naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MP3 security problem; the role of backups

Subject: Re: MP3 security problem; the role of backups
From: Walter Knapp <>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:28:20 -0500
Marty Michener wrote:

> They refer to it as the RegWorm, created by Big Mother MS, to prevent 
> unauthorized use of their over-priced flawed OS on more than one 
> machine.    Actually this is not how it works, but the effect on the user 
> is correctly stated.  It starts counting at every bootup from the time you 
> activate the OS.  It requires seven "yes" votes on every boot up to allow 
> you to use the system.  As long as it gets the yes votes, the system keeps 
> running.  These votes come from matching SYSTEM information, not from every 
> added or changed board.  The questions asked are: "Is this device the same 
> as it was at activation?"  The devices screened on boot:
>     * Video adapter
>     * SCSI disk adapter
>     * IDE disk adapter
>     * Network Interface Card (NIC) MAC Address
>     * Amount of RAM
>     * Processor
>     * Processor Serial Number
>     * Hard drives
>     * Hard Drive volume serial number
>     * CD-ROM/CD-RW/ DVD-ROM
> 
> For example, you can change sound boards, or add a video capture card, etc. 
> and it has no effect on the votes.  Add a hard disk or an NIC and it will 
> change the voting.  It really is only a pain if something goes bad, and you 
> need to replace a part, then you have to call an 800 number and explain and 
> MS gives you relief from the problem over the phone.  What people really 
> don't like is the threat of not using what they paid for.
> 
> Home XP Service Pack 1 update gives you three days of usage after the 
> seven-yes rule is violated, so you can use THE COMPUTER to contact MS - I 
> guess even tax-collector-malignant-monopoly employees get tired of 
> answering the phones for all that money.

Any truth to this having a bug that sets it off without a reason?

Somehow I'm thinking I'm perfectly happy with my PC running Windows 2000 
pro. And getting happier.

>>Don't worry, I'd just about as happily join a mob attacking Apple. I
>>thought I'd managed to avoid Unix. It needs no bugs to make your life bad.
> 
> 
> Now that my wife's cousin has retired from MS for life at 38, I would 
> gladly join on a MS campus attack - name the day. Seven years ago we 
> visited him and got a tour of the MS campus; you should have heard _his_ 
> thoughts about Mother MS!    I think there is a general relation: the 
> closer you are to MS the more you hate them, so Mac people just hate them; 
> PC people REALLY hate them;  Programmers of PCs - - well, you get the 
> picture. ;^)

Note that my spelling checker keeps wanting to change your last name to 
Mutineer, wonder what it knows ;-)

It used to be that folks went and worked as programmers for Microsoft to 
get their retirement fund in order. It did not matter how poor a 
programmer they were, in a few years they would be able to quit and 
retire. Maybe it's not that way anymore and that's what they are grumpy 
about.

I think most mac people don't exactly hate MS. If anything we probably 
more dislike all the mindless folk who keep them in business. It 
certainly makes one wonder. To me it's amazing just how much abuse 
people will take and thank MS for it. What I really hate is how much the 
MS stuff slows down progress toward better computers.

> [Walt, we probably have to be careful about jokes like this, because 
> supposedly all this email is being filtered for you-know-what content daily 
> by the other big brother.   It has been my life-time finding that the more 
> powerful someone is in the military-police-enforcement-security business, 
> the less sense of humor they have - but I love to be proven wrong, and 
> frequently am.  I see no reason a priori to expect homeland security 
> personnel to grasp the difficult concepts of farce or irony.]

If I'm lucky one of the fools will try and arrest me. Maybe I can get 
enough out of the false arrest lawsuit to feel comfortable. I somehow 
think if they tried arresting everybody griping about PC's they would 
empty the country. And I am not of the right ethnic group, my family has 
been in the US since the very first europeans arrived, fought in the 
revolutionary war, the civil war (both sides) and so on. I'll be happy 
to take apart their laws and rules using the constitution. What is 
needed is for everybody in the country to find out all the keywords and 
phrases they are searching for and put them in every email they send. 
Just throw them in at the end of the actual email.

Don't worry, if I was actually close to doing something I'd not be 
talking about it. Closest I've been to the MS campus was back in the 
70's when I was doing sound measurements studying the soundfield from 
520. Did not actually go on the campus, but did measure next to it.

If you really want your blood to run cold, go off and listen to the 
right wing, "religious" US Shortwave radio stations. They have plenty of 
really scary people to keep tabs on. I recently got myself a new radio 
and found where all the folks that used to be on AM radio went. And what 
you say on shortwave is less regulated, which is probably why they are 
there.


> You are right, I really don't care what the length is, and wouldn't have a 
> clue as to how to "run code" having exceeded the buffer allocation.  I have 
> installed the patch so my "Windows Shell" buffer is no longer 
> "unchecked".  It is most amusing to me, that the famous popular book, The 
> Cuckoo's Egg, described a way about ten years ago of hacking into the old 
> Berkeley Unix machine that worked similarly, by overrunning an unchecked 
> buffer.  Nothing, as you said, Walt, is new, here.

Chris, before he died, used to take bets. Point at a PC, any PC at 
Georgia Tech Library and he would crash it by remote control from his 
powerbook. Usually in just a minute or less. Though he did not do it 
often, too boring. Something to do on the late night shift. He told me 
some of the ways you could overrun a PC's buffers. Yep, nothing new.

>>All I'm unhappy about is that files have become so big and complex the
>>ultimate backup is no longer practical. Used to do that in my mainframe
>>days, a printout of each file.
> 
> 
> I know, somehow, by the time I have formed a full set of PC WAV files @ 
> 44,100 16 stereo from each Minidisc from the field, the files together take 
> up more than one CD-ROM!

Usually by just a few minutes or bytes, I'm sure murphy must have a law 
about that.

Some of that is your use of metadata. My aiff's, without metadata, are 
about equal when I burn a audio CD from them. The other way is if you 
are recording in mono.

>>>So, my advice to you, my friends, working on ONE computer every day,
>>>(especially those of you who THINK you are NOT living dangerously):
>>>
>>>                Backups, don't leave home without them.
>>
>>Ahmen!
>>
>>Walt
>>
> 
> 
> 
> best to all,

What do you think? Have we got folks scared enough yet to do their 
backups? Probably time to get back to more enjoyable topics.

I'm toying with attempting to make a mic capsule from scratch. The first 
step toward building a MKH type mic from scratch.

Walt





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: MP3 security problem; the role of backups, Walter Knapp <=
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU