you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Exactly. It highlights the lack of creativeness of the CCP, that they couldn't even make their own OS. It highlights the laziness and slowness of the CCP that they're still using windows in 2022 when there's a hundred perfectly viable versions of open-source linux.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Switching to Linux is amateur as shit too. No doubt there are lots of ways to hack in that have been developed over the years. It can't be secured because the source code is open source. The only potentially secure software is proprietary software. And the processors are built with back doors too.

Give me a million dollars and 2 years and I can build a basic system that would work and can be progressively improved on.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It can't be secured because the source code is open source

No, that's why it's secure. You can actually have people look at the code. And bugs are quickly patched because so many people are working on the source code constantly.

It's better than windows by a mile. But of course like you said a proprietary OS would probably be best, but would take a lot of time investment by the CCP compared to just using linux.

And as soon as the CCP comes out with a proprietary system it will begin to be hacked, just like windows which is also proprietary (but also has built-in back doors, unlike linux). So even a proprietary OS probably wouldn't be much more secure than windows, at least after a few years have passed. They won't have the benefit of "security through obscurity" that is typically provided by proprietary software

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think the reason windows is so leaky is the fact that Microsoft wants it to be. If the back doors are obviously engineered then Microsoft risks being sued for espionage and hacking. By making it look like faulty code they maintain plausible deniability.

I also suspect that they write viruses in order to sell anti virus software.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If the back doors are obviously engineered then Microsoft risks being sued for espionage and hacking.

Lol by who? The same courts and intelligence agencies that paid him to install the back doors? Get real. This stuff has been known for a while and no one has enough teeth to do anything about it.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

By literally anyone. It is naive to think that the US government has more control over windows back doors than Microsoft. It is naive to think they don't also spy on the US government.

Knowing something and proving it in court are two very different things. Those who have teeth also need evidence. You can't claim it hasn't happened only because no-one has teeth. If the evidence was there then there would be lots of lawyers willing to go for that jackpot.

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You can't claim it hasn't happened only because no-one has teeth. If the evidence was there then there would be lots of lawyers willing to go for that jackpot.

Ahhh how I wish it worked like that. I deeply wish that were the case. Unfortunately you're not accounting for the high degree of corruption and greased palms that are paid to turn a blind eye.

People have known with definitive proof for over 20 years now... https://ninjagambleyen.wordpress.com/2015/09/03/the-nsas-backdoor-in-microsoft-windows-we-knew-in-1999/