I am a trifle cynical
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Ridcully Aug 02, 2015 6:00 AM EDT |
From everything I have read so far, and given what has been published officially of Redmond's plans, is Win10 anything else except "ransom ware" ? I'd hope I was wrong but does the leopard really change its shorts ? |
| seatex Aug 02, 2015 9:30 AM EDT |
Ridcully - I don't know about leopards, but tigers never change their stripes. Windows 10 looks like a hot mess, as I expected. At least Microsoft is continuing to make Linux look more and more attractive. |
| BernardSwiss Aug 02, 2015 10:37 AM EDT |
Not that I disagree with either of you -- but the article is about actual ransomware (plus spyware), that tricks users into installing it under the pretence of being the genuine, official Microsoft "upgrade" from Windows 7/8 to Windows 10. Windows |
| the_doctor Aug 02, 2015 4:23 PM EDT |
Quoting:Cisco's security team has noticed a new spamming campaign attempting to spread the CTB-Locker ransomware using emails purporting to come from Microsoft, telling people they are ready to download Windows 10. It's amazing what people will fall for. |
| Ridcully Aug 02, 2015 5:11 PM EDT |
Yes I know BernardSwiss - no argument. It's simply that my very cynical mind turned the term into applying, in the broadest sense, a "continuous form of ransomware" to what Redmond now proposes to do with Windows10 - "soak the masses" in perpetuity if they ever try to use it to process or access their data. "You vill pay us ze ransom money continuously, or ve haf vays....... !!!" (with apologies to Sergeant Schultz) Curiously, my increased dislike of Windows in all its forms comes from the fact that recently I have been forced to use Win8 as part of a project - no other option. Come to think of it, perhaps it isn't curious after all. |
| BernardSwiss Aug 02, 2015 8:47 PM EDT |
Yes indeed, Ridcully. I think one of the things that imperceptibly shifted me from being "a Windows-user, who fiddles with Linux a bit," to "a full-time Linux-user," -- before I even actually realised that I'd made the switch -- was the generally taken for granted, but essentially unnecessary hoops, arbitrary impediments and outright manipulations that relying on Microsoft and proprietary software "requires". |
| Ridcully Aug 03, 2015 6:00 AM EDT |
Hi BernardSwiss.....permit me a little nostalgia ? What happened to me was that I hit RedHat Linux way back in circa 2000 when I was still using Win98SE......and to be honest, I did like that Windows version. Linux was then somewhat "difficult" to use, but I persevered and then bit by bit decided I prefered SuSE better than RedHat. I think the engineering was better and YaST was certainly superior in my books. But what I then did was invested in Win4Lin and used that within SuSE while running Win98SE inside Win4Lin. That came to an end when Win4Lin ceased supporting Win98SE which, despite all its problems, I still look on with some good memories. And from then on, it was SuSE, openSUSE, KDE and Crossover Office.......So, like you, gradual, but steadily removing all need for Windows, except the legacy software that I still use inside Crossover Office, including a very old version of Quicken Cashbook and Adobe Photoshop 4. One almost forgets the Windows "horror" until circumstances force you to use it again.....It's odd, but every time I booted up the Win8 laptop, there was always the thought: "Will it work this time ?" Silly I suppose, but I had really forgotten how commercial firms "prey" on Windows installations.......how antivirus firms try their hardest to make you buy their products; how difficult it is to get rid of the utter garbage that Windows installations are pre-packaged with due to the OEMs.........You don't buy a Windows "machine", you buy a device that is intended to print money for Redmond and its associated software........all of which are focused on stripping you of your wallet's contents. I loathe Redmond and all its works.......and that's putting it mildly. |
| notbob Aug 03, 2015 1:30 PM EDT |
I recall W98SE. Not fondly. I changed to Linux cuz I suffered my 3rd drive-by hack on a Widows box. Woke up one morning, turned on my W98SE box and saw this msg: "Your drive has been wiped!" Well, maybe not the main HDD, but my secondary HDD. And not wiped, but every file had been corrupted, rendered inaccessible. That's it. No more half stepping. I had two desktop boxes and a KVM switch. The Linux machine got changed from RH to Slackware and the W98SE box got retired. The Slack box was a huge full sized sucker which I packed w/ plug-able drive bays while I tried NT and other linux distros. Now I jes run Slackware. Haven't suffered bloatware, ad-ware, intrusions, hacks, etc, since. If ppl really want Windows, try learning Linux and turning a distro into Windows. I don't know who is currently offering and exact WM/DE like Windows, but I know an earlier version of Tails Linux did. Upon boot, it would ask if the user wants a Linux or a more covert Windows desktop. If Windows, Tails would boot up a perfect copy of XP. Even Firefox was an IE icon on the taskbar. Word was the icon for Libre Office. Cracked me up! ;) |
| CFWhitman Aug 03, 2015 1:44 PM EDT |
My memories of Windows 98 are that it crashed at the drop of a hat. After using Linux for a while, going back to 98 was really annoying with all the crashes. My favorite version of Windows during its support period was Windows 2000. I seriously doubt that Microsoft will ever release another version that I like better than I liked 2000. By the way, it's not that 2000 was so great. I still used Linux more than it. |
