Windows 8 - Deeper Impressions

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

EDITORIAL: What happened to Windows Phone? ( NeoWin 2013-08-17 )

On paper Windows Phone seems like the best thing to happen to humanity since sliced bread and the end of the Black Plague, or at the very least the best thing that could ever happen to Windows Mobile.

[...]

So why is it that, three years later, this seemingly perfect OS accounts for just 3% of the market? What happened over the years that prevented Windows Phone from taking the world by storm?

So what exactly will it look like when the NuMicrosoft fail begins to dawn upon the NeoKids? Well take a peek. Excuses, rationalizations, denial. Not quite yet an obituary, but a step towards closure nonetheless.

Microsoft: After April 8th, Windows XP will have "zero day" exploits forever ( NeoWin 2013-08-16 )

HeHeHe! The latest and greatest fear-fest from the biggest group of children ever gathered in one place ( minus the two or three adults trying calm the little girls down ). Too many examples to even bother quoting, but so many of them expose their absolute lack of any knowledge whatsoever saying things out of instinct and emotion even though they are completely false.

They even have a giant infographic, Microsoft-created naturally, to feed the sheeple talking points. One of the best ones is that Windows 7 is 6-times more likely to be infected than Windows 8 ! See here ...

Ummm, it's got like 8 times the market share, so it's more likely 8 times as vulnerable. Math is hard!

The truth is that Microsoft's greatest fear is that people might finally call their bluff, exposing the decade of FUD spread by these panty-wearing little girls to steer the sheeple into the upgrading and updating treadmill, and strangling businesses into expensive slavery contracts paying for placebo support. Hardware makers benefit, software makers benefit, Microsoft benefits, so-called security professionals benefit. I wonder just how much of the computer economy is directly driven by FUD from all these used-car salesmen? It's a tight economy right now, people are getting laid off daily, using security FUD to drum up new sales is crazy and borderline criminal because it will result in lost jobs to instead buy new computers to placate their fears. There is a real-life "yelling fire in a crowded theater" aspect to this. I really hope businesses and users tell them all to screw off.

They are also worried that people might avoid switching from a pre-9/11 pre-Vista pre-Prism operating system to something new and government-compromised. Read that earlier article about Lavabit shutting down their service rather than being complicit in spying and now being threatened with prosecution for shutting down. It makes sense to me that there is pressure on Microsoft to get their "customers" onto something new and accessible to government spooks. This is what they famously term a tinfoil conspiracy theory.

[jaclaz]

Ummm, it's got like 8 times the market share, so it's more likely 8 times as vulnerable. Math is hard!

No, the source seems like the same SIR 14 cited here:

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163539-are-ms-updates-for-xp-really-necessary/?p=1047286

http://blogs.technet.com/b/security/archive/2013/08/06/the-risk-of-running-windows-xp-after-support-ends.aspx

http://www.microsoft.com/security/sir/archive/default.aspx

http://download.microsoft.com/download/E/0/F/E0F59BE7-E553-4888-9220-1C79CBD14B4F/Microsoft_Security_Intelligence_Report_Volume_14_Worldwide_Threat_Assessment_English.pdf

Which specifies that numbers are expressed on comparable samples (i.e. they are "normalized").

Still, I personally won' t buy that data, there must have been some serious errors in the sampling or gathering of the raw data.

BTW, that data is also saying that Vista has lower infection rate than Windows 7, i.e. they are basically telling us that:

1. Vista was a "paradigm shift" when it comes to security
2. Windows 7 - notwithstanding the new mitigation techniques added scores WORSE than Vista (i.e. the added mitigation provisions were not effective)
3. Windows 8 - which adds mainly improvements to the same mitigation techniques added in 7 is another "paradigm shift" in security

I will wait the next SIR to see if those data are confirmed.

