasks much more faster thne XP does.

This is a bit off topic I think

[edit on 4-2-2007 by funky monk]

Originally posted by sky1

You might want to read all of the posts before responding...check the first page of posts and read my last one. It has a UNIX Kernel, a MAC (Linux) GUI, and it has NOT 'basically been written from the ground up'. Anyone who knows anything about making an OS knows this. It is NOT more reliable and it's the SAME as XP....just a little prettier and a lot heavier.

Vista's kernel has no ancestry whatsoever to any UNIX kernel. It is an enhancement of the NT kernel that Microsoft created a long time ago. One could argue that it's more closely related to OpenVMS (and OpenVMS is older than UNIX) because Dave Cutler worked on OpenVMS for DIGITAL, and later went on to work on Windows NT for Microsoft, but beyond that, there is no relation, and it's highly doubtful that he brought any concepts from OpenVMS to Windows NT.

You mean Microsoft actually created something on its own from scratch as opposed to stealing from somebody else? No tell me its not so!!!

Don't know how nsa made it more secure since the pirated version of windows vista is already on the internet, funny thing is it will even update on the internet.

Originally posted by pepsi78
Don't know how nsa made it more secure since the pirated version of windows vista is already on the internet, funny thing is it will even update on the internet.

The idea, as far as I know, I don't work for NSA or Microsoft, was to make it more secure as an operating system, not to make it "unpiratable", in the same way some authority could work with a car manufacturer to make it safer for the driver and passengers but not more difficult to steal.

As the article says, and as I have said also, NSA has published before guidelines to make computers more secure to use, as you can see here.

Well it's not like because of windows vista my monitor will explode in my face and cut my face in to pices.
Make what more secure?
If they are refering to the imunity of the sistem, as in a more stable platform that offers some kind of virus protection, I don't belive that to be the case, it's imposible to do that.
The only reason NSA would create something is to spy, so what you navigate could posibly go in the log.

Originally posted by pepsi78
The only reason NSA would create something is to spy, so what you navigate could posibly go in the log.

So do you think that the guidelines they provide are only ways to make computers easier to get cracked by NSA?

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by pepsi78
The only reason NSA would create something is to spy, so what you navigate could posibly go in the log.

So do you think that the guidelines they provide are only ways to make computers easier to get cracked by NSA?

I can't say for a 100% that is what they are doing, but why not?

Why would NSA be intrestid to help MicroSoft?, what would NSA gain from this.
When I look at things, google was forced to sumbit data to them, like so many others.
Yahoo is curently loging IP's in the log on chat rooms and they store arhives of what people talk over there.
And you know what, it would not surprise me if this forum does the same
Microsoft would be the perfect oportunity for them, if NSA coded part of windows then it's all clear to me, NSA does not do favors unles there is something to gain.

Originally posted by pepsi78
Microsoft would be the perfect oportunity for them, if NSA coded part of windows then it's all clear to me, NSA does not do favors unles there is something to gain.

What do you think they gained by publishing those security guidelines?

They did those for free, as far as I know.

Guaranteed NSA is simply helping themselves to greater control.

Like others have posted this is not the first time - it's old news - if anything they are just more arrogant about it.

I certainly would not do anything seriously counter establishment on a retail OS - I mean why make it easy for them?

If you just want to retain your privacy then simply use some reasonable encryption on your personal stuff and while having personal communications.

As for Vista - can anyone here seriously give me a decent reason to upgrade (besides Direct X 10)?

If I ever do use vista for anything - it will simply be a duel boot for multimedia/gaming rig - I'm not voluntarily going to comply with the insidious Palladium protocol.

en.wikipedia.org...

Windows is like Saudi Oil (and perhaps Saudi Credit Firms) the more world citizens learn to reduce their dependance on it - the more autonomy they will regain in their personal lives.

Originally posted by supercheetah

As an advocate of GNU/Linux and non-Microsoft software in general (I'm looking at you, Apple), I'm glad. I hope that pushes people off Windows. Nothing could be better for the ecology of the Internet.

I sell thousands of dollars worth of Microsoft per week, through an authorized var, and I can tell you that even if every home or home office user in the world switched to a non microsoft solution, Microsoft will still be just fine because the make ALL of their money through their licensing agreements, and business aren't going to stop buying it - Microsoft is here to stay.

Originally posted by TruthMagnet

As for Vista - can anyone here seriously give me a decent reason to upgrade (besides Direct X 10)?

Nope, not unless you care about controlling the security of multiple users. There are "parental controls" in Vista, which allow the IT staff to monitor web activity with a lot more control than xpp.

Well, the search function is way more intuitive as well.... Direct X 10 is more important to me than that shtuff.

