Microsoft Windows XP has one year to live

[icepac]

What exactly do you know about my history with computers? Again you're making blanket statements with no actual data to back anything up. FYI I started computing with C64 around 1986 and coded my first small assembler program using it in 1987 By the way if you like tinkering, with Linux you can (or have to) still micromanage drivers like that. Although it's getting less common even there, which IMO is a positive thing.

The information quoted above confirmes that your history of coding started about 9 years after mine.

Not really sure why you posted it.

This all started when I listed my different OS's drive images I have stored and you somehow took exception to it.

I've moved the focus of my career away from mastery of desktop computing and administration to the point where computers and engine management systems meet but it doesn't mean I forgot everything I've learned or the certifications I have earned.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

The information quoted above confirmes that your history of coding started about 9 years after mine.

Not really sure why you posted it.

Your quoted answer above confirmes that you can't provide me a link to a Win95 driver for a 7xxx series Radeon, nothing else.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Here is the full resolution of 173.194.32.23 that was provided in your screenshot.

(Image removed from quote.)

Yeah so once more: Nobodys computer is 'connected' to markmonitor or spied. What did surprise me was the extent of the search engines that were routed through markmonitor - even the Chinese baidu.com. There are however still search engines which are not affected by markmonitor.

So while you were right in that yahoo, bing, google, baidu etc. searches are going through markmonitor, it's a problem related to those services only and not something that makes our computers 'connect' there unless we use those services.

[icepac]

You claimed that none of your endpoints were with markmonitor and provided a screenshot.

I resolved the addresses from your screenshot and proved they go to markmonitor.

There is nothing more to be said.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

You claimed that none of your endpoints were with markmonitor and provided a screenshot.

I resolved the addresses from your screenshot and proved they go to markmonitor.

There is nothing more to be said.

Whois.sc that I used shows only Google.inc registration. When I checked the DNS it shows markmonitor. YOU claimed that everyones computers are spied - without any reference to going to search sites. You were wrong - end of story.

[guncrasher]

Whois.sc that I used shows only Google.inc registration. When I checked the DNS it shows markmonitor. YOU claimed that everyones computers are spied - without any reference to going to search sites. You were wrong - end of story.

even a dweeb like me knows that ms and google do that all day long.

semp

[MrRiplEy[H]]

even a dweeb like me knows that ms and google do that all day long.

semp

People just imagine things that in reality do not happen. Every last bit of information that flows out of windows has been scrutinized to the end, trust me.

Markmonitor is an internet registrar that handles DNS for Google and many other .com sites.

This claim reflects a misunderstanding of how the internet works, and what MarkMonitor does.

Markmonitor is an internet registrar, that means that they manage the registration of the domain names. While they have the power to change the registration they cannot do this in a non-obvious way. None of the traffic that goes to those sites goes through MarkMonitor.

When you connect to google.com your request is looked up on what is called a "nameserver". Nameservers translate domain names like "www.google.com" into the actual addresses, which look like 121.43.11.92. There are 13 "root nameservers", and they will then redirect you to another nameserver that handles all the .COM addresses (called a TLD nameserver), which redirects you to a third nameserver that handles all the .google.com addresses, which will return the actual address of www.google.com.

If someone had control of the nameserver, then they could re-route your traffic into their own sites, and potentially eavesdrop on it. They could not do this secretly though, as you could still easily see where the traffic was going.

But MarkMonitor DO NOT CONTROL THE NAMESERVERS for google.com. The root nameservers (which are run by large telecom companies, and bodies like NASA or the University of Maryland) are entirely independent of MarkMonitor. The secondary nameservers for .COM are run by Verisign, also independent of MarkMonitor, The nameservers that Verisign's nameservers point to for google.com are owned by Google.

[icepac]

Ripley, you have made a huge amount of incorrect assumptions which removes credibility from your further posting.

Here.......I will do the work to show them below.

LOL! Google Markmonitor and you'll find out it's a DMCA monitoring company. Are you running P2P perhaps? It means your computer is seeding a copyright holders spy computer. Expect a lawsuit in 3..2..1

Incorrect..........I don't run any P2P and my computer is not seeding a copyright holder's spy computer.

Actually I just upgraded my computer with new hardware and installed a fresh Win7 installation on it. I was really "surprised" to find there are no connections to markmonitor or any other non-microsoft endpoint for that matter. In fact there are a total of zero connections anywhere after windows updates stop running.

If I open the Google web page I get two additional connections, both ending to 'Google Inc'.

You probably have spyware on your computer Did you perhaps make the installation from an OEM install disc? That would imply your brand computer comes with embedded spyware straight out of the box. Congratulations!

Incorrect again.......no spyware on my computer and my installs were not done with an oem installation from a manufacturer and my computer was built by me.   

