Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

rezonate · Feb 12, 2004, 06:29 PM

It's unfolding as we speak.

http://slashdot.org/

rezonate · Feb 12, 2004, 06:35 PM

Damnm Neowin has been slasherdotted

Ganesha · Feb 12, 2004, 06:44 PM

Looks like MS just found an easy way to identify all their security problems.

GeneShifter · Feb 12, 2004, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by rezonate:
It's unfolding as we speak.

http://slashdot.org/

IF this is real, I would suggest not running your virtual pc with 2000 or NT on an unprotected broadband network connection. It will only be a matter of a few days for vulnerabilities to be exploited. Hopefully, this is not true.

Earth Mk. II · Feb 12, 2004, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by GeneShifter:
IF this is real, I would suggest not running your virtual pc with 2000 or NT on an unprotected broadband network connection. It will only be a matter of a few days for vulnerabilities to be exploited. Hopefully, this is not true.

just turn off virtual switch. That should be enough for most remote vulnerabilities.

Bobby · Feb 12, 2004, 07:49 PM

This list is *supposedly* all the files in the leaked source archive...

And to reiterate, this is only a list of files, not any actual code. Or anything anybody can do except look at it and think maybe this info is true... I just wanted to clarify that before posting the link...

http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~mortehu/files.txt

cpt kangarooski · Feb 12, 2004, 07:50 PM

Because as we all know, there were no vulnerabilities (or goddamn wide open gaping holes) prior to now.

Amorya · Feb 12, 2004, 07:53 PM

Reckon we could compile it for PowePC?

Not that I'd want to run Windows on a Mac, especially with no binary compatibility. But it'd be interesting to see if you could...

Amorya

RooneyX · Feb 12, 2004, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by Amorya:
Reckon we could compile it for PowePC?

It's only a step up or so from NT4 and that ran on PPC.

cdhostage · Feb 12, 2004, 07:58 PM

I think Microsoft is going to be overflowing with scathing comments on their messy, unconnected code in a few days. If this is true, an interested hacker could interfere with Windows Update itself and hack the planet. tee em.

thunderous_funker · Feb 12, 2004, 08:09 PM

Theoretically, this could be apocalyptic (commercially speaking).

I'm not sure how MS could fight this without having to essentially give in and open the code completely in hopes that the white hats outnumber the black hats. That works for Linux, but I'm not sure MS can expect the same kind of positive ratio.

Imagine the irony of MS begging the Open Source community to save it.

ambush · Feb 12, 2004, 08:12 PM

HOLY ****!

SUCKS TO BE YOU MICROSOFT

SELL ALL MSFT STOCKS

SADDDD

Uisce · Feb 12, 2004, 08:12 PM

I think MS released its source code on purpose. Maybe with the help of the open source community it can finally cobble together a decent OS.

ambush · Feb 12, 2004, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Uisce:
I think MS released its source code on purpose. Maybe with the help of the open source community it can finally cobble together a decent OS.

Highly unprobable

olePigeon · Feb 12, 2004, 08:14 PM

I think we'll find out without doubt that Windows code really is a steaming pile of horse sh*t, then Bill Gates will cash out some odd $90 Billion and yell out in a Homer fashion, "Heh, heh, heh! Suckers!"

ambush · Feb 12, 2004, 08:15 PM

TORRENT THAT **** BABY

ambush · Feb 12, 2004, 08:18 PM

Apparently fake.

Eug · Feb 12, 2004, 08:22 PM

Probably fake.

voodoo · Feb 12, 2004, 08:25 PM

Fake?

ambush · Feb 12, 2004, 08:29 PM

If not fake:

Shut down your Win2k boxens if they're critical servers...

Sell your MSFT tomorrow

If fake:

Good joke, good job.

Either way:

funny!