Comparing the data with the SIR 13 we learn that between the semester "january-june 2012" and the semester "july-december 2012" data for 32 bit:

The CCM for XP SP3 increased from 9.5 to 11.3

The CCM for Vista decreased from 4.9 to 3.5

The CCM for Windows 7 RTM decreased from 5.3 to 4.8

The CCM for Windows 7 SP1 decreased from 4.9 to 4.5

The CCM for Windows Server 2003 SP2 decreased from 4.2 to 4.0

I will call them "strange" trends, lacking a better word (and an actual logical explanation)

What is really worth reading is the "first" part of the SIR 14:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/E/0/F/E0F59BE7-E553-4888-9220-1C79CBD14B4F/Microsoft_Security_Intelligence_Report_Volume_14_Running_Unprotected_English.pdf

Where you will be able to find this pearl (page 8):

Of all the currently supported Windows client operating system and service pack

combinations, Windows XP SP3 had the smallest relative difference between the

infection rates of protected and unprotected computers, with protected

computers reporting an infection rate 3.7 times greater than unprotected

computers. More recently released versions of Windows feature a number of

security improvements that are not included in Windows XP, which means that

even protected computers running Windows XP face risks from exploitation and

malware infection that don’t apply to more recent versions of Windows.

Right after a graphic (that I don't have the time/will to rip/reproduce) which gives (still 32 bit):

XP SP3 protected 4.2

XP SP3 UNprotected 15.6

AND:

Windows 7 RTM protected 2.7

Windows 7 RTM UNprotected 20.4

AND:

Windows 7 SP1 protected 1.5

Windows 7 SP1 UNprotected 14.1

Which is later commented as:

The RTM version of Windows 7, which had the highest percentage of

unprotected computers of any platform (shown in Figure 4), also displayed the

highest infection rates for unprotected computers, with a CCM of 20.4 for the

32-bit edition and 12.5 for the 64-bit edition. This correlation suggests that a

larger population of unprotected users within a platform creates an attractive

target for attackers.

A protected XP is less secure than a protected 7, but an unprotected XP is more secure than an unprotected Windows 7 RTM and more or less as secure as an unprotected Windows 7 SP1.

I wonder what all the mitigation techniques are there for, then?

jaclaz

[JorgeA]

That SIR made for fascinating reading -- thanks, jaclaz! It also helped that the actual report doesn't start until page 11 of the 22-page PDF.

Still, a few things caught my eye. The first paragraph on page 11 suggests to the reader to...

(See page 78 for more information about drive-by downloads.)

Note that we're being asked to consult page 78 of a 22-page report. There seems to be a longer report available, but there's nothing on this PDF to indicate its existence; you have to click on a link in the "About this report" page which offers "past reports and related resources."

If we check Figure 6, we can see that the security of protected XP SP3 was virtually the same as (or even lower than) that of protected Vista SP2 until October 2012, and if we look at Fig. 7 we see that the same applies to protected Windows 7 (i.e., it too was infected more often than XP). As for the October 2012 spike, Figure 8 on page 19 shows that this is almost entirely due to a sudden upsurge in two types of malware infections in Korea (discussed on page 20).

So I would say, unless you live in Korea or are in the habit of visiting Korean websites, just keep your malware security suite and all your applications up to date. Even in Korea, by December you had a 99.6% chance of being OK even by Microsoft's reckoning. IMHO, the talk about XP being sooooo insecure is much ado about little.

And let's no forget that, today, the bulk of security threats consist of Flash and Java exploits, such that vulnerabilities specific to Windows (any flavor) account for that much smaller a proportion of all PC infections. Whatever version of Windows one uses, the key here is to either keep Flash and Java up to date, or to disable them.

Comparisons to Windows 8 are of limited value at this point because all Win8 computers are new -- that is, they come with the most recent versions of Flash and (maybe) Java and other software, and (crucially) they have not had a chance to go out of date yet as users neglect to update them.

That said, if Win8 ever took off among the "3-year-old-mindset" crowd, as they appear intent on doing with their Metro Playskool interface, then -- despite all its vaunted security advantages -- over time I would predict a longterm increase in Win8 infections to levels well above those of any prior Windows OS, thanks to the susceptibility of Win8-mentality users to use simplistic passwords and to fall for bu11$h!t e-mail from pretty e-cards and Nigerian princes.

