Security

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Microsoft and Paid-Hacking

0 helpful
22 replies

by thamer 1 view

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Background: In case you missed it, in early 2002 Microsoft sued to shut down Lindows.com and are currently fighting in court over trademark issues, with Lindows trying to invalidate the trademark on "Windows" and Microsoft charging trademark infringement by the similar-sounding Lindows name. Microsoft's allegation )As I understand it) was that they own the trademark for the word "windows," maintaining that no other company should be allowed to use the word “windows”( and I assume the "indows" sound it carries)

While the judicial system did block Microsoft's request to shut Lindow.com down, a trial is looming for April 2003. At that time, the Judge (or jury) will decide whether Microsoft has a valid trademark for the word "windows" and whether the Lindows.com name is confusing.

But, believe it or not! Michael Robertson, CEO of Lindows.com and the self-proclaimed opponent of Microsoft in this case, last month revealed that he is responsible for a $200,000 reward for hacking into Microsoft's new Xbox video game console. The challenge was announced anonymously in July, offering the money to anyone who could make the Xbox function with the Lindows operating system. As no one accomplished the task so far, Robertson extended the deadline. Wired News, 3 January 2003 http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,57052,00.html

Comment:
I'm in support of the argument that an individual should have a choise to have and run the software of his choice in his hard drive inhis own home while having his windows open for air to pass thru and that is not the issue over here.

My point is, could it be that paid-hacking is what MS should be confronting? I mean look at the top 10 viruses, the late one the Slammer, aren't they made to exploit the vulnerablities in MS Products so the end-user may have the choise not to trust them? Wha's Microsoft's crime?

Appreciating your comments and thoughts.

22 replies

by mrafrohead

Paid hacking would be what MS should be confronting in my opinion.

But I'm not a lawyer:)

Personally, I think that MS is out of line suing Lindows for the fact that it "sounds" like Windoze. I think that Billy Bob is just a little worried that he's got some actual serious competition.

As for Mr. Robertson being a head of a company and paying people to hack a product other than their own for his own personal gain, I think that that's pretty low. I am disapointed to hear this and will have to check into it further as this is the first occurance that I've read.

I think that Lindows is a great idea and as long as the company stays ethically on the right side of the tracks I hope that it succeeds. But leave the hacking to the will of the hackers, let them do it when they decide they want to do it. Don't try to provoke them into hacking something for another companies personal gain. That's pretty sickening and is as low as some of Microsofts doings. Hacking for vulnerabilities to improve security is one thing, but not for personal gain of another corporation.

I'm really surprised to have read what I read today, but at the same time, I'm glad to hear it. I'll be checking further into it and if I find more data to coroborate this, I will definately be removing myself from Lindows support mailing lists of the like. There is no excuse for bad business like this!

Mrafrohead

by oldefar

Or in this case, a pile of manure.

I am looking forward to a posting as to whether the statement is true. Posting a prize is no different than hiring a hacker to go after a competitor.

by mrafrohead

Yeah, that's as tactless as some of the reports I've read about some M$ business tactics.

If this is true, I still haven't been able to check, it's a HUGE smudge in the Linux world. It's really a truly disapointing thing to have read.

Lame part is, I'm afraid that there is credibility behind it, but I don't want to believe there is.

Mrafrohead

by thamer

Thank you for your input and thoughts.

I'm curious to know if Lindows will end-up keeping the name ... or if they will have to shut their project down.

As for paid-hacking, I'm in favor that it should always be toward benefiting network security, site administration, and the integrity of the network infrastructure ... as long it follows the discipline of Ethical Hacking from a vendor-neutral perspective.

I know that the market is creating opportunities for paid-hacking on open source projects ... but as you said it ... it shouldn't be provoked ... otherwise.

I would appreciate if you keep me updated with your reserach.

by oldefar

I believe the key is that the target has invited the hacking on their own site and systems.

On systems they are developing for purposes of improving their product.

On systems they use for purposes of improving their security.

By vendor neutral third parties for purposes of identifying security problems to the industry at large.

by someadmin

I don't follow. First viruses and worms are designed to attack victims. None of the participating servers, or the Internet, asked for or benefitted from slammer.

