Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,rec.arts.comics.strips
Subject: Re: xkcd: CrowdStrike
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 09:13:50 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <ort4ajp89mpnvumfe1era7f998ef8ph0hc@4ax.com>
References: <v7mhb5$qi0k$2@dont-email.me> <pan$efaa$e4f1e82d$63a65db8$edda2d85@cpacker.org> <q8mv9jpn95tb1urggdutodhiktta669ogv@4ax.com> <v7s265$ipa$1@panix2.panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2024 18:13:53 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="315516a51986512d40c42756f673f8df";
	logging-data="2487495"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/mHig7Tzts4CsZbT2RYPvToXYbbaYOs+4="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EjGi0cNEvh+o4ELn27PgMzT++Kg=
Bytes: 3519

On 24 Jul 2024 23:19:33 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them
>>to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
>>enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a
>>point.
>
>There is always third-party access to the kernel.  In the Windows NT =
days
>before Microsoft had figured out 1960s-style memory protection, any =
program
>in user space could make changes to the kernel.  And sometimes they=20
>accidentally did.

If you say so.

Microsoft says otherwise.

Then again, it occurred to me a decade or two ago that Windows is
simply to big to actually test for regressions in any meaningful sense
-- hence the lack of quality control leading to occasional bad
"updates". And  a bit later that the chances of anyone at Microsoft
actually knowing how Windows works was essentially 0.

So I'm not going to say "and they should know" because there is a good
chance that they have no idea at all and this assertion is pure
marketing.

>What the EU forced Microsoft to do was to DOCUMENT the kernel so that=20
>people could more reliably get third-party access.

How odd. I seem to remember them being required to allow third-party
programs to be loaded and selected over Microsoft programs. Leading to
such interesting experiences as buying a new computer, remove the
payment-required security package, and then simply rebooting to
activate Microsoft's own.=20

Sounds like rather more than just "documenting the kernel". But it
would explain the dearth of "Undocumented Windows" books covering the
more recent versions.

I gave up on paid 3rd-party virus scanners when I happened on one that
only hooked into the Windows security network (was recognized by it)
every other year (version). They also played fast-and-loose with their
invoices, including extra charges without bothering to inform you
until they were paid. My deduction was that they had two different
teams producing versions on two-year schedules and one team hooked
theirs into Windows security and the other did not. This also
explained the UI whiplash suffered when "updating".
--=20
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"