Jump to content

Does Microsoft Need a New Source Code for the Future?


Recommended Posts

Posted

I want to start a new topic on this because the Biometrics debate has gotten

too long. I will now post Chris Quirke, MVPs reply to me about my thinking

the 9x (98 Second Edition) should be part of the internal Defense Network of

this source code.

 

Chris Quirke, MVP says:

 

I think we have the same ideas, but weigh things differently and

reach different conclusions - you see the 9x code base itself as

being something to be preserved at all costs, where I see the

factors that make the 9x code base safer in certain respects as

something that should inform other code base development.

 

An interesting point from the article I linked for you, was the

difference between deeply re-architecting an existing code base,

and starting a new code base from scratch. I'd have though such

deep design change to be as disruptive as re-coding from scratch,

but apparently this is not the case. If that's so, then it may be

practical to re-architect the NT code base as a true stand-alone

OS, which keeps networking out of the center as an discardable

subsystem should unexpected risks demand that response.

 

I put it this way; exposed code surfaces are like points of wear

in a car. You don't merge piston rings into pistons (or brake

shoes into axles) so that when these parts get worn, they are

easy to replace. Same thing with code surfaces; you may have

to suddenly amputate or replace them, so don't embed them in

the core of how the OS works.

 

For example, an OS should be able to wipe its own butt without

RPC, and/or not expose RPC to network surfaces (especially

the Internet). It shouldn't rely on RPC to do internal things, weld

this into Internet exposure, and then rely on a firewall as a band

aid over this clickless, remotable risk surface.

Guest S. Pidgorny
Posted

G'day:

 

"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:9FE39DA9-023E-49AE-9D5A-3D78E30372BA@microsoft.com...

<span style="color:blue">

> I think we have the same ideas, but weigh things differently and

> reach different conclusions - you see the 9x code base itself as

> being something to be preserved at all costs, where I see the

> factors that make the 9x code base safer in certain respects as

> something that should inform other code base development.</span>

 

Windows 3.1/9x code base is now dead. Everything is NT. Not sure about

mobile devices but will not be surprised with XP as the base for Windows

Mobile next version.

<span style="color:blue">

> For example, an OS should be able to wipe its own butt without

> RPC, and/or not expose RPC to network surfaces (especially

> the Internet). It shouldn't rely on RPC to do internal things, weld

> this into Internet exposure, and then rely on a firewall as a band

> aid over this clickless, remotable risk surface.</span>

 

RPC is as good (or bad, depending on your by-default attitude) as any other

IPC. I can disable RPC in Windows and still run software, but I see no

reason to.

 

--

Svyatoslav Pidgorny, MS MVP - Security, MCSE

-= F1 is the key =-

 

http://sl.mvps.org http://msmvps.com/blogs/sp

Posted

Windows 9x may be dead somewhat to Microsoft but it is alive and kicking

everywhere else with Mozilla still supporting it with their web browser as

well as AVG 7.5 supporting it as well. People do not realize how stable it

has become.

 

Heck, 98 Second Edition for me is more stable than XP Professional. Vista

while it is stable enough for me still suffers somewhat with compatibility

issues. However, Vista is indeed tops with external security. However,

Windows 9x has the internal safety and less surface area to attack because it

does not have the services that XP has and XP likes to throw all the

information back compared to 98 Second Edition which is a lot quieter and

runs really well on older PC's. You talk about a great opportunity for all

those used computers that cannot run XP and why not have them run 98SE

instead of being tossed in the landfill. I am sure there are many people

around the world that would see having a computer as a great luxury.

 

Thanks for replying though and I appreciate your views and I already know

about the end of life software date of July 11, 2006. BTW, did you know this

fact on the Microsoft 98 Second Edition page:

 

http://support.microsoft.com/ph/1139

 

Last Review : February 28, 2008

 

It sounds like Microsoft does care for 98 Second Edition users like myself

who are looking into ways for the company to expand and explore new avenues

into the future of information technology. Microsoft is really great about

supporting their legacy users and I feel that Microsoft has a much better

track record of caring than say Apple who thinks their products are, oh so

great, that Apple can charge a huge premium for them when Apples are based

upon open source code anyway.