Steb Mad · Feb 12, 2004, 08:30 PM

Nope, most definitely not fake. Here's a sample code:

10 * BEGIN
100 GOSUB 7000 ; * Load stuff
110 GOSUB 900 ; * Show windows logo
120 GOSUB 20000 ; * Prompt for operator login
130 GOSUB 32000 ; * Fill half of memory with DLL's
140 GOSUB 16000 ; * Time waster loop
.
.
.

Amorya · Feb 12, 2004, 08:37 PM

OK, anyone here got hold of a copy?

ambush · 08:59 PM

Originally posted by Amorya:
OK, anyone here got hold of a copy?

Edit: no.

rezonate · 09:15 PM

Edit: the link i had here was 4 years out of date, lol.

rezonate · Feb 12, 2004, 09:37 PM

I love this little line apparently from some file in the code: "Comments such as, "potentially off-by-1, but who cares..." are buried within code for the Windows Taskbar. Sources tell BetaNews there is no reference that calls Netscape developers "Weenies," as was alleged in court documents. Other comments range from mundane technical jargon to all out profanity. "

http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1076632515

Nebrie · Feb 12, 2004, 09:57 PM

The code out there is supposedly only a 660MB fraction of the 40GB of total Windows code according to Cnet

dampeoples · Feb 12, 2004, 10:15 PM

I don't think anything big will come of this, especially if it's just 1CD's worth of code. It's not like there aren't vulnerabilities out there already.

d4nth3m4n · Feb 12, 2004, 11:46 PM

for some reason i feel like ive known about this for a while now. i think i was talking to a M$ tech in like oct. and he mentioned it.

i really dont think im making this up, 'cept that he said it was the xp source code. i know that xp is largely nt and 2000, and maybe he was trying to keep it simple around his totally hot, though kinda airheaded daughter. (

) something, but i dont think this is as breaking as people think it is.

cover up?

ryaxnb · Feb 13, 2004, 02:16 AM

Originally posted by Uisce:
I think MS released its source code on purpose. Maybe with the help of the open source community it can finally cobble together a decent OS.

Wouldn't they release Longhorn code then?

King Bob On The Cob · Feb 13, 2004, 02:37 AM

Originally posted by d4nth3m4n:
for some reason i feel like ive known about this for a while now. i think i was talking to a M$ tech in like oct. and he mentioned it. i really dont think im making this up, 'cept that he said it was the xp source code. i know that xp is largely nt and 2000, and maybe he was trying to keep it simple around his totally hot, though kinda airheaded daughter. () something, but i dont think this is as breaking as people think it is.

cover up?

People have had access to the Windows source code for a long while, but only certain people, not the total free-for-all that it became today.

killer_735 · Feb 13, 2004, 03:22 AM

Wow. In the prison of modern computing, windows just dropped the soap.

People can play with the source code, program in a back door or a piece of spyware, then compile it and distibute it. This can also be used for great good, hover. Think of the boon this is to the open-source community, though.

nonhuman · Feb 13, 2004, 03:36 AM

Originally posted by killer_735:
Wow. In the prison of modern computing, windows just dropped the soap.

People can play with the source code, program in a back door or a piece of spyware, then compile it and distibute it. This can also be used for great good, hover. Think of the boon this is to the open-source community, though.

I doubt the small chunk of the code that was "released" is compilable.

torsoboy · Feb 13, 2004, 04:12 AM

maybe now everyone will see how great the software is written! i mean they have the best programmers money can buy, and they come out with a lot of coding standards. i think if this is true, people will have to stop claiming it is crap, because they will see that it is pretty decent.

but who knows.

Minty Fresh · Feb 13, 2004, 04:27 AM

I heard it was The "Dell Guy"...who leaked the source code!

rezonate · Feb 13, 2004, 05:11 AM

It's been confirmed by MS. The BBC has a story today in which MS says parts of it have been leaked onto the Net.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3484545.stm

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...dowssource.asp

voodoo · Feb 13, 2004, 08:27 AM

Originally posted by rezonate:
It's been confirmed by MS. The BBC has a story today in which MS says parts of it have been leaked onto the Net.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3484545.stm

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...dowssource.asp

dbgfhrgl

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Sherwin · Feb 13, 2004, 09:04 AM

It's time for the tin foil hat to be place upon head:

I purchased a copy of 2000 to run on a standalone accounts machine this week (I'm not stupid enough to let it connect to the 'net - it's simply going to be an accounts machine 'coz there's no good accounts apps for the Mac).

