September 17th, 2007, 12:11 PM
M$ lose EU antitrust case
The European Union Court has upheld its commissioners' ruling that M$ don't play fair:
Well fancy that
Rather a long read I am afraid, but what interests me is the technical content of the Court's ruling:
34 Linux is an ‘open source’ operating system released under the ‘GNU GPL (General Public Licence)’. Strictly speaking, it is only a code base, called the ‘kernel’, which performs a limited number of services specific to an operating system. It may, however, be linked to other layers of software to form a ‘Linux operating system’ (recital 87 to the contested decision). Linux is used in particular as the basis for work group server operating systems (recital 101 to the contested decision) and is thus present on the work group server operating systems market in conjunction with Samba software, which is also released under the ‘GNU GPL’ licence (recitals 506 and 598 to the contested decision)....
September 17th, 2007, 06:42 PM
MS was trying to point out that it has plenty of competition in the interoperability department. Case point Samba within Linux, open directory etc. It also argued that Linux has groupware but since they are open source... yeah DUH. There is a flip side to this decision - I don't really care one way or another but there are plenty of products that inter-operate with MS whether MS wants them to or not. But forcing MS to open up closed architecture is going to open op more holes in an already riddled system. We've debated open disclosure before but that is a flip side.
The case basically said that MS uses secret code to connect it's products. And this gives them an unfair advantage. Therefore they must open up this code. Wonder if this effects AD security. If so this decision could give MS and advantage going forward. Bet no one has written that yet?
West of House
You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
There is a small mailbox here.
September 17th, 2007, 10:56 PM
Hmm, I was just watching the news on TV and they said that MS had to release some of their source code - I thought that was a tad unfair but reading the above link it appears they just need to define and document the protocols that work group servers use to communicate (someone needs to define a work group and a domain to the EC) - the actual code will remain closed, which I think is pretty fair.
I think this will result in a lot of 4 rate applications popping up that do not work well with a work group/domain infrastructure, as there will no doubt be a race to produce these app's and get it on to the market 1st.......I personally will still lean toward an MS product for an MS domain. However a good thing that will almost certainly come from it is that providing some decent and realistically competitive software emerges, then MS will have to drop their prices to compete.....and that is most defiantly not a bad thing...
By lepricaun in forum Microsoft Security Discussions
Last Post: September 12th, 2008, 11:55 PM
By Jareds411 in forum Code Review
Last Post: September 19th, 2004, 11:56 PM
By Poop782 in forum Programming Security
Last Post: September 17th, 2004, 06:54 PM
By gore in forum Newbie Security Questions
Last Post: December 29th, 2003, 07:01 AM
By xpaciscool in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Last Post: March 11th, 2002, 01:01 AM