The challenge to mod Xbox, in contrast, is an attempt to run an alternative OS on Xbox hardware. Apparently Robertson has an interest in selling Lindows for the Xbox.

Microsoft sells an Xbox package, including hardware and software. What is the problem with consumers replacing Microsoft software with something else?

by mrafrohead

In regards to Slammer.

Actually, yes, EVERY SINGLE INFECTED SERVER DID ASK FOR IT! That is due to poor administration on the Network Admins behalf. There were patches released prior to Slammer hitting MONTHS BEFOREHAND. Had all systems been patched previously, Slammer would have had no effect whatsoever. So you can thank every single SysAdmin that failed to take seriously the threat that was proposed by David Litchfield.

As for Xbox Modding. That'd be alright, if he weren't paying hackers to do it in an open environment. That's like placing your skidmarked underoo's on your front door so everyone can see how filthy you are.

I think that selling Mod Chips are fine, but don't expect any further support from the manufacturer. In that sense, you aren't really "changing" the system in general. You are just adding to it.

If Robertson wanted hardware to run his OS on, he should develop it or hack the xbox himself. If he can't do either of those, then he should HIRE himself an independant and assign them the task. Better yet, he could just do it the legit way, since he's running a BUSINESS and discuss options with M$ themselves. Then pay royalties like most places ususally do. If he seriously wants to sell Lindows for XBox, he's just a jerk. The right way for this would be to keep it all opensource. Hack the Xbox, and then write the OS he wants and FREELY distribute it. That would be okay. Trying to profit off of someone elses work is dispicable.

Theproblem with consumers replacing the software with something else is this. MS doesn't want that. If they did, they would do it themselves. Xbox is a gaming console. Not a real computer. If you're looking for a computer, go buy a computer.

And I can NOT believe I am defending MS over The Penguin here, but Robertson is completely wrong and should be ashamed of himself.

Mrafrohead

by someadmin

I think I understand your opinion, yet...

I don't see any similarity between coding malicious viruses or worms and coding to allow a different OS on a game console.

Also I personally don't limit my definition of computers to PC's. There's a whole range of computers from IBM mainframes to handheld devices that have enjoyed the option of free software. Why not add game consoles to the list?

I'm happy that Linux, FreeBSD, *BSD, *BEOS, etc. do not pay royalties to hardware manufacturers. In fact, I doubt that Microsoft ever paid royalties when Microsoft sold their alternative OS to PC-DOS or OS/2.

I view the OS as any other software. I believe that people have the right to load whatever software they want to run the hardware they own. If I want to use my "computer" as a firewall, Internet browser, typewritter, calculator or gaming console: that's my choice.

I do NOT think that manufacturers are "wrong" to use hardware protection schemes or legal restrictions on the development tools they license.

I also do NOT think that consumers are "wrong" to develop software for the computer hardware they own.

Whatever Mr. Robertson's motives are, I don't think the Xbox hack is hurting anyone.

In close, we may agree to disagree, but I'd like to leave you with this thought. Where would PCs (and Microsoft for that matter) be today if IBM did not open their hardware specifications? What if IBM instead sold PCs with a security chip that forced everyone to use PC-DOS and OS/2?

I think the phenomenal success of the PC-Clone should guide our judgement in this issue.

by admin

I agree. Prize money taints everything it touches.

:(

Long live the DIY modders and hackers!

:)

by thamer

Xbox shares 99% of its architecture with a modern PC with 8 GB or a 10 GB hard drive. However the Xbox lacks some PC interface (keyboard and mouse, PC-like BIOS), has some others in addition (a controller for buttons, LEDs) and differs in implementation in some aspects (kernel in ROM, boot sequence, hard disk partitioning, timer frequency, shutdown,). The Xbox kernel is a stripped-down version of the Windows 2000 kernel and has some shortcomings, such as the lack of memory protection and built-in drivers for audio and video. Additionally, the only tool suited for Xbox development is the Xbox SDK, which cannot be legally used by hobbyists. It also runs some stripped DirectX code-base ... and ,... of course , it has some nasty bugs.