| Ridcully Aug 03, 2015 5:30 PM EDT |
I cannot remember that CFWhitman, but then it's over 15 years since I threw the Win98SE disk away - I do remember that the "SE" upgrade did work much better than plain Win98. Candidly, if there was any Windows release that stands above all others, I personally would select WinXP, but it's always personal. One person's preferred Windows version is often another person's rejected blank wall with BSOD written on it. Let's face it, the success of Windows was not due to its excellence of software engineering at any point; Redmond simply had brilliant advertising techniques and the "suckers flooded in to part with their money". |
| penguinist Aug 03, 2015 9:57 PM EDT |
As I've publicly stated before, I am using Linux 100% and have no Windows instances installed in any of my systems, not even in a virtual machine. That said, I have used Windows in the past, in fact I served as technical lead on several projects which developed application software which needed to run in a Windows environment, so I suppose you could say that I can speak about Windows with some amount of familiarity. One of the many big advantages that Linux enjoys over Windows is the flexibility and freedom that it gives its users. That point was driven home for me again today. I am often asked by friends and associates for help in making the transition away from proprietary enslavement and into the freedom of the Linux space. In order to make the process easy for people, I've often made Linux Live USB sticks to give to people who want to get started. Now that you can buy 8GB USB sticks in bulk quantities for $2 each, I went ahead and ordered a bunch of them with the idea that I'd gift them freely to my unfortunate Windows friends (primarily those who are tired of the virus rat race and are ready to experience freedom). So the idea was to put a Linux Live Disk on the stick (that takes up the first 1GB) and then format the rest of it as a 7GB fat32 partition so that the USB stick could be used not only to boot Linux but also serve as a general purpose multiplatform USB data stick. That was the plan. I produced one and took it to a Windows machine to test it (our local library has a few of them). The boot up into Linux worked fine as expected, but after booting back into Windows to test the data partition, I was surprised to see that Windows denied access to the fat32 partition. Why? I can't think of any rational reason that Windows would deny its users the ability to view and use a multipartition USB stick. But, here we have it, for some reason someone at Microsoft had decided to code in this restriction. Who knows the reason, but the pattern that it represents is clear. Build in restrictions, make the users beg for the restrictions to be lifted, then SELL the removal of the restriction. As a business plan, that technique could be repeated indefinitely, at least as long as there are enough users willing to cooperate with it. |
| arm Aug 04, 2015 12:31 AM EDT |
Well I don't know what you did wrong penguinist, but I have a USB stick setup exactly as you mentioned and have never had a problem accessing the fat32 partition from any windows machine. |
| CFWhitman Aug 04, 2015 9:43 AM EDT |
Windows 98SE is actually the only version of 98 I ever ran. It's funny because I dealt with Windows 95 and then Windows 98. However I started using Linux about the same time I ran 98. Then I upgraded the Windows partition at home to Windows 2000. After I had run only Linux and Windows 2000 for a while (I might have still been running Windows NT 4 at work), I used a computer that had Windows 98 again (that I just hadn't used for a while). I was amazed at its instability. I realized that it had been just as unstable before, but I had not noticed because when I was running only 95 and 98, I was used to it. After running Linux and Windows 2000 for a while, I couldn't take it anymore. |
| NoDough Aug 04, 2015 11:29 AM EDT |
Penguinist, You should check with the library. They may have used Windows Group Policy to block access to USB storage devices thereby preventing users from purposely infecting their network via USB. (Yes. I know. They can retrieve viruses all day long via the Internet. But these are government employees we're talking about here.) NoDough |
| penguinist Aug 04, 2015 2:24 PM EDT |
Hmmm, virus rules prevent USB multipartition access under Windows. That seems possible. So the theory is that the presence of a Linux boot image occupying the first three partitions could be interpreted as a virus. When I have time I'll format a USB stick with exactly two partitions, both being empty fat32 partitions and then repeat the test next time I'm at the library. That's kinda funny though. Remember that I was able to boot up those machines in Linux from my USB stick. If I was really interested in destroying a system I certainly would have had the opportunity. Preventing access to the fat32 data on the stick from inside a Windows boot seems like too little and too late, and quite unfriendly to legitimate users. |
| NoDough Aug 05, 2015 8:17 AM EDT |
_penguinist wrote:Hmmm, virus rules prevent USB multipartition access under Windows. Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of them blocking USB access entirely when Windows is running. But either theory is plausible. _penguinist wrote:Preventing access to the fat32 data on the stick from inside a Windows boot seems like too little and too late, and quite unfriendly to legitimate users. Agreed. But, again, these are government employees. As a group they are not known for seeing every angle. |
