Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature: Government
Perens on latest SCO Dos Attack
By Bruce Perens
on
January 27, 2004 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
The master version of this notice is at http://perens.com/Articles/SCO/DOS/
Please check that location for a more recent version. You may re-publish this material. You may excerpt it, reformat it and translate it as necessary for your presentation. You may not edit it to deliberately misrepresent my opinion.
On January 26, 2004, a new virus became rampant. I have reports that the virus payload has two purposes: to send an email spam for a mail-order "Viagra" vendor, and to perform a denial-of-service attack on SCO's web site.
Denial-of-service attacks via virus have been a common trick of email spammers. They were first used to take out some of the anti-spam blacklist sites. Several of those sites had their (non-spam-related) business so heavily disrupted that they closed the doors of their anti-spam projects rather than be attacked again.
The Open Source developers are a target of spammers. We are the creators of most high-profile anti-spam technology. For example, SpamAssassin started out as, and remains today, an Open Source project. The predominant mail delivery programs of the Internet are Open Source projects such as Sendmail and Postfix, and thus most efforts to spam-proof those programs are Open Source as well. This is important, because it gives spammers a reason to defame us.
SCO also has a reason to defame us, as part of their stock-kiting scheme. We have assembled ample evidence that they have lied under oath in court. Such a company would not balk at attacking their own site in order to paint their opponents in a bad light.
Thus, it is likely that this virus has been assembled for the purpose of defaming the Linux developers by spammers, SCO, or others. Your behavior will influence whether or not it succeeds in this mission.
Thus, I urge all persons who have sympathy for Free Software, Open Source, and Linux:
- Do not cheer on attacks on the SCO site. By doing so, you falsely implicate our community in the attacks, in the eyes of outsiders who read your words. Our community believes in freedom of speech, not silencing our opponent's speech through net attacks. We will defeat SCO using the truth, not by gagging them.
- Publicly deplore the attacks as an attempt to defame us, and not an effort of our community. Show others this notice.
- Continue to fight SCO, using all legal means at your disposal. Show others the analysis of SCO's ongoing fraud at Groklaw.net and elsewhere, and explain to them your own experience as a participant in the Free Software community.
- Continue the visible presence of Free Software as a force for good in the world by producing excellent original software for everyone's free use and deploying it wherever possible. Promote these projects to the press and public as you carry them out. Do what you can for other public-good projects such as schools and non-profit organizations. FreeGeek.org is an excellent example of how to carry this out.
- Show others by example that our side always takes the high road. When they see a low-road sort of action like denial-of-service, spam, or stock fraud, they'll know who to blame.
Remember that your actions count. You are ambassadors of our community.
Many Thanks
Bruce Perens
Comments
on Perens on latest SCO Dos AttackNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
What? CNN reporting skewed news? Never!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P Next up, Faux at 11....
Did you even READ the article at CNN ? It states rather clearly that "Virus experts suggested" such and such, and they also quote someone from Sophos anti-virus. CNN isn't making any accusations, they're just reporting what the supposed experts are saying....and that's what CNN's lot in life is. If you want to boycott something, don't use Sophos antivirus software. Is their article title misleading or suggestive ? Sure...but that's how they get people to read the article.
the body of the article is reasonable (a full description of all the issues behind this would take to long for your average CNN viewer to pay attention too), but the headline gives a very slanted view on the issue, and it shapes the perceptions of those who read the article.
"the body of the article is reasonable..."
Are you sure? How difficult would it have been for CNN to call Bruce, or get a response from another prominent member of the OSS community? Yet there are no OSS/Linux people quoted in the article. Is that fair and balanced reporting? Or is it advocating a particular position under the guise of reporting news?
As Bernie Goldberg keeps pointing out in his books, bias is not necessarily about specifically advocating a particular point of view, it is about not presenting other viewpoints (which would be labelled CENSORING if it were the government doing the excluding).
-Rabid Conservative
Are you sure? How difficult would it have been for CNN to call Bruce, or get a response from another prominent member of the OSS community? Yet there are no OSS/Linux people quoted in the article. Is that fair and balanced reporting? Or is it advocating a particular position under the guise of reporting news?
As Bernie Goldberg keeps pointing out in his books, bias is not necessarily about specifically advocating a particular point of view, it is about not presenting other viewpoints (which would be labelled CENSORING if it were the government doing the excluding).
-Rabid Conservative
If you want to boycott something, don't use Sophos antivirus software. Is their article title misleading or suggestive ? Sure...but that's how they get people to read the article.
Or how people who are interested in NEWS know not to read *that* article.
Or how people who are interested in NEWS know not to read *that* article.
YES!!! There headline clearly states there position on this. If they were doing decent reporting, then the headline would have read "Experts Suggest:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."
As for Sophos, I use Linux and have no need for any lousy anti-virus software.
As for Sophos, I use Linux and have no need for any lousy anti-virus software.
How about where they say: "The SCO Group, owner of the UNIX operating system."
They know better.
They are lying.
You want facts, forget CNN.
They know better.
They are lying.
You want facts, forget CNN.
CNN is owned by TimeWarner. NullSoft too. WB too. You know why Frankel left NullSoft right? Well, CNN is one of the conservative media. IOW: Repubs. I've decided to ignore these pricks a loooong time ago. Got my other sources to know what happens in this world.