Since DMCA forbids circumventing copy protection, what Robertson is willing to develop is an alternative operating system for the Xbox gaming console. The ability of a side product to run unsigned code.

This alone does not make it possible to play pirated copies of games ... but who can guarantee that they (hackers) will not proceed to such goal? ... (You know, true never yeilds to false ... and ... you agree that the call for this "contest" is ... False, don't you?)

by mrafrohead

I think that modding a system is fine. If you bought a system, it's yours. Do what you want with it as you paid for it. Just don't expect any further support from the manufacturer of the original unit.

As for a BUSINESS pushing someone to hacksomething for their own personal gain. That's cheap. Hacking something for your OWN personal gain is fine by me. To clarify. This is just an example, not true as this scenario doesn't really exist. Just an example. I have a PS2. I want it to play Dolby Digital 5.1 and mine only plays Dolby Pro Logic (Stereo). So I hack/mod the PS2 to play 5.1. That I think is fine. But just so anyone here without a PS2 knows, all PS2's are Dolby Digital. So this is a false example, but what popped into my head.

Now if this guy is trying to have a person hack someone's OS so that the he can release a product that will benefit from it. I hope the business buckles. That is very bad business, and there are no ethics there.

Mrafrohead

by admin

I rebuilt the thermostat to keep a nice 6-7 degree celsius temp and then put a big stainless tower on top with a Guinness faucet over a stainless drip tray I got for 50 cents a pound.

I hope no one is angry :)

by guruofdos

A tech doing something 'worthwhile'!

To quote myself...

An engineer without beer is like a vibrator without batteries...it just cannot perform to the total satisfaction of the end user!

by admin

What did they expect really?

Take the common mans commercial industrial beer and mix it with your favorite micro and come up with a beer everybody likes? HAHA on the contrary, everybody hates the result. It's no different here.

Everyone with a bent to make money on Linux should be put on an island ran by Ron Popiel for the remainder of their lives so they could all sell slimy junk that no one needs to each other.

That is why I stopped endorsing Caldera as well. Lindows should be run out of town. I would rather use freeBSD or Linux, but I even prefer MS to Lindows. At least MS isn't trying to pull the wool over your eyes, they are outright in their quest for mammon.

by mrafrohead

SomeAdmin.

In your above post, you have many good points. I love your "Deep Thought". And the answer: We'd all be using Macs ;) **cheeze eating grin**

I agree with you in regards to computers not just being PC's. I just look at a gaming console as a gaming console. It's not a pc in my opinion. Never will be. Although the XBOX is as close as they come right now. Processor, memory, hard drive. But, it's still just a console. A dummy machine.

I have no problems with people hacking the Xbox. I have problems with a company trying to hack it for their own personal gain.

Mr. Robertsons motives as they appear to me from what I'm reading are greed. I think that this is a smudge for the Linux community. And a really bad one at that. I unfortunately am VERY new to the Linux world. I don't know the software very well, but I use a lot of Linux programs ported through Windoze. I love the Open Source community. What Mr. Robertson appears to be doing is inexcusable and appears to stray away from the whole "Linux way of life" as I understand it.

Mrafrohead

by guruofdos

And I suppose they have trademarked DOS too!

MS-DOS may be a trademark, but DOS itself isn't. Or could it be that Microsoft won't take on IBM (PC-DOS) or Digital/DEC/Caldera (DR-DOS) because they know they'd lose.

Perhaps they'll be after me next...let's face it, with a name like GuruOfDOS, I must be a target for Uncle Bill.

If MS put half of what they pay their lawyers into market research and R&D, we may one day see a good operating system!!! I won't hold my breath...everything sinceMS-DOS 6.22 has been a 'nearly but not quite'!

by thamer

It seems the folks at www.theneoproject.com have decided to continue work on factoring Microsoft's Xbox public RSA key.

http://www.vnunet.com/News/1137916
(VNU Net, a British publisher)

"The Neo Project website claimed that attempts to break the encryption algorithm had been resumed, and said: "We're back and back strong!"

The group added: "With the recent media frenzy we stopped the project to research the legal aspect before proceeding any further."

Comment:
... Oh my!

This discussion is closed to new replies.