The disc is genuine windows.

You mention two additional connections and both were proven to got to markmonitor.

After a clean boot:
(Image removed from quote.)
When at Google frontpage:
(Image removed from quote.)

See? No markmonitor, only Google.inc. The UDP port at the bottom is created by Punkbuster (ok, so not a 100% clean install anymore )

Here you say no markmonitor..........and below I post the whois of your supposted connections that aren't connected to markmonitor.

So you agree that nobodys computer is spied in any way and they're not connected to markmonitor. Where I have to agree with you is that it seems like all the biggest search engines seem to be routed through markmonitor. Not all of them however.

Your claim that everyones computer is connected to markmonitor is therefore just plain false. This affects only people doing searches using the most common search engines. It looks like the US government has bent down backwards to the copyright predators and subjected all US related search engines (even baidu is a .com) to a global censorship.

There is no need for any conspiracy plots when your own government sells you to the highest bidder as the standard MO

I agreed to nothing you have said but you quickly edited your posts after I showed you were incorrect and decided to try to spin this a different direction.

Your statement "Your claim that everyones computer is connected to markmonitor is therefore just plain false." is incorrect because I never said "everyone's computer is connected to markmonitor"..........but yours is.

Spin unsuccessful.

You then claim I need to do more checking into markmonitor but the entire thread here as well as in the "chemtrail" thread is full of posts showing you posting first before checking and having to resort to spin control, outright misquotes, and editing after what clearly is not enough research on your end.

Then you claim that I didn't do enough research when it is proven that you were the one who had to "cram" and educate yourself on something you shouldn't have been commenting on because you lacked the knowledge on the subject.

Now you are busy only showing a sliver of what markmonitor does as if what you referenced is the only thing they do.

Since you have newly learned about markmonitor to attempt to discuss the subject, why omit the rest of the things markmonitor does?

Maybe more research is need on your end?

Start with "six strikes".

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Ripley, you have made a huge amount of incorrect assumptions which removes credibility from your further posting.

Here.......I will do the work to show them below.

Incorrect..........I don't run any P2P and my computer is not seeding a copyright holder's spy computer.

You yourself claimed your computer was connected to that endpoint. Like I said that's simply not possible without you running some software that's initiating that connection. Seeing that Markmonitor is a copyright predator my logical assumption was that you were running p2p and were seeding the investigators of copyright holders

Incorrect again.......no spyware on my computer and my installs were not done with an oem installation from a manufacturer and my computer was built by me.  

Why did you make wild claims about your computer being connected to markmonitor then? Even more, EVERYONES computer being connected there. Quit the BS!

You mention two additional connections and both were proven to got to markmonitor.

(Image removed from quote.)

Here you say no markmonitor..........and below I post the whois of your supposted connections that aren't connected to markmonitor.

(Image removed from quote.)

Yep it's a site registered to Google.inc and it's registered via the internet registrar called Markmonitor. Verisign and GoDaddy.com are also HUGE spies you know!

I agreed to nothing you have said but you quickly edited your posts after I showed you were incorrect and decided to try to spin this a different direction.

Your statement "Your claim that everyones computer is connected to markmonitor is therefore just plain false." is incorrect because I never said "everyone's computer is connected to markmonitor"..........but yours is.

Spin unsuccessful.

Eeeek! Wrong. My computer is not connected to markmonitor. It seems you still don't understand that markmonitor is the registrar and the data is not routed through their servers. You've fallen to a typical conspiracy sinkhole just as those chemtrail guys!

You then claim I need to do more checking into markmonitor but the entire thread here as well as in the "chemtrail" thread is full of posts showing you posting first before checking and having to resort to spin control, outright misquotes, and editing after what clearly is not enough research on your end.

Get a grip. YOU CLAIMED EVERYONES COMPUTERS ARE CONNECTED TO MARKMONITOR. THEY'RE NOT LIKE I SAID. Period. Later you specified that you need to be connected to Google in order to see 'markmonitor' and even then I couldn't find evidence of that. And the reason was simply because at no point any connection to markmonitor was made - markmonitor hosts dns for Google.

You can't blame me for making false assumptions because of your own erroneous posts.

[Skuzzy]

This has gone off the rails and is no longer providing anything useful.  If you two want to continue this, please take it private.

[trigger2]

Oh cool.  I remember you and some other guys were arguing about how Apple phones don't get viruses.  The other day at my Tech school the IT teacher handed out to all the classes a sheet of programs to protect your computer.  On the sheet at the bottom it had programs for Apple OS and Mac stuff.  In parentheses it says ( Yes, Apple computers can and do get viruses too!). I kind of laughed cause I remember reading the posts about how they were a little better about not getting them.  Correct me if I am wrong here lol.