--JorgeA

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

A protected XP is less secure than a protected 7, but an unprotected XP is more secure than an unprotected Windows 7 RTM and more or less as secure as an unprotected Windows 7 SP1.

Seriously. They're completely full of sh!t. That's what it is.

Like I've said, at best their numbers are representative of sheeple. Those that click on everything. These are all synthetic tests, automated with no user variables. Furthermore they are presumably running their devices facing the "internet" not a hardware firewall.

They are using MSIE, probably MSIE6 in order to drag down Windows XP, and the dead-end firewall that shipped with SP2.

In short, they could only fudge the numbers this bad by testing the worst case scenario a MicroSheep using MSIE with a software firewall.

Anyone still doing this without a Gateway-Router-Hardware Firewall deserves it. Let Darwin sort them out.

Ironically this FUD is not a indicator of a bad Windows XP or 2000, it is an indicator of Windows in general as delivered by Microsoft. Their solution after all these years is to strap-on piles of anti-malware to monitor your every move including every flashdrive you insert on an operating system most likely compromised by federal spooks. Screw that crap. Thanks anyway.

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Windows XP's retirement could spark a hacker feeding frenzy ( PC World 2013-08-13 )

Lots of FUD-wielding security analysts putting their reputations on the line throwing out incredible numbers like our friend in this thread. These guys remind me of sports writers who live completely in the theoretical, charting the teams' strengths and weaknesses on paper every year and inevitably at the end of the season they got it 99% wrong.

They seem to be he!! bent on pushing everyone into the Playskool Microsoft Tiles at all costs, and the FUD is thicker than the media reporting prior to Y2K. This time around though they will likely pay with their careers or at least their reputations because the Internet is now really up and running and their words will not get lost to the ages. So bring on those predictions of doom and gloom!

Microsoft warns it'll hand out zero days for Windows XP ( UK Register 2013-08-16 )

XP Z: Microsoft scares Windows XP users straight with undead bug warning ( ComputerWorld 2013-08-16 )

Microsoft warns Windows XP users risk 'zero day forever' ( Mary Jo Foley ZDNet 2013-08-16 )

More on the Windows XP FUD. Interesting take on it at The Register article and especially the comments which explore the Microsoft blackmail aspect of the issue, that is, Microsoft is pretty much telling the hackers to wait until next year, then reverse engineer the new patches for Vista-7-8 that no longer work on Windows XP, and then use the information to discover the unpatched holes in Windows XP.

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Meanwhile, for all those safe users "protected" by Windows Updates ...

Microsoft Patch Tuesday: The '90s called. It wants its 'Ping of Death' back ( UK Register 2013-08-14 )

Microsoft botches six Windows patches in latest Automatic Update ( InfoWorld 2013-08-15 )

Microsoft pulls two of its Patch Tuesday security updates ( NeoWin 2013-08-15 )

In an amazing tour de force, Microsoft's Automatic Update chute released at least six bad patches on Tuesday. Here's what's amazing: It's just 48 hours or so since the bomb bay doors opened, and Microsoft has acknowledged problems with all of these patches. That's a first, I think -- and the biggest positive development in the Automatic Update minefield I've seen in a long time.

The gory details: see InfoWorld article

I just love the idea of an ever-changing core codebase on my computers, don't you? NOT. This is why I leave Windows Update off and only visit it manually, only when I decide to.

Seriously, with all the sloppy mistakes coming out of Microsoft over the past few years why wouldn't some errors also trickle out of Windows Update? Here are some examples ...