Now, this copy was brand new. I'm sure that my (and many others') decision to buy 2000 over XP is riling M$ a little, considering that they'd really probably like to drop support for it.

Microsoft, of course, also wants people to upgrade to XP because it's less easy for the average user to pirate. Their cashflow projections have got to have been hit hard when people haven't been buying XP and just using an old copy of 2000, right?

And, if you think about it, why only a CD's worth of source code? Anyone with access to it should just as easily be able to leak the whole lot, right?

So... Possibly... Possibly... M$ actually leaked this code on purpose to undermine the average user's confidence in 2000 - thus forcing the user to go out and buy XP. The bits leaked are possibly the stuff that didn't make it into XP, thus ensuring XP's continuing perceived security.

mitchell_pgh · Feb 13, 2004, 09:15 AM

In my opinion, the biggest issue I see with this is...

will Microsoft pull an SCO in 4 years...

Oh, you are using our code... bla bla bla...

starman · Feb 13, 2004, 10:15 AM

I can't believe this happened. This is disasterous for MS. It would be interesting to see how things shake out this weekend in terms of how much is compilable, how much of an OS you can make out of it, etc.

The Linux people are going to be all over this, not so much to steal the code, but to get ideas on better ways of solving issues.

And let's not forget our friends, the hackers....

Mike

starman · Feb 13, 2004, 10:18 AM

Source of the leak:

http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1076674118

EXCLUSIVE BetaNews has learned that Thursday's leak of the Windows 2000 source code originated not from Microsoft, but from long-time Redmond partner Mainsoft.

The leaked code includes 30,915 files and was apparently removed from a Linux computer used by Mainsoft for development purposes. Dated July 25, 2000, the source code represents Windows 2000 Service Pack 1.

typoon · Feb 13, 2004, 10:32 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/interne....ap/index.html

rezonate · Feb 13, 2004, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by starman:
Source of the leak:

http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1076674118

EXCLUSIVE BetaNews has learned that Thursday's leak of the Windows 2000 source code originated not from Microsoft, but from long-time Redmond partner Mainsoft.

That's a bit curious. Mainsoft make Mainwin, a great tool for porting Windows software to Unix.

Cadaver · Feb 13, 2004, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by Sherwin:
It's time for the tin foil hat to be place upon head...

Ok. Here you go...

starman · Feb 13, 2004, 12:59 PM

I'd love to put some of the code on a T-shirt and roam around Linux gatherings

.

"Mr. So-and-so, have you ever looked at the Windows source code?"

HAHA

Mike

benb · Feb 13, 2004, 03:56 PM

Too bad they couldn't leak the XP CD key generation algorithm.

starman · Feb 13, 2004, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by benb:
Too bad they couldn't leak the XP CD key generation algorithm.

Oh, God, could you imagine?

Mike

benb · Feb 13, 2004, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by starman:
Oh, God, could you imagine?

Mike

Yea. I'd save $84 + a hardware purchase from NewEgg.

wataru · Feb 20, 2004, 03:59 AM

I thought this was clever.

MindFad · Feb 20, 2004, 04:14 AM

Bwahahahahaha. That is classic.

insha · Feb 20, 2004, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by Steb Mad:
Nope, most definitely not fake. Here's a sample code:

10 * BEGIN
100 GOSUB 7000 ; * Load stuff
110 GOSUB 900 ; * Show windows logo
120 GOSUB 20000 ; * Prompt for operator login
130 GOSUB 32000 ; * Fill half of memory with DLL's
140 GOSUB 16000 ; * Time waster loop
.
.
.

Dude, this is funnier than the actual source code leak...