Oh trust me, Mac OS X is just as prone as any OS. I work as an IT for Apple, and it's almost comical to see the number of security flaws. That in conjunction with 3rd party applications (such as Java) create security vulnerabilities like you wouldn't believe.
A couple of links for the neighsayers (from apple, mind you):
Apple's recomendation? For security, disable Java unless you absolutly need it.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5648

"Apple NEVER get's malware!"
-One Apple stepped into assist in removing from the wild: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5243

If I'm being perfectly honest, Mac OS is waiting for something major to break. Most that I interact with aren't running even base level security software (i.e. a firewall). I also suggest reading up on the Pwn2Own conference. It was made to show the security exploits of the Mac OS after Apple ignored Dragos Ruiu's complaints about some exploits. Long story short:
Major softwares are there (Windows, fully updated, Mac OS, fully updated, and a Linux form, fully updated, and now mobile phones too, if you're the first to hack the product using a previously unkown exploit, you get to keep the device), and Mac OS is usually the first to fall.

Not as secure as people would like to believe...

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Oh trust me, Mac OS X is just as prone as any OS. I work as an IT for Apple, and it's almost comical to see the number of security flaws. That in conjunction with 3rd party applications (such as Java) create security vulnerabilities like you wouldn't believe.
A couple of links for the neighsayers (from apple, mind you):
Apple's recomendation? For security, disable Java unless you absolutly need it.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5648

"Apple NEVER get's malware!"
-One Apple stepped into assist in removing from the wild: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5243

If I'm being perfectly honest, Mac OS is waiting for something major to break. Most that I interact with aren't running even base level security software (i.e. a firewall). I also suggest reading up on the Pwn2Own conference. It was made to show the security exploits of the Mac OS after Apple ignored Dragos Ruiu's complaints about some exploits. Long story short:
Major softwares are there (Windows, fully updated, Mac OS, fully updated, and a Linux form, fully updated, and now mobile phones too, if you're the first to hack the product using a previously unkown exploit, you get to keep the device), and Mac OS is usually the first to fall.

Not as secure as people would like to believe...

True - but OSX has always been hacked through Safari in pwn2own. Use firefox with noscript and those vectors disappear. Also the number of existing attacks is close to none on OSX which is why your chances are low on running to an OSX attack unless you visit some warez site. iOS has the best security track record of all mobile OSes so far and that's mostly because of the prescreening of the apps and forced code signing.

As far as Java goes, the department of homeland security also advises every pc user to disable it

[ACE]

Never mind. 

[trigger2]

True - but OSX has always been hacked through Safari in pwn2own. Use firefox with noscript and those vectors disappear. Also the number of existing attacks is close to none on OSX which is why your chances are low on running to an OSX attack unless you visit some warez site. iOS has the best security track record of all mobile OSes so far and that's mostly because of the prescreening of the apps and forced code signing.

As far as Java goes, the department of homeland security also advises every pc user to disable it

Correct analysis, but the same can be transferred across to Windows as well. Or heck, even Solaris. There was a study done by the Univiersity of Colorodo (this is years old... XP was current at that time) into OS vulnerability, and for the most part, they're pretty secure. There are vulnerabilities, but IIRC, XP had something along the lines of 40 documented vulnerabilities, and I don't know how many of those were exploitable or the extent of the vulnerability. Where people fail is they expect that on OS over the other has a security strength when in actuality, security is care and concern of the user. I was floating Java up to show that usually, it's 3rd party software that "everyone" has that gets exploited, and security falls. Mac OS X is a solid OS, just as Windows 7 is, but the exploits tend to come from beyond the OS and from the user's carelessness, so the idea of, "let's get a mac so we're 100% secure" is a folly. (:

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Correct analysis, but the same can be transferred across to Windows as well. Or heck, even Solaris. There was a study done by the Univiersity of Colorodo (this is years old... XP was current at that time) into OS vulnerability, and for the most part, they're pretty secure. There are vulnerabilities, but IIRC, XP had something along the lines of 40 documented vulnerabilities, and I don't know how many of those were exploitable or the extent of the vulnerability. Where people fail is they expect that on OS over the other has a security strength when in actuality, security is care and concern of the user. I was floating Java up to show that usually, it's 3rd party software that "everyone" has that gets exploited, and security falls. Mac OS X is a solid OS, just as Windows 7 is, but the exploits tend to come from beyond the OS and from the user's carelessness, so the idea of, "let's get a mac so we're 100% secure" is a folly. (:

Yes but the fact that still remains is that there are about 2 000 000 variations of different attacks for the windows platform in the wild and maybe 5 known ones for the mac. I like my odds on OSX.