 

You talk about how ironic that is. Furthermore, Bill Gates and Microsoft

are the bad guys in many people's eyes but that is simply not true because

Microsoft is gladly willing to help its users and Bill Gates is now working

to make the world a better place for people who have limited opportunities

and are starving and sick with Aids and Malaria through his Foundation.

 

So you see that Windows 9x is not truly dead. The reason being is that it

still has life in it and why do you think Microsoft has not sold the 9x

source code if it is useless. The great thing about 9x is that it is

compatibility with older software and games and uses MS-DOS as a maintenance

operating system compared to Vista.

I am using 98 Second Edition as I post back to you and it never seems to

have any issues anymore as long as you don't use too much ram.

 

I use 512 megabytes of ram with it and editted the system.ini to recognize

less and have a 256 megabyte ATI video card. Nope, it is Windows XP Service

Pack 3 that is having the issues right now with people having trouble getting

updates for it without the proper patch to register the .dlls again. In

addition, Windows Vista has great external security but lacks the internal

safety of a 9x operating system.

 

I use XP Professional in a dual-boot on the same machine on a seperate hard

drive. It is NTFS file system compared to the Fat32 file system of 98 Second

Edition.

 

The thing is when the APS domain was hacked into last summer (2007), the

hacker(s) got into the XP Professional side of my machine because the

external security of the network was destroyed. However, I was also using

VPN to link with the Intranet of the APS domain and 9x did not get hacked

because it has internal safety of a smaller surface area, no rpc, a true

maintenance operating system of MS-DOS, etc. So you can see how 9x machines

were meant to be stand alone. In this ever increasing digital age, I am

surprised that more home consumers do not rise up and demand another 9x

operating system to be able to be more stand-a-lone and not report in to

their boss and/or the government all of the time. Are people really that

willing to give up their precious freedoms to others and end up having the

equivalent of a network computer that does not have an essence of its own

individuality.

 

It surprises that so many people do not see this and the coming danger of

willing to have just one easily hackable source code out there. You must

have a comprehensive internal safety and external security solution with

closed and open source technologies available from Microsoft and others to

make the best operating systems out there possible and to help mitigate any

incoming threats that may want to harm the Matrix FrameWork and Subsystems of

the Network.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"S. Pidgorny <MVP>" wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> G'day:

>

> "Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

> news:9FE39DA9-023E-49AE-9D5A-3D78E30372BA@microsoft.com...

> <span style="color:green">

> > I think we have the same ideas, but weigh things differently and

> > reach different conclusions - you see the 9x code base itself as

> > being something to be preserved at all costs, where I see the

> > factors that make the 9x code base safer in certain respects as

> > something that should inform other code base development.</span>

>

> Windows 3.1/9x code base is now dead. Everything is NT. Not sure about

> mobile devices but will not be surprised with XP as the base for Windows

> Mobile next version.

> <span style="color:green">

> > For example, an OS should be able to wipe its own butt without

> > RPC, and/or not expose RPC to network surfaces (especially

> > the Internet). It shouldn't rely on RPC to do internal things, weld

> > this into Internet exposure, and then rely on a firewall as a band

> > aid over this clickless, remotable risk surface.</span>

>

> RPC is as good (or bad, depending on your by-default attitude) as any other

> IPC. I can disable RPC in Windows and still run software, but I see no

> reason to.

>

> --

> Svyatoslav Pidgorny, MS MVP - Security, MCSE

> -= F1 is the key =-

>

> http://sl.mvps.org http://msmvps.com/blogs/sp

>

>

>

> </span>

Guest S. Pidgorny
Posted

G'day:

 

"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:55349169-F536-4137-B4A3-

<span style="color:blue">

> So you see that Windows 9x is not truly dead. The reason being is that it

> still has life in it and why do you think Microsoft has not sold the 9x

> source code if it is useless.</span>

 

I didn't say that Windows 9x is dead, or that the code is useless. I said

the codebase is dead - in a sense that there is no active development on the

code base. Why it is not sold, or made open - I don't know, and cannot

speculate.

