Really.

Microsoft practically gives software away to convince others that it is worth using.
There was some pieces about this on p2pnet some time ago…

Off the top of my googling there’s this:
False ads in the uk
http://p2pnet.net/story/2249

Can’t find a better one, but threatening to go linux is being used to
get better prices from Microsoft, who then say they are better.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20040611-3874.html

How can you secure without policing?

What ISPs do now is block ports, like smtp(25) and http(80).
That prevents you from running servers at these ports.
Effective? No.

Does it help with security?
Yes, for those that do not know they have servers running there.
That is however more a problem of the operationg system enabling
certains (unneeded) services by default or malicious applications.
BTW malicious applications will find a way somehow if the user is not
paying attention and running any programs without some verification.

Does it prevent legitimate use of servers on that port?
Yes, for those who want to run services at these ports.
Whould that imply some risks?
Of course, but that is true of every service offered over the internet.

If you want complete security, there is a button on all computers
that provide complete invulnerability to all attacks.
The off button.

Now this really worries me … in the UK the Defense Procurement Agency plan on using win2k for running the computer systems.

WHY WHY WHY!!!!!

I doubt ANYONE who knows ANYTHING about Windows or ‘nix can’t belive this.

It’s gotta be untrue or VERY, VERY STOOPID !!!!

The BBC had a piece on it the other day on the news … can’t find any info on their website though!!

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/06/ams_goes_windows_for_warships/

NOT “police” it.

It should be their responsibility to block email bourne viruses and spam. But not to start policing file sharers, etc.

Once you open the door for ISP to police their network
you are inviting them to control the access of their users.
And since they CAN police it, it means they can be legally forced to do it.

So what if ISPs decide that it is a security risk to visit p2pnet?
Or what if a court rules that they must block Morpheus from running on computers in their network?
Oh, and while you’re at it, why not block websites that make the government look bad.

Farfetched?
What is difficult to believe is that you can devise a way to detect
“unsecure” computers.
If you cannot objectively determine that, you have to be subjective.
Which means some guy somewhere decides what must be blocked.