| jdixon Aug 06, 2015 8:54 AM EDT |
> Candidly, if there was any Windows release that stands above all others, I personally would select WinXP WinXP was when Microsoft started requiring you to activate every install of Windows. Windows 2000 didn't have that. |
| DrGeoffrey Aug 06, 2015 11:38 AM EDT |
Quoting:One almost forgets the Windows "horror" until circumstances force you to use it again.....It's odd, but every time I booted up the Win8 laptop, there was always the thought: "Will it work this time ?" Silly I suppose, but I had really forgotten how commercial firms "prey" on Windows installations.......how antivirus firms try their hardest to make you buy their products; how difficult it is to get rid of the utter garbage that Windows installations are pre-packaged with due to the OEMs.........You don't buy a Windows "machine", you buy a device that is intended to print money for Redmond and its associated software........all of which are focused on stripping you of your wallet's contents. I loathe Redmond and all its works.......and that's putting it mildly. Ridcully - May I use your quote? After 2 months of avoiding all things MS I recently was forced to log onto a Windows 7 system. Your quote precisely captured my thoughts. Quoting:Candidly, if there was any Windows release that stands above all others, I personally would select WinXP I'm not certain any version stands above the others. To me, choosing between them is akin to choosing which poison you prefer to drink. |
| Ridcully Aug 06, 2015 5:45 PM EDT |
Go for it DrGeoffrey......All I did was put down the truth as I saw it.......and once it's out here on LXer, my words are "public domain" as far as I am concerned. Also, I'd thoroughly agree with your final two sentences. It was simply that WinXP seemed to behave better than 98SE and it STILL had a conventional start menu that someone like me could understand. I've already seen Win10 on laptops in one of the big computer chain stores here in Queensland......all I could think of was: "So what ? Touch Windows with a barge pole ? No thankyou, I prefer to keep my work uncontaminated by the filthy hands of Redmond." But, then, I'm a cynical old sod and perhaps there reallly are some who people like crashes, malware and dealing with software advert popups every five minutes. On an even more cynical hilarious/sad note, Australian governments are now at the "sting stage" where Microsoft is concerned......they are still running WinXP and they do NOT know how the heck to get out of it, other than paying Redmond "scadillions" to keep supporting the monster they created for themselves. Some comments are already flying about using Linux, but the fools have never taken the first step the UK has done, of moving to open formats. I think that this is the problem you ultimately face if you stack your software administration system with people who only know the Windows system - they continue to make sure your government wallets are riveted to Redmond's bank accounts. Our Taxation and Pharmaceutical Benefits systems are classical examples of platform dependent software. It is going to cost enormous amounts to ever transfer to another OS..........and every doctor and chemist in Australia will also have to move. Of course, they COULD make the software "platform independent"......but again, the cost, the cost, the cost. And once more my very, very cynical mind equates Windows directly with the term "ransomware" even though the term is strictly a definition for a specific type of malware.......or come to think of it, where Windows is concerned, is there a difference ? And on that cheery note, I'll stop burbling on. |
| Ridcully Aug 09, 2015 5:55 AM EDT |
This is just hitting the ABC (Australia): http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-09/australians-paying-tho... Once again, the lesson is clear: Use Windows and you are almost inviting malware. |
| penguinist Aug 09, 2015 7:02 AM EDT |
Automated nightly backups would go a long way to mitigate this type of ransomware threat. This is another place where Linux shines. I run a simple nightly backup copying all my important stuff to an offsite location. My backup script is about 10 lines long and uses rsync along with hard links and is launched by cron. Unfortunately the technique won't run on Windows since Windows does not support hard links last time I checked. I suppose Windows users could buy a Raspberry Pi in order to do their nightly backups for them. Or they could just cross the bridge and find freedom in the Linux world. |
| notbob Aug 09, 2015 10:56 AM EDT |
> my important stuff to an offsite location. ....and this is a better solution, how? If yer "offsite" is your own, OK. Otherwise, I don't understand how putting yer backup stuff on "cloud" storage is something which is benefited by using Linux. Am I misunderstanding you? |
| penguinist Aug 09, 2015 11:17 AM EDT |
notbob: Sorry I left off that detail. Please correct my statement to read: "...copying all my important stuff to an offsite server which I control." Just for the record, I never ever use "cloud" storage. That is to say, I do not put my data on a server that someone else controls. Thank you notbob for helping me to clear up this important point. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!