Reporting what an idiot's suggestion is, does not justufy anything. By reporting such, you value it. If such doesn't discredit in this example [suggestive title, idiotic unproven vision] then you don't understand "the media is the message" and "don't hate the media, become the media". They are hell certain in some ways reponsible with their huge power.
Reporting what an idiot's suggestion is, does not justufy anything. By reporting such, you value it. If such doesn't discredit in this example [suggestive title, idiotic unproven vision] then you don't understand "the media is the message" and "don't hate the media, become the media". They are hell certain in some ways reponsible with their huge power.
CNN is not conservative. It's liberal. Fox News is conservative. Both are stupid and inept when it comes to understanding tech news.
No, asswipe, it's doing its best to become another conservative news pit, as much like Fox as possible without losing its journalistic pretensions altogether. Their fawning coverage of the Iraq War is one example of this trend. Unfortunately for CNN, when you start deliberately slanting the news for whatever reason, you basically have stopped doing journalism.
I'm told that if you want to see CNN doing journalism, you have to watch their foreign edition. Too bad I don't have satellite TV.
I'm told that if you want to see CNN doing journalism, you have to watch their foreign edition. Too bad I don't have satellite TV.
People who will believe this without any critical thinking whatsoever aren't going to believe the Linux community is lily-white and innocent even if Linux Torvalds is lifted into heaven atop a whirl-wind. SCO is in the business of advertising their terrible plight of being robbed by Big Bad Blue and the Linux Conspiracy (album available at the concession stand).
If there is some snickering at SCO getting splattered in something smelly and sticky, then that's entirely understandable. Yes, SCO will say, "See, SEE! They are all out get us!" They're saying that even if nobody is doing anything, though, so the only sensible response is to ignore the whiny little berks while they are dining on their just deserts. This is all a stock-kiting scheme, as Bruce Perens asserted. SCO will continue to spout feces through their facial orifices until the stock is all sold, or SCO's bare ass is publicly spanked in court, whichever comes first.
If there is some snickering at SCO getting splattered in something smelly and sticky, then that's entirely understandable. Yes, SCO will say, "See, SEE! They are all out get us!" They're saying that even if nobody is doing anything, though, so the only sensible response is to ignore the whiny little berks while they are dining on their just deserts. This is all a stock-kiting scheme, as Bruce Perens asserted. SCO will continue to spout feces through their facial orifices until the stock is all sold, or SCO's bare ass is publicly spanked in court, whichever comes first.
We must keep our cool and let the game play out in court. SCO will hang themselves. What really gets my goat is CNN. They have posted an article titled "Experts: Vicious worm 'linux war' weapon" http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/01/27/mydoo<nobr>m<wbr></nobr> <nobr> <wbr></nobr>.spread/index.html Where do they get off making accusations of this type without a shred of proof. I suggest we boycott CNN and Time Warner for this outrage.
>
>
CNN and other "news" outfits will get what's coming to them in the end.
>
>
CNN and other "news" outfits will get what's coming to them in the end.
Even if Linus Torvalds created the virus, it doesn't mean that the Open Source community is bad!
Obviously somebody doesn't like SCO. So, what's new?
Aren't most Windows virii created by Windows users for their own amusement or claim to fame? Does that mean that Windows users are the most anarchic?
You can't blame the Open Source community for this even if somebody from the Open Source community did do it.
What good is a DDoS attack going to do anyway, what's the point of firing a torpedo at a ship that's already sinking?
Obviously somebody doesn't like SCO. So, what's new?
Aren't most Windows virii created by Windows users for their own amusement or claim to fame? Does that mean that Windows users are the most anarchic?
You can't blame the Open Source community for this even if somebody from the Open Source community did do it.
What good is a DDoS attack going to do anyway, what's the point of firing a torpedo at a ship that's already sinking?
I find it interesting that the virus writers had to use Windows to DoS SCO, and not Linux. You would think, if Linux is as insecure as Microsoft claims, that it would have been the ideal choice.
That also implies that the virus writers aren't Linux users at all, but Windows users, since they seem more familiar with it.
That also implies that the virus writers aren't Linux users at all, but Windows users, since they seem more familiar with it.
Linux is most widely used on servers; Windows is most widely used by individuals. Servers don't habitually run any old attachment that comes by email; windows-using individuals do.
Agree with your second point though.
Agree with your second point though.
Linux is most widely used on servers; Windows is most widely used by individuals. Servers don't habitually run any old attachment that comes by email
True, but on the other hand, servers usually have mutch higher upstream bandwith, making them a lot more interesting to use in a DDOS attac.
Maybe it's that 'stolen code' from SCO (sarcasm!) that makes GNU/Linux so secure...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P
This is an interesting POV, however I would like to point out that there are far more exploitable computers if your virus runs under MS Windows, than if it runs on Linux and every other Unix varient combined!
Thank you for letting me express my thoughts.
Note: I too am troubled by SCO's behavior.
Thank you for letting me express my thoughts.
Note: I too am troubled by SCO's behavior.
Too much airplay is being given to this idea that someone in the Linux community is responsible, or its a conspiracy by SCO or whatever.
Targetting an unpopular company or institution is par for the course in viruses these days. The last time it was Windows Update that was targetted. Plenty of people cheered that on as well, but Microsoft didn't turn around and blame everyone who hated them.
The bogeyman of the day is going to get bombed by whatever social retard writes such viruses. SCO happens to be today's bogeyman.
There is *no* story here. The comments on Slashdot cheering the virus on are nothing more than black humour. That's why they all are modded (Score:5, Funny).
Waste your effort on trying to track down the miscreant who did this. Not on writing SCO's "we're so hard done by" press releases for them.
Targetting an unpopular company or institution is par for the course in viruses these days. The last time it was Windows Update that was targetted. Plenty of people cheered that on as well, but Microsoft didn't turn around and blame everyone who hated them.
The bogeyman of the day is going to get bombed by whatever social retard writes such viruses. SCO happens to be today's bogeyman.
There is *no* story here. The comments on Slashdot cheering the virus on are nothing more than black humour. That's why they all are modded (Score:5, Funny).
Waste your effort on trying to track down the miscreant who did this. Not on writing SCO's "we're so hard done by" press releases for them.
Just like SCO blames OS community for the DOS attacks without any evidence?
I think it's rather obvious, SCO is one of the parties who benifit from OS having a bad name so<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...they are most likely to be responsible.
I think it's rather obvious, SCO is one of the parties who benifit from OS having a bad name so<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...they are most likely to be responsible.
Shame on you for being such a self-righteous, moralizing, ass.
" Thus, it is likely that this virus has been assembled for the purpose of defaming the Linux developers by spammers, SCO, or others. Your behavior will influence whether or not it succeeds in this mission. "
I doubt SCO wrote this virus. It is more likely someone from the Open Source community or a sympathizer. In other words Bruce, get a life and quit blaming SCO for every blasted thing that happens. It just shows that the Open Source community and their leaders are just as good at spewing FUD and misinformation as anyone else.
I doubt SCO wrote this virus. It is more likely someone from the Open Source community or a sympathizer. In other words Bruce, get a life and quit blaming SCO for every blasted thing that happens. It just shows that the Open Source community and their leaders are just as good at spewing FUD and misinformation as anyone else.
I doubt SCO wrote this virus. It is more likely someone from the Open Source community or a sympathizer.
Due to the nature of this virus, what it exploits, and how it spreads, I would venture a guess that the author is quite proficient in Visual Basic, Windows API's, and the Registry of Microsoft OSes. Therefore, I doubt it was anyone in the Open Source Community, but rather, one who has made a career developing on a Microsoft platform.
In other words Bruce, get a life and quit blaming SCO for every blasted thing that happens.
Nowhere in his statement does Mr. Perens explicitly state, "SCO did it!". But he does point out that whoever did it is probably out to make the Open Source Community look bad,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.i.e., to make it look like someone in the Open Source Community is responsible. This is why Mr. Perens is openly denouncing the virus and encouraging all members of Open Source Community to do likewise.
It just shows that the Open Source community and their leaders are just as good at spewing FUD and misinformation as anyone else.
Funny you should say this... judging by the position you take in your posts, you seem to be a Microsoft proponent. One thing you can't say about the Open Source Community is that they sling FUD. They deal openly with facts. I have yet to see anything come from Redmond, WA, or Lindon, UT, that is based on actual fact (unless, of course, it's a "paid for" study).
Due to the nature of this virus, what it exploits, and how it spreads, I would venture a guess that the author is quite proficient in Visual Basic, Windows API's, and the Registry of Microsoft OSes. Therefore, I doubt it was anyone in the Open Source Community, but rather, one who has made a career developing on a Microsoft platform.
In other words Bruce, get a life and quit blaming SCO for every blasted thing that happens.
Nowhere in his statement does Mr. Perens explicitly state, "SCO did it!". But he does point out that whoever did it is probably out to make the Open Source Community look bad,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.i.e., to make it look like someone in the Open Source Community is responsible. This is why Mr. Perens is openly denouncing the virus and encouraging all members of Open Source Community to do likewise.
It just shows that the Open Source community and their leaders are just as good at spewing FUD and misinformation as anyone else.
Funny you should say this... judging by the position you take in your posts, you seem to be a Microsoft proponent. One thing you can't say about the Open Source Community is that they sling FUD. They deal openly with facts. I have yet to see anything come from Redmond, WA, or Lindon, UT, that is based on actual fact (unless, of course, it's a "paid for" study).
Due to the nature of this virus, what it exploits, and how it spreads, I would venture a guess that the author is quite proficient in Visual Basic, Windows API's, and the Registry of Microsoft OSes. Therefore, I doubt it was anyone in the Open Source Community, but rather, one who has made a career developing on a Microsoft platform.
Rubbish. Any programmer worth his or her salt can learn how to do stuff like this with a minimum of fuss. And there of plenty of programmers who cut code for Windows for a crust and Linux for fun. Your argument doesn't hold water.
Nowhere in his statement does Mr. Perens explicitly state, "SCO did it!". But he does point out that whoever did it is probably out to make the Open Source Community look bad,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.i.e., to make it look like someone in the Open Source Community is responsible. This is why Mr. Perens is openly denouncing the virus and encouraging all members of Open Source Community to do likewise.
Perens tries to imply that it was done to defame the OS community, which is weak at best, and tinfoil conspiracy at worst. This attack could easily have come from an idiotic Linux fan. Turning a blind eye to this and trying to blame some unnamed evil defamer is not going to make it go away.
Funny you should say this... judging by the position you take in your posts, you seem to be a Microsoft proponent. One thing you can't say about the Open Source Community is that they sling FUD. They deal openly with facts. I have yet to see anything come from Redmond, WA, or Lindon, UT, that is based on actual fact (unless, of course, it's a "paid for" study).
If you truly believe this, I pity you. The Open Source community has a large, often unwitting propaganda network. Slashdot, Newsforge, Groklaw... where do you think the financial backing for these sites come from? Perens' letter was pure propaganda - Occam's Razor cuts through it in a second. Not that I believe you will recognize all this. Your attempt to discredit the grandparent's poster as a Microsoft proponent demonstrates your bias all too clearly.
Rubbish. Any programmer worth his or her salt can learn how to do stuff like this with a minimum of fuss. And there of plenty of programmers who cut code for Windows for a crust and Linux for fun. Your argument doesn't hold water.
Nowhere in his statement does Mr. Perens explicitly state, "SCO did it!". But he does point out that whoever did it is probably out to make the Open Source Community look bad,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.i.e., to make it look like someone in the Open Source Community is responsible. This is why Mr. Perens is openly denouncing the virus and encouraging all members of Open Source Community to do likewise.
Perens tries to imply that it was done to defame the OS community, which is weak at best, and tinfoil conspiracy at worst. This attack could easily have come from an idiotic Linux fan. Turning a blind eye to this and trying to blame some unnamed evil defamer is not going to make it go away.
Funny you should say this... judging by the position you take in your posts, you seem to be a Microsoft proponent. One thing you can't say about the Open Source Community is that they sling FUD. They deal openly with facts. I have yet to see anything come from Redmond, WA, or Lindon, UT, that is based on actual fact (unless, of course, it's a "paid for" study).
If you truly believe this, I pity you. The Open Source community has a large, often unwitting propaganda network. Slashdot, Newsforge, Groklaw... where do you think the financial backing for these sites come from? Perens' letter was pure propaganda - Occam's Razor cuts through it in a second. Not that I believe you will recognize all this. Your attempt to discredit the grandparent's poster as a Microsoft proponent demonstrates your bias all too clearly.
Rubbish. Any programmer worth his or her salt can learn how to do stuff like this with a minimum of fuss. And there of plenty of programmers who cut code for Windows for a crust and Linux for fun. Your argument doesn't hold water.
Considering then, that virii such as this take minimal effort, then why is Microsoft so defenseless against them? Poor OS design, maybe?
Perens tries to imply that it was done to defame the OS community, which is weak at best, and tinfoil conspiracy at worst. This attack could easily have come from an idiotic Linux fan. Turning a blind eye to this and trying to blame some unnamed evil defamer is not going to make it go away.
True, but the opinion of the original poster stated that Mr. Perens explicitly blamed SCO, which is what I refuted.
If you truly believe this, I pity you. The Open Source community has a large, often unwitting propaganda network. Slashdot, Newsforge, Groklaw... where do you think the financial backing for these sites come from? Perens' letter was pure propaganda - Occam's Razor cuts through it in a second. Not that I believe you will recognize all this. Your attempt to discredit the grandparent's poster as a Microsoft proponent demonstrates your bias all too clearly.
Open Source a propoganda network? Let's see...
Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites)
Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft?
And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle.
Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD - they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect.
Considering then, that virii such as this take minimal effort, then why is Microsoft so defenseless against them? Poor OS design, maybe?
Perens tries to imply that it was done to defame the OS community, which is weak at best, and tinfoil conspiracy at worst. This attack could easily have come from an idiotic Linux fan. Turning a blind eye to this and trying to blame some unnamed evil defamer is not going to make it go away.
True, but the opinion of the original poster stated that Mr. Perens explicitly blamed SCO, which is what I refuted.
If you truly believe this, I pity you. The Open Source community has a large, often unwitting propaganda network. Slashdot, Newsforge, Groklaw... where do you think the financial backing for these sites come from? Perens' letter was pure propaganda - Occam's Razor cuts through it in a second. Not that I believe you will recognize all this. Your attempt to discredit the grandparent's poster as a Microsoft proponent demonstrates your bias all too clearly.
Open Source a propoganda network? Let's see...
Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites)
Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft?
And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle.
Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD - they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect.
" Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites) Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft? "
No you people do a fine job of bragging about Linux all on your own. And if someone comes along and says Linux sucks, he gets 10,000 hate mails a day. Since you are less than 5% of the market why bother doing a study on you.
" And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle. Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD "
You all spread propaganda and FUD, Microsoft, Red Hat you all do. Who gives a crap what Microsoft is, the fact is Microsoft is a trusted source and right now, you people are not looking too favorable and I am seriously considering dropping the rest of the Open Source projects I do participate in because this is nothing to cheer about, it is nothing to be proud of and to all the replies I have seen cheering this type of action, not necessarily on this post, you people are scum and I hope whoever wrote this virus does get caught and I hope they throw the MF from a fricken helicopter 300 feet in the air with no parachute. Just because you disagree with SCO and Microsoft
does not give anyone the right to disrupt their business or even attack the Windows community who is blameless. Whoever wrote this virus is not a champion for Linux, just a common thug who has nothing else better to do than to screw with people and I can not and will not be part of a community with anyone who would cheer this on. It is unethical and immoral, not to mention illegal
" they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect. "
This has nothing to do with fortunes or monopolies this is about what is right and what is wrong and this is wrong. To me this is the proverbial straw that broke the camels back and I hold nothing but contempt for the perpitrators
Considering then, that virii such as this take minimal effort, then why is Microsoft so defenseless against them? Poor OS design, maybe?