<span style="color:blue">

> The thing is when the APS domain was hacked into last summer (2007), the

> hacker(s) got into the XP Professional side of my machine because the

> external security of the network was destroyed. However, I was also using

> VPN to link with the Intranet of the APS domain and 9x did not get hacked

> because it has internal safety of a smaller surface area, no rpc, a true

> maintenance operating system of MS-DOS, etc.</span>

 

The reason your internal network wasn't hacked is not that Windows 95

doesn't have RPC. In targeted attacks, platform switch doesn't stop

intruders who usualy collect credentials and go from there.

<span style="color:blue">

> So you can see how 9x machines

> were meant to be stand alone. In this ever increasing digital age, I am

> surprised that more home consumers do not rise up and demand another 9x

> operating system to be able to be more stand-a-lone and not report in to

> their boss and/or the government all of the time. Are people really that

> willing to give up their precious freedoms to others and end up having the

> equivalent of a network computer that does not have an essence of its own

> individuality.</span>

 

Nonsense, Slashdot-style.

 

--

Svyatoslav Pidgorny, MS MVP - Security, MCSE

-= F1 is the key =-

 

http://sl.mvps.org http://msmvps.com/blogs/sp

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:39:19 -0700, Dan wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> Windows 9x may be dead somewhat to Microsoft but it is alive and kicking

> everywhere else with Mozilla still supporting it with their web browser as

> well as AVG 7.5 supporting it as well. People do not realize how stable it

> has become.</span>

 

Just because some application vendor's products run on Windows 9x still

does not mean they are supporting it. If a vulnerability is discovered in

the OS, the app vendors are not about to provide a patch for it. Windows 9x

is no more stable now than when it was originally released.<span style="color:blue">

>

> Heck, 98 Second Edition for me is more stable than XP Professional. Vista

> while it is stable enough for me still suffers somewhat with compatibility

> issues. However, Vista is indeed tops with external security. However,

> Windows 9x has the internal safety and less surface area to attack because it

> does not have the services that XP has and XP likes to throw all the

> information back compared to 98 Second Edition which is a lot quieter and

> runs really well on older PC's.</span>

 

Compared to Vista and XP, Windows 9x has almost no "internal security"

which is a false term in the first place.

<span style="color:blue">

> You talk about a great opportunity for all

> those used computers that cannot run XP and why not have them run 98SE

> instead of being tossed in the landfill. I am sure there are many people

> around the world that would see having a computer as a great luxury. </span>

 

 

Since the discussion is about security, the above has nothing at all to do

with the topic at hand.

<span style="color:blue">

>

> Thanks for replying though and I appreciate your views and I already know

> about the end of life software date of July 11, 2006. BTW, did you know this

> fact on the Microsoft 98 Second Edition page:

>

> http://support.microsoft.com/ph/1139</span>

 

 

What "fact" are you referring to? If you're referring to the end of life

date, that is well known and can be found on lots of pages on the Microsoft

web site.

<span style="color:blue">

>

> It sounds like Microsoft does care for 98 Second Edition users like myself

> who are looking into ways for the company to expand and explore new avenues

> into the future of information technology. Microsoft is really great about

> supporting their legacy users and I feel that Microsoft has a much better

> track record of caring than say Apple who thinks their products are, oh so

> great, that Apple can charge a huge premium for them when Apples are based

> upon open source code anyway. </span>

 

This makes no sense at all.

<span style="color:blue">

>

> You talk about how ironic that is. Furthermore, Bill Gates and Microsoft

> are the bad guys in many people's eyes but that is simply not true because

> Microsoft is gladly willing to help its users and Bill Gates is now working

> to make the world a better place for people who have limited opportunities

> and are starving and sick with Aids and Malaria through his Foundation.</span>

 

Again completely irrelevant.