• Vista "Windows Ready" labeling controversy.
• Insulting customers with Vista Mojave Project, 'You're doing it wrong'
• Half-hearted Zune development and later cancellation
• Almost flushing $45 Billion down the toilet on Yahoo!
• Blowing $6+ Billion on aQuantive
• Win7sp1 Browser Ballot screwup resulting in $700+ Million fine
• Mindlessly changing well-known Logos for both "Microsoft" and "Windows"
• Removing the Start Menu from Windows 8 and not restoring it despite worldwide criticism
• Removing Aero Glass from Windows 8 RP, and not restoring it despite worldwide criticism
• Including Metro on Server editions of Windows 8
• Spreading the horrific Flat Colorless GUI across product lines
• Radically altering various product EULAs to thwart customer class-action lawsuits
• Further ruining MSDN and TechNet membership benefits
• Metro naming fiasco with Metro AG
• Windows RT branding deception with ARM vs x86 Incompatibility
• Windows 8 Mojave Project sequel, 'So easy, a child will show you how to use it'
• High profile and unprofessional Scroogle campaign
• Orwellian patent for in-home spying with Kinect
• Major changes to Office licensing affecting loyal customers
• Significant Xbox screwups: Always-On, Always-Connected, DRM, no Optical play, HDD installs only, Kinect required
• Significant Xbox screwups: No Resale of pre-owned, previous games Not Compatible, Xbox live security breach
• EU and China Bribery Allegations
• Selling out Chinese citizens through Skype collaboration with Regime turning in customers using various keywords
• Selling out American citizens complying with requests for customer information
• Withdrawing Office 2010 leaving only the horrific Office 2013 available
• Microsoft creative director on Always-On console: #dealwithit
• Bitcoin mining malware spreading on Skype at 2,000 clicks per hour
• Killing TechNet membership benefits
• Exposed as first partner in Government Spying programs

It's really been an incredible few years, eh? Simply stunning! And that list is far from complete, but it surely indicates a shift away from a stable professional outfit towards that of a blundering drunk weaving all over the road, banging into everything in sight.

And you better believe that there is much more to come.

[CharlotteTheHarlot]

Microsoft finally fixes Outlook.com issues; offers apology and explanation (Update) ( NeoWin 2013-08-17 )

Microsoft apologizes for Outlook, ActiveSync downtime, says error overloaded servers ( The Verge 2013-08-17 )

The main issue was "a failure in a caching service that interfaces with devices using Exchange ActiveSync." That failure caused a cascade effect where devices flooded Microsoft's servers with traffic that they weren't able to handle, taking down Outlook and SkyDrive for some users. To fix it, Microsoft was forced to block Exchange ActiveSync for a short time, giving it breathing room to fix web access before turning EAS back on. That caused a backlog for mobile devices, but more importantly Microsoft says it needed to change its infrastructure to prevent this issue from cropping up again which the company says it has done.

But how long was it? NeoWin finally provides some actual numbers albeit grudgingly and vaguely ...

It's been a bit of a rough week for some users of Microsoft's Outlook.com email service. The problems started on Wednesday as reports came that some people could not see their emails on the Outlook.com website. Microsoft confirmed these problems via its live status page, and the issues extended to the company's SkyDrive and People services as well.

These problems lasted for a few hours, but the People and SkyDrive issues were dealt with later that same day. The same went for people who wanted to view Outlook.com email on the web. However, Microsoft reported that some users were still experiencing problems with syncing their Outlook.com emails with mobile devices.

These problems extended into Thursday and Friday, but now Microsoft's live status page indicates that the Outlook.com syncing issues have now been resolved.

It looks like at least three full days for some users. If this had affected the other cloud thingie we would be calling it Office 362 ( and counting )

Dear Microsoft, please put the DRM back in Xbox One! Pretty please, - signed: a MicroZealot.

Security stuff again ...

NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds ( Washington Post 2013-08-15 )

NSA coughs to 1000s of unlawful acts of snooping on US soil since 2008 ( UK Register 2013-08-16 )

NSA Broke Privacy Rules "Thousands" Of Times ( Tom's Hardware 2013-08-17 )

I'm still shocked by this. <--- See my shocked face? The reason I'm shocked is because they have all those safeguards, you know, judges and congress-critters and stuff. And they said: "Don't worry, be happy!". That's why I'm so shocked.

[JorgeA]

Seriously, with all the sloppy mistakes coming out of Microsoft over the past few years why wouldn't some errors also trickle out of Windows Update? Here are some examples ...