Originally posted by tha stillz

Originally posted by supercheetah

As an advocate of GNU/Linux and non-Microsoft software in general (I'm looking at you, Apple), I'm glad. I hope that pushes people off Windows. Nothing could be better for the ecology of the Internet.

I sell thousands of dollars worth of Microsoft per week, through an authorized var, and I can tell you that even if every home or home office user in the world switched to a non microsoft solution, Microsoft will still be just fine because the make ALL of their money through their licensing agreements, and business aren't going to stop buying it - Microsoft is here to stay.

I don't care what happens to Microsoft. I'm not a fan of their monopoly because I don't like monopolies in general, but if they continue to exist after losing their monopoly, that really won't bother me. I used to hate IBM and Apple because they both nearly had monopolies in the 80s, but since that has changed, I actually like some of the things they do these days. I hope the same thing happens to Microsoft.

What bothers me the most about Microsoft right now, though, is the monoculture of software they've created. In biology, monocultures are a bad thing (it's what lead to the Irish potato famine because all the potatoes in Ireland descended from a scant four different species of potatoes brought from the Americas), and the same is true of the Internet.

If the NSA helped Microsoft make Vista then the NSA isn't as powerful as they are made out to be.... Vista isn't out of the box and it is already full of holes. Some security assistance.... makes me feel a whole hell of a lot safer.

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Ok, I just got a little more info on the new vista OS. Apparently if you receive a file from someone using a pirated version of a microsoft product, it will not only not allow you to open it, Microsoft will come knocking on your door wanting to know the info of the person you got that file from.

what a bunch of crooks, they stole most of what they use!!!!!!

[edit on 3-2-2007 by XphilesPhan]

100% incorrect.

As an advocate of GNU/Linux and non-Microsoft software in general (I'm looking at you, Apple), I'm glad. I hope that pushes people off Windows. Nothing could be better for the ecology of the Internet.

Push people off Windows? Rofl. Nothing supports Mac OsX. Search for Direct X, and two, all that would happen is viruses will start to be coded for OsX.

You might want to read all of the posts before responding...check the first page of posts and read my last one. It has a UNIX Kernel, a MAC (Linux) GUI, and it has NOT 'basically been written from the ground up'. Anyone who knows anything about making an OS knows this. It is NOT more reliable and it's the SAME as XP....just a little prettier and a lot heavier.

First of all, Windows dosn't have Mac GUI, it isn't based on UNIX AT ALL, and it pretty much has been written from the ground up.

If you have actually used Vista, you should know, that although it LOOOVVVEEESSSS RAM, programs will run faster on it, and also yes, applications should be significantly stabler on it.

It IS more reliable as XP, it IS pretties than XP, it IS faster than XP, it ISN'T ANYTHING LIKE XP!

You mean Microsoft actually created something on its own from scratch as opposed to stealing from somebody else? No tell me its not so!!!

Well, I'm surprised that people still use Macs. You can quiet easily install OsX on PC's, and if you do that it will be a whole lot cheaper.

Yes, you CAN install osX on PCs, do teh research.

The Vista connection with the NSA could be from pretty much for anything.

Quote from the article:

The National Security Agency (NSA) stepped in to help Microsoft develop a configuration of its next-generation operating system that would meet U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) requirements, said NSA Spokesman Ken White.

It's to meet DoD requirements. That could just mean anything really.

To other people. I have got no idea why your afraid of trusted computing. Sorry, but it's a load of crap. Try Vista and you'll see, that there is only a tiny pit of trusted computing. Far less than to cause concern.

[edit on 7-2-2007 by PisTonZOR]

Im not disturbed in the least that the NSA wants to assist with security on vista... however, I am disgusted in the NSA's choice for an Operating System. If they wanted a secure operating system, why not just use a Unix based OS?

I'm rather startled at the faith the NSA has placed in Microsoft. Knowing Microsofts track record, this could be a huge security problem for the NSA.

I look forward to reading news about the aftermath... should be tasty.

Originally posted by johnsky
Im not disturbed in the least that the NSA wants to assist with security on vista... however, I am disgusted in the NSA's choice for an Operating System. If they wanted a secure operating system, why not just use a Unix based OS?

They did not wanted a secure OS, they wanted to secure Vista.

As I have said in other posts, the NSA has some guides about how to configure various software and hardware products, in this case they grabbed the opportunity of talking to the people who were building the software instead of waiting for its release before they could analyze it.

I'm rather startled at the faith the NSA has placed in Microsoft. Knowing Microsofts track record, this could be a huge security problem for the NSA.

If they had any faith in Microsoft they wouldn't have bothered with Vista security.