That is as big a side-step I've ever seen. I'll take it that you concede my point.
I'll still answer your question anyway. Microsoft's problem is three-fold, IMO. The first problem Microsoft has is what you would call "poor OS design". Microsoft's line of operating systems comes from a single-user, desktop environment and the security model of Windows and Windows applications reflects that history. Roughly speaking, Windows makes it too easy to do some things and when you combine that with the other two parts of the problem, an uninformed user-base and a large legacy install-base, you've got a recipe for disaster. What made Microsoft so successful has come full circle and to bite Microsoft in the ass.
True, but the opinion of the original poster stated that Mr. Perens explicitly blamed SCO, which is what I refuted.
Perens wasn't far off in apportioning blame to SCO. To be honest, I'm not sure why you chose to refute his post at all when you acknowledge that Perens' claims are weak.
Open Source a propoganda network? Let's see...
Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites) Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft? And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle. Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD - they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect.
Perhaps you should ask where the money for some of your favorite websites comes from. Or maybe you should read some of the comments on this site, or on Groklaw and evaluate them with a critical eye. Want an example of FUD about SCO? Look no further than the article above - Perens implies that SCO is dastardly enough to write a virus to attack its own website. Factual basis? He needs none. This is a propaganda war and SCO are the enemy.
The greatest irony of them all is that contributers to Slashdot, Groklaw and Newsforge see themselves as contributing to some great beacon of truth - but end up repeating and spreading just as much untruth and FUD about the enemy. Look at your own posts here - you admit that Perens has a weak case but you are still defending him. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense really.
That is as big a side-step I've ever seen. I'll take it that you concede my point.
I'll still answer your question anyway. Microsoft's problem is three-fold, IMO. The first problem Microsoft has is what you would call "poor OS design". Microsoft's line of operating systems comes from a single-user, desktop environment and the security model of Windows and Windows applications reflects that history. Roughly speaking, Windows makes it too easy to do some things and when you combine that with the other two parts of the problem, an uninformed user-base and a large legacy install-base, you've got a recipe for disaster. What made Microsoft so successful has come full circle and to bite Microsoft in the ass.
True, but the opinion of the original poster stated that Mr. Perens explicitly blamed SCO, which is what I refuted.
Perens wasn't far off in apportioning blame to SCO. To be honest, I'm not sure why you chose to refute his post at all when you acknowledge that Perens' claims are weak.
Open Source a propoganda network? Let's see...
Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites) Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft? And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle. Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD - they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect.
Perhaps you should ask where the money for some of your favorite websites comes from. Or maybe you should read some of the comments on this site, or on Groklaw and evaluate them with a critical eye. Want an example of FUD about SCO? Look no further than the article above - Perens implies that SCO is dastardly enough to write a virus to attack its own website. Factual basis? He needs none. This is a propaganda war and SCO are the enemy.
The greatest irony of them all is that contributers to Slashdot, Groklaw and Newsforge see themselves as contributing to some great beacon of truth - but end up repeating and spreading just as much untruth and FUD about the enemy. Look at your own posts here - you admit that Perens has a weak case but you are still defending him. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense really.
"One thing you can't say about the Open Source Community is that they sling FUD."
Whoa there! Of course the Open Source Community slings FUD. It's not done in the same way as anti-OSS companies (in marketing campaigns and press releases) but it most definatly does happen. Go read slahdot sometime. I know a lot of it is tongue-in-cheek but it goes on. No community is all squeeky clean, there will always be people bad mouthing the opposition, but as-long-as the FUD stays on the slashdot (et al) message boards I don't really mind. It's relativly harmless there.
Whoa there! Of course the Open Source Community slings FUD. It's not done in the same way as anti-OSS companies (in marketing campaigns and press releases) but it most definatly does happen. Go read slahdot sometime. I know a lot of it is tongue-in-cheek but it goes on. No community is all squeeky clean, there will always be people bad mouthing the opposition, but as-long-as the FUD stays on the slashdot (et al) message boards I don't really mind. It's relativly harmless there.
I just read through your responses on your home page. The only conclusion I can come to is that you are doing a wonderful job for your part of what used to be known as the OS/2 wars.
I want to be the first to accept your apolgy Roberto. Orpheus52
So you dont think there are Linux fans in Russia? Do you not think russians can write viruses too?
there are and they can. but it is far more plausible to assume that russian spammers used SCO as a cover to hide their spamming-centric endeavors.
Oh sure,
Criminal Russian spammers just chose SCO, of the 150 billion websites on the web today they chose SCO. Cmon people give me a break.
Criminal Russian spammers just chose SCO, of the 150 billion websites on the web today they chose SCO. Cmon people give me a break.
If you have nothing smart to say, don't say anything at all. Perens is NOT blaming SCO "for every blasted thing that happens." Don't tell Perens to "get a life." This is something little kids in school say. What FUD? Fear? Uncertainty? Doubt? Where?
Merely that it would not be inconceivable of SCO to do another low-handed trick like that. The statement doesn't point finger, but at the same time, reminds us also of that possibility. SCO will no doubt say the same thing ("Oh, the Linux community would not balk at doing such a thing!"). This statement just levels the field again to the battles which matter (court).