• Vista "Windows Ready" labeling controversy.
• Insulting customers with Vista Mojave Project, 'You're doing it wrong'
• Half-hearted Zune development and later cancellation
• Almost flushing $45 Billion down the toilet on Yahoo!
• Blowing $6+ Billion on aQuantive
• Win7sp1 Browser Ballot screwup resulting in $700+ Million fine
• Mindlessly changing well-known Logos for both "Microsoft" and "Windows"
• Removing the Start Menu from Windows 8 and not restoring it despite worldwide criticism
• Removing Aero Glass from Windows 8 RP, and not restoring it despite worldwide criticism
• Including Metro on Server editions of Windows 8
• Spreading the horrific Flat Colorless GUI across product lines
• Radically altering various product EULAs to thwart customer class-action lawsuits
• Further ruining MSDN and TechNet membership benefits
• Metro naming fiasco with Metro AG
• Windows RT branding deception with ARM vs x86 Incompatibility
• Windows 8 Mojave Project sequel, 'So easy, a child will show you how to use it'
• High profile and unprofessional Scroogle campaign
• Orwellian patent for in-home spying with Kinect
• Major changes to Office licensing affecting loyal customers
• Significant Xbox screwups: Always-On, Always-Connected, DRM, no Optical play, HDD installs only, Kinect required
• Significant Xbox screwups: No Resale of pre-owned, previous games Not Compatible, Xbox live security breach
• EU and China Bribery Allegations
• Selling out Chinese citizens through Skype collaboration with Regime turning in customers using various keywords
• Selling out American citizens complying with requests for customer information
• Withdrawing Office 2010 leaving only the horrific Office 2013 available
• Microsoft creative director on Always-On console: #dealwithit
• Bitcoin mining malware spreading on Skype at 2,000 clicks per hour
• Killing TechNet membership benefits
• Exposed as first partner in Government Spying programs

It's really been an incredible few years, eh? Simply stunning! And that list is far from complete, but it surely indicates a shift away from a stable professional outfit towards that of a blundering drunk weaving all over the road, banging into everything in sight.

And you better believe that there is much more to come.

That's quite a list, Charlotte. Thanks for putting it all together in one neat package.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

Leo Laporte goes off on Win8 in episode 403 of This Week in Tech.

The guests meander around aimlessly for quite a while, but the fun begins around 1:21:30 with a discussion of the pseudo-Start Button, and goes on for about twelve minutes. The golden nugget in the conversation belongs to Leo (1:26):

This is the crappiest operating system ever... This thing, I can't wait to get rid of it!

Dvorak intersperses some interesting tidbits about Tami Reller and Steven Sinofsky. A (possibly half-joking) morsel about a "Windows 97" that "was never released" led me to this old Thurrott article, which suggests that there's nothing new under the sun. Among the new OS's features would be:

New software updates are automatically downloaded over the Internet. Apparently, Microsoft is moving away from releasing operating system upgrades every two years and toward a subscription model where upgrades are downloaded automatically as they are introduced.

[emphasis added]

Sound familiar? Oh, and apparently customers have defeated this feudal model once already.

--JorgeA

Edited August 18, 2013 by JorgeA

[jaclaz]

@Charlotte

The end of the internet as we know it is near.

I will re-re-re-post a link to some 2017 news (but pre-published - SCOOP! - in 2007 ):

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/127283-experts-say/

And, for NO apparent reason if not the way the NSA (and all related stuff) has been, is and will be mis-managed, a re-re-re-repost of the known message from Her Majesty the Queen to the people of the ex-colonies in North America:

http://friday-funny.blogspot.it/2009/07/message-from-queen.html

jaclaz

Edited August 18, 2013 by jaclaz

[Formfiller]

You can also witness again the amazing memory problems Microsoft's ad department has.

In 2001, the floppy was apparently still widespread, and fax was more common place than email. Wrong!

Also LC displays were already getting pretty mainstream by 2001, unlike what the graphic implies.

,

They also got the internet users number wrong in 2001. They claim that only 50 Million people used the internet in 2001 - dead wrong!