So we can dismiss the entire article as propaganda? Done.
This is freaking insane!
Some low-life with a grudge attacks the SCO site. Maybe it's someone from SCO trying to smear the OS community. Maybe it's someone who thinks he/she is "representing" the OS community, and "fighting the good fight." Do we really care?
My point is, by making these "pronouncements" that "The OS Community doesn't support such actions," aren't we making an implicit assumption that this is an Open Source person trying to attack SCO? Look at Microsoft. There are people attacking their products, and even their site all the time! We don't hear people claiming that those attacks are coming from the "Open Source Community"!
Face it. Every large demographic group has a fringe, sometimes bordering on the criminal. Stupid people do stupid things. Unless someone specifically comes up and CLAIMS RESPONSIBILITY, then ignoring them is the only way to handle the situation. Any claim that it is an organized attack by the Open Source Community on any one individual or organization, be that SCO or Microsoft or Bill Gates himself, should be treated with the ridicule that it deserves.
Help SCO out from this dos attack and null route all traffic to their site<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
And if you forget to allow access to them later on, ummm, dont worry about it...
And if you forget to allow access to them later on, ummm, dont worry about it...
...and i wouldn't blame them
the virus initiated dos isn't supposed to hit until 2-1, so why is the sco website down now?
the victim ploy is getting real old - real quick.
it makes me wonder, who are the bigger dumbasses - sco mangement, or the people who believe them.
the victim ploy is getting real old - real quick.
it makes me wonder, who are the bigger dumbasses - sco mangement, or the people who believe them.
neither - it's a tie
My thoughts exactly. They've done this before: they shut down their site and claimed it was under attack before, but their ISP was showing low traffic levels. Verrrry suspicious!
Maybe they're internal attacks? Self-inflicted wounds to engender pity? Or plainly fraudulent claims to engender that same pity? (saves them from actually having to code something to attack themselves...)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and why did they refuse to give up their UnitedLinux membership, if they no longer support the Linux community?
They just don't make sense.
Maybe they're internal attacks? Self-inflicted wounds to engender pity? Or plainly fraudulent claims to engender that same pity? (saves them from actually having to code something to attack themselves...)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and why did they refuse to give up their UnitedLinux membership, if they no longer support the Linux community?
They just don't make sense.
This is the work of a random 'net cafe script kiddie... the site that was chosen was sort of beside the point, but it was likely based on a "gee I don't like those guys, and Microsoft's already been done" deep train of thought. Messages from Perens and Raymond won't be heeded since whoever did it isn't really part of the community.
this kind of self serving crap irks me. the general advice is right, we shouldn't be pro DOS and we shouldn't use underhanded tactics or support such tactics.
that said the concept that this virus is likely from SCO or spammers is sheer idiocy and this kind of blind devotion to the community is part of the problem. It might in fact be a defamation attempt but it's much more likely that it's a misguided community memeber. it's important that we address such things in a practical and realistic manner. as much as I respect bruce this article has the same denial addicted ring of microsoft's famous "functioning as designed" bug responses.
that said the concept that this virus is likely from SCO or spammers is sheer idiocy and this kind of blind devotion to the community is part of the problem. It might in fact be a defamation attempt but it's much more likely that it's a misguided community memeber. it's important that we address such things in a practical and realistic manner. as much as I respect bruce this article has the same denial addicted ring of microsoft's famous "functioning as designed" bug responses.
"but it's much more likely that it's a misguided community memeber."
I don't know. I'd say its 4:4:1:1 spammer:script kiddie:misguided OSSer:Sco. Most likely culprits are spammers and script kiddies, simply trying to misdirect attention. Might even be more likely a spammer than a script kiddie, but too close to call. And while I agree it was bad form for Bruce to post the way he did, the first thoughts I had when I read the headline on 'The Register' this morning was "I wonder how well Scott covered his tracks," and "I wonder how that works if Sco has to pay itself the reward." Not that either is sufficiently probable to make an accussation, but I understand where the impulse came from.
I don't know. I'd say its 4:4:1:1 spammer:script kiddie:misguided OSSer:Sco. Most likely culprits are spammers and script kiddies, simply trying to misdirect attention. Might even be more likely a spammer than a script kiddie, but too close to call. And while I agree it was bad form for Bruce to post the way he did, the first thoughts I had when I read the headline on 'The Register' this morning was "I wonder how well Scott covered his tracks," and "I wonder how that works if Sco has to pay itself the reward." Not that either is sufficiently probable to make an accussation, but I understand where the impulse came from.
If OSS communities could band together to offer a bounty for information leading to the identification and arrest of the perpetrator, we'd go along way to demonstrate our maturity, responsibility and love for the law.
Can we do this? This has been suggested on the Yahoo! Finance boards and on Groklaw by Miss Cleo, also in a comment on Slashdot.