Here's an article from 1998:

http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/s-asia-it/archive/1998/10/msg00014.html

September 28, 1998

Over 300 Million Internet Users in Year 2000

Buffalo Grove, IL - According to the Internet Industry Almanac there will be over 327 million Internet users by year-end 2000--up from 100 million Internet users at year-end 1997.

1997 had already more people online than Microsoft's graphic shows for 2001! I know they give a source for this claim in the graphic, but the number is wrong nevertheless. Read old articles from the end of the 90s and the beginning of the 2000s - they all give far higher numbers than 50 Million.

Here's another contemporary article:

http://www.zdnet.com/news/world-net-population-nears-300-million/110302

World Net population nears 300 million

Summary: The United States claims more than one-third of all online households. But Germany and the UK are catching up, says a new Nielsen survey.

By Ben Charny | September 9, 2000 -- 00:00 GMT (17:00 PDT)

The Internet's global population is nearing 300 million people in 20 different countries, according to what Nielsen//NetRatings says is the first-ever examination of global Internet penetration.
The report also shows that North America has by far the most people with Internet access from a home PC: about 150 million. But the Nielsen report also said European countries, with a combined 82 million people online, is catching up.

The United Kingdom, Germany and Italy are leading the charge among Europeans, who contribute more than half of the European Internet population, according to the Nielsen report.

Of the 20 countries surveyed, the United States has the most wired households, with 136.9 million people over the age of two with Internet access at home.

"The estimated cost and detection time of these breaches weren't tracked at the time" - wrong again!

http://www.lib.iup.edu/comscisec/SANSpapers/damico.htm

What Does a Computer Security Breach Really Cost?
Anita D'Amico
September 7, 2000

Forrester Research estimated the tangible and intangible costs of computer security breaches in three hypothetical situations. Their analysis indicated that, if thieves were to illegally wire $1 million from an on-line bank, the cost impact to the bank would be $106 million. They also estimated that, in the hypothetical situation that cyber techniques are used to divert a weekâs worth of tires from an auto manufacturer, the auto manufacturer would sustain losses of $21 million. Finally, they estimated that if a law firm were to lose significant confidential information, the impact would be almost $35 million.

Does this sound unrealistic? Remember, that Forrester used both tangibles and intangibles in their estimates, including the loss of confidential information and reputation. The sections below present the results of analyses of real world cost impacts of cyber events, using largely tangible costs as the means of estimating impact.

Real World Examples of Cost Impacts

Cost Impacts On Individual Companies

In December, 1998 Ingram Micro, a PC wholesaler, had to shut down its main data center in Tucson, Arizona due to an electrical short. While the reason for the shut down was not a security breach, the loss of Ingramâs Internet business and electronic transactions from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM mimicked what could happen with a Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attack or a major intrusion. As a result of its one day of lost sales and system repairs, Ingram estimates that it lost a staggering $3.2 million. This figure is comparable to Forresterâs projection of a $21 million loss for an auto manufacturer who is unable to get tires for a week.

To estimate the cost impact of the types of breaches that happen daily to companies, one can turn the annual surveys of the Computer Security Institute (CSI) (www.gosci.com) and the FBI,. For the past five years, the CSI-FBI "Computer Crime and Security Survey" has been a major source of information on the frequency and impact of computer security breaches, through their polling of commercial, non-profit, and government organizations. Their Year 2000 report was based on a survey of 643 information security professionals from organizations throughout the United States. Typically, the respondents represent organizations that have already made some commitment to computer security. In the 1999 survey, 91% of the respondents had firewalls, 42% had intrusion detection systems, and 34% were using digital certificates in their companies.

Of the 643 respondents in the year 2000, 90% had detected cyber attacks on their organizations; and 74% reported financial losses associated with those attacks. Of the total sample of respondents, 42% (273 people) were able to quantify their exact losses, which totaled $265,589,940, or $972,857 cost impact per organization across all types of breaches.

The highest impact came from theft of proprietary information, reported by 66 people. Their total losses came to $66,708,000 or $1,010,727 cost impact per organization for theft of proprietary information. While this may seem like a lot, the average cost impact of theft of proprietary information in their 1999 survey was $1,847,652. The sabotage of data or networks was reported by 61 respondents, for a total loss of $27,148,000 or an average loss of $445,049 per organization. This loss was significantly higher than the 1999 average loss of $163,740 associated with sabotage.

....

Some research and consulting firms such as Computer Economics (www.computereconomics.com) measure the impact of computer breaches across several companies or industries. Computer Economics has estimated that in 1999 businesses around the globe spent $12.1 billion to combat the effect of computer viruses. Their estimate was based on tangibles such as lost productivity, network down time, and expenses incurred to get rid of the virus infections.

The ILOVEYOU and its copycats have also been studied for their financial impacts across industries. According to Computer Economics the ILOVEYOU virus and its variants caused $6.7 billion in damage in the first five days.

The FBI, in their testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information, cites the Yankee Groupâs estimate that industries around the world lost $1.2 billion to the DDOS attacks on e-commerce in February 2000. Their estimate was based on lost capitalization, lost revenues and the costs of security upgrades.

There are far more stats and data in the article. The notion that this stuff wasn't tracked at that time is ridiculous. Also the claim in the Microsoft ad that hacker attacks were limited to big companies, in opposite to today where they attack "everyone" is another dishonest statement. Together with "vandalism then, tacking control of PCs today". Let's not forget the summer of worms in 2003, Back Orifice, CIH, ILOVEYOU. Those were threats to everyone. Distributed DoS: Sobig and MyDoom, XP era. Botnets (and accompanying information theft) are also not something new, but straight from the XP era too:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/feds-crush-coreflood-botnet-infected-million-computers-stole/story?id=13369529

Feds Take 'Coreflood Botnet': 'Zombie' Army May Have Infected 2 Million Computers, Stolen Hundreds of Millions of Dollars

Coreflood is believed to have been operating since 2002 and has resulted in an unknown number of U.S. bank accounts being broken into with losses that could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars, according to FBI officials.

How can a tech company like Microsoft get this so wrong? It's either incompetence or scaremongering.

Another proof how deranged "NuMicrosoft" got.

Edited August 20, 2013 by Formfiller

[TELVM]

 

 

Windows 8 Benchmark Records No Longer Accepted At HWBOT - Benchmark Result Veracity Compromised
 

If I get it right Tiles no longer syncs with hardware RTC (for compatibility with the cheap toys that lack it), and system time accuracy goes belly up whenever you underclock or overclock from Windows, thus compromising benchmarking.

[bpalone]

A bit off topic, but not to much.  It seems that Internet Traffic was off by 40% due to a short outage of service at Google.  Maybe, we are already living in the cloud and don't really know it.  The outage was for only a minute or two, but the numbers are staggering for that amount of time.  You can read more about it here:  http://news.sky.com/story/1129847/google-outage-internet-traffic-plunges-40-percent

 

This new software, does leave a lot to be desired.

 

bpalone

[JorgeA]

Windows 8 Benchmark Records No Longer Accepted At HWBOT - Benchmark Result Veracity Compromised

If I get it right Tiles no longer syncs with hardware RTC (for compatibility with the cheap toys that lack it), and system time accuracy goes belly up whenever you underclock or overclock from Windows, thus compromising benchmarking.

Nice find!

Check out this crack in the comments section:

Good riddance!

Now if only Microsoft just listened to the OC community and cancelled Win8, that'd be great.

--JorgeA

[JorgeA]

A bit off topic, but not to much. It seems that Internet Traffic was off by 40% due to a short outage of service at Google. Maybe, we are already living in the cloud and don't really know it. The outage was for only a minute or two, but the numbers are staggering for that amount of time. You can read more about it here: http://news.sky.com/story/1129847/google-outage-internet-traffic-plunges-40-percent

This new software, does leave a lot to be desired.

bpalone

That's amazing, that so much traffic runs through one single outfit.

--JorgeA