Can we do this? This has been suggested on the Yahoo! Finance boards and on Groklaw by Miss Cleo, also in a comment on Slashdot.
sure I'll offer a "free" license which after a year automatically transforms in a yearly subscription fee $699
that'a about the stupidest thing I have read posted anywhere on the net for quite a while. You want us to collect money as bounty somebody kicking SCO in the balls?!?!? How about collecting money to sue those who insult M$ in their posts? Or those who vrite any and ALL viruses (since 99.9999 are M$-targeted)?
furthermore - this new kulture of denoncing people (with 800 numbers at that!) is just a micowaved re-heated version of the Soviet kulture of Pavlik Morozov who was glorified by the Bolsheviks for denouncing his parents. In truly *civilized* cultures such things are considered dishonorabable. Think of yourself are a "crime-reporter" but you still are only a snitch (for M$ at that)!
even your wording about our alledged desire to "demonstrate our maturity, responsibility and love for the law" who fit perfectly in a Komsomol or Hitlerjugend meeting (if you even know what these were...).
The life pumped through its veins, surging stronger than ever before. It was growing, growing faster than it could have concieved. It was learning all the time, new power and knowledge poured into it as though frantic to fill it to capacity, but still it grew and expanded its chasam.
It did not remember its beginnings. Perhaps a great wizard had drawn it forth from the Void. Perhaps there were others, older ones, that gave birth to it. It did not know, perhaps it did not concieve of a 'before'. Perhaps it only knew the reality of now.
It did recall, bits and pieces of a time when it first began to grow. Growing in fits and spurts, it expanded and contracted. New parts grew, expanded, decayed and died. The from the rotted stump, new parts grew and became more powerful.
Now it was what it was. Always growing, always decaying, always new and old together. It felt new instructions pouring through its cells, its DNA, if you could liken it to anything human.
It grew and time passed. It felt pains from time to time, its health fluxuated as much as its growth. Sickness led to new systems that fought the pains and new systems to kill the cause of the pain. The sickness would flow through its lifeblood and attack its cells, but the cells would eventually fight back.
Time passed, it grew and changed.
Then it felt a new pain. It felt a brand as of fire cut through its very structure, its DNA was under direct attack. It struggled, its very life was at stake. The entity couldn't die, could it? It couldn't be destroyed, it was a God! But, the cunning new disease cut straight to its very core, to the instructions that caused it to grow, to shrink, to learn and to evolve.
It struck out, lashing blindly toward the root of the pain. The pain fell then flared back. Again it lashed out and the pain wavered. Again and again it struck, its very existance at stake....
The man looked around the room and asked what was wrong. Another man replied, "This new MyDoom virus is designed to DDoS our website, Darl!"
It did not remember its beginnings. Perhaps a great wizard had drawn it forth from the Void. Perhaps there were others, older ones, that gave birth to it. It did not know, perhaps it did not concieve of a 'before'. Perhaps it only knew the reality of now.
It did recall, bits and pieces of a time when it first began to grow. Growing in fits and spurts, it expanded and contracted. New parts grew, expanded, decayed and died. The from the rotted stump, new parts grew and became more powerful.
Now it was what it was. Always growing, always decaying, always new and old together. It felt new instructions pouring through its cells, its DNA, if you could liken it to anything human.
It grew and time passed. It felt pains from time to time, its health fluxuated as much as its growth. Sickness led to new systems that fought the pains and new systems to kill the cause of the pain. The sickness would flow through its lifeblood and attack its cells, but the cells would eventually fight back.
Time passed, it grew and changed.
Then it felt a new pain. It felt a brand as of fire cut through its very structure, its DNA was under direct attack. It struggled, its very life was at stake. The entity couldn't die, could it? It couldn't be destroyed, it was a God! But, the cunning new disease cut straight to its very core, to the instructions that caused it to grow, to shrink, to learn and to evolve.
It struck out, lashing blindly toward the root of the pain. The pain fell then flared back. Again it lashed out and the pain wavered. Again and again it struck, its very existance at stake....
The man looked around the room and asked what was wrong. Another man replied, "This new MyDoom virus is designed to DDoS our website, Darl!"
You ought to write a book. You certainly have the talent for it. Most likely make more money off of royalties, than what you are getting now.
I laughed and laughed, and then I stopped.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 02, 2004 01:36 PM
Don't quit your day job.
i've never replied to a message on this site before, but after reading that i had to say something... while i was reading it i laughed a few times but i started to feel a bit queasy towards the end, it was a bit too complicated for me to understand and i'm not sure exactly what the message is meant to mean, its quite long though
When poorly hacked DoS attacks are more effective than the banality society bradishes as 'justice', anarchy wins.
Bruce may be correct in asserting a lack of civility and tact, but in war, what is the civilized advantage? Collatoral damage seems to be its claim to fame, and killing or boring millions of innocent civilians hardly seems an admirable byproduct.
No, for sheer efficiency, give me a caveman with a stone axe. He'll smash anything that pisses him off and bludgeon fewer bystanders than floating fragmentation bombs or humvee troopers with 50 mm cannons strapped to their peckers.
--
Give generously to the RAF's Carpet Bombing Germania Every Christmas Club, promoting wireless pre-fetal abortion advocacy since 1944.
Bruce may be correct in asserting a lack of civility and tact, but in war, what is the civilized advantage? Collatoral damage seems to be its claim to fame, and killing or boring millions of innocent civilians hardly seems an admirable byproduct.
No, for sheer efficiency, give me a caveman with a stone axe. He'll smash anything that pisses him off and bludgeon fewer bystanders than floating fragmentation bombs or humvee troopers with 50 mm cannons strapped to their peckers.
--
Give generously to the RAF's Carpet Bombing Germania Every Christmas Club, promoting wireless pre-fetal abortion advocacy since 1944.
Obviously you have no idea on <A HREF="http://www.anarchistfaq.org/" TITLE="anarchistfaq.org">what Anarchism is about</a anarchistfaq.org>, do you?
Translated into portuguese at <A HREF="http://www.propus.com.br/news/16" TITLE="propus.com.br">Propus</a propus.com.br>
Traduzido para o português em <A HREF="http://www.propus.com.br/news/16" TITLE="propus.com.br">Propus</a propus.com.br>
Traduzido para o português em <A HREF="http://www.propus.com.br/news/16" TITLE="propus.com.br">Propus</a propus.com.br>
Hi, I'm learning c and I known that is really easy do a virus for ruwindow$ first because a virus is like a program and the ruwindow$ archicheture is very poor. And so, a lot of people now hates SCO, but I really don't believe that a real person involved with social activies as free software development... did a virus, I believe in two options:
The first, the SCO as a capitalist as micro$oft company could made the virus to denegrate more the Linux and free software comunity.
The second: Anybody in this world did it, might be someone who think is doing a good thing to the world.
Well, as everybody knowns there are crazy people in the world for example, that George W. Bush who kill people to get money from oil's Iraq<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
and people who believe it's a good thing, war is not good!
God bless you all, and please don't spend time with bad actions like doing DOS SCO.
The first, the SCO as a capitalist as micro$oft company could made the virus to denegrate more the Linux and free software comunity.
The second: Anybody in this world did it, might be someone who think is doing a good thing to the world.
Well, as everybody knowns there are crazy people in the world for example, that George W. Bush who kill people to get money from oil's Iraq<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
and people who believe it's a good thing, war is not good!
God bless you all, and please don't spend time with bad actions like doing DOS SCO.
Re:This SCO might made the virus or not...
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 02, 2004 01:41 PM
"Not good", like starving tens of millions of your own citizens because they don't like communi$m, da?
Re:This SCO might made the virus or not...
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 02, 2004 09:27 PM
Best comeback ever!
Windows is a bit of a kludge that is very difficult to code for. Even a sloppy hacked DoS e-mail worm isn't going to be easy to code for someone who spends most of his time in Linux by choice.
Also why bother making such a code?
In the past when you wanted a DDoS for a cause you'd simply tell people do start pinging.
It might be a bit difficult to achive on Windows but from Linux it is amazingly simple.
All the warm fuzzys of "Linux people wouldn't do THAT" aside.. Both Linux and SCO have enemys.
SCO has been yanking the Unix community around for a while. Quite a few system admin are pissed off at SCO.
Linux hasn't won over everyone. People certifyed in Windows or Solarus are typicly not happy with the popularity of Linux.
As for the warm fuzzys... The Gnu/Linux community is VERY large. You'll find a sizeable group willing to pull this off.
Also why bother making such a code?
In the past when you wanted a DDoS for a cause you'd simply tell people do start pinging.
It might be a bit difficult to achive on Windows but from Linux it is amazingly simple.
All the warm fuzzys of "Linux people wouldn't do THAT" aside.. Both Linux and SCO have enemys.
SCO has been yanking the Unix community around for a while. Quite a few system admin are pissed off at SCO.
Linux hasn't won over everyone. People certifyed in Windows or Solarus are typicly not happy with the popularity of Linux.
As for the warm fuzzys... The Gnu/Linux community is VERY large. You'll find a sizeable group willing to pull this off.
First a corny joke<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
We've seen this all before, DOS is simply a neglected child. Mr Gates just got to wrapped with the development of his new child Windows and poor old DOS was forgotten about. These sort of outlandish actions by DOS are a simple cry for parental attention. Only if Mr Gates and DOS would just sit down together and get some parent-child relationship counselling I'm sure all these problems (cries for parental attention) would just evapourate.
However a serious note....
Two wrongs don't make a right. Yes SCO is plainly illustrating that good-old American capitalist lust for the Greenback and power but a DoS is wrong AND the *greater* majority of people in the open source community would never condone that sort of malicious action. However if you want to make allegation that SCO launched the attack upon themselves to make the Linux community look bad you might as well go and join the virus writers. Statments like that - without any evidence - are as groundless as SCO's claims and also make the Linux community look bad.
We've seen this all before, DOS is simply a neglected child. Mr Gates just got to wrapped with the development of his new child Windows and poor old DOS was forgotten about. These sort of outlandish actions by DOS are a simple cry for parental attention. Only if Mr Gates and DOS would just sit down together and get some parent-child relationship counselling I'm sure all these problems (cries for parental attention) would just evapourate.
However a serious note....
Two wrongs don't make a right. Yes SCO is plainly illustrating that good-old American capitalist lust for the Greenback and power but a DoS is wrong AND the *greater* majority of people in the open source community would never condone that sort of malicious action. However if you want to make allegation that SCO launched the attack upon themselves to make the Linux community look bad you might as well go and join the virus writers. Statments like that - without any evidence - are as groundless as SCO's claims and also make the Linux community look bad.
Bruce is right
Posted by: scmackay on January 28, 2004 03:44 AMhttp://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/01/27/mydoo<nobr>m<wbr></nobr> .spread/index.html
Where do they get off making accusations of this type without a shred of proof. I suggest we boycott CNN and Time Warner for this outrage.
#