<span style="color:blue">

>

> So you see that Windows 9x is not truly dead. The reason being is that it

> still has life in it and why do you think Microsoft has not sold the 9x

> source code if it is useless. The great thing about 9x is that it is

> compatibility with older software and games and uses MS-DOS as a maintenance

> operating system compared to Vista.

> I am using 98 Second Edition as I post back to you and it never seems to

> have any issues anymore as long as you don't use too much ram. </span>

 

Microsoft has not sold the source code because they don't sell source code.

You can assign all the motives you want to this but the bottom line is that

not selling the source code has nothing at all to do with whether or not

Microsoft thinks it is useless or not. It is Microsoft's intellectual

property and they simply don't sell it. MS DOS 4.0 was a piece of crap and

the source code hasn't been sold. MS BOB was a piece of crap and the source

code hasn't been sold.

<span style="color:blue">

>

> I use 512 megabytes of ram with it and editted the system.ini to recognize

> less and have a 256 megabyte ATI video card. Nope, it is Windows XP Service

> Pack 3 that is having the issues right now with people having trouble getting

> updates for it without the proper patch to register the .dlls again. In

> addition, Windows Vista has great external security but lacks the internal

> safety of a 9x operating system.</span>

 

Again, you have no idea what you're talking about here. You really need to

expand your horizons beyond your pet MVP. His opinions are not well

regarded in the security community.

<span style="color:blue">

>

> I use XP Professional in a dual-boot on the same machine on a seperate hard

> drive. It is NTFS file system compared to the Fat32 file system of 98 Second

> Edition. </span>

 

So?

<span style="color:blue">

>

> The thing is when the APS domain was hacked into last summer (2007), the

> hacker(s) got into the XP Professional side of my machine because the

> external security of the network was destroyed. However, I was also using

> VPN to link with the Intranet of the APS domain and 9x did not get hacked

> because it has internal safety of a smaller surface area, no rpc, a true

> maintenance operating system of MS-DOS, etc. So you can see how 9x machines

> were meant to be stand alone. In this ever increasing digital age, I am

> surprised that more home consumers do not rise up and demand another 9x

> operating system to be able to be more stand-a-lone and not report in to

> their boss and/or the government all of the time. Are people really that

> willing to give up their precious freedoms to others and end up having the

> equivalent of a network computer that does not have an essence of its own

> individuality.

>

> It surprises that so many people do not see this and the coming danger of

> willing to have just one easily hackable source code out there. You must

> have a comprehensive internal safety and external security solution with

> closed and open source technologies available from Microsoft and others to

> make the best operating systems out there possible and to help mitigate any

> incoming threats that may want to harm the Matrix FrameWork and Subsystems of

> the Network.</span>

 

Wow, you've really drunk the Chris Quirke kool-aid here and you really have

no concept of what security is all about.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

If a train station is where the train stops, what is a work station?

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

How collegial of you, Paul!

 

Paul Adare - MVP wrote:<span style="color:blue">

> ...Again, you have no idea what you're talking about here. You really need

> to

> expand your horizons beyond your pet MVP. His opinions are not well

> regarded in the security community.</span>

<snip>

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:10:47 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> How collegial of you, Paul!

>

> Paul Adare - MVP wrote:<span style="color:green">

>> ...Again, you have no idea what you're talking about here. You really need

>> to

>> expand your horizons beyond your pet MVP. His opinions are not well

>> regarded in the security community.</span>

> <snip></span>

 

The truth is what the truth is. You obviously have nothing at all to add to

the conversation at hand, which coming from you is about par for the

course.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

Nice computers don't go down.

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

Dan and I have had many fruitful discussions in the past.

 

Paul Adare - MVP wrote:<span style="color:blue">

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:10:47 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

><span style="color:green">

>> How collegial of you, Paul!

>>

>> Paul Adare - MVP wrote:<span style="color:darkred">

>>> ...Again, you have no idea what you're talking about here. You really

>>> need

>>> to

>>> expand your horizons beyond your pet MVP. His opinions are not well

>>> regarded in the security community.</span>

>> <snip></span>

>

> The truth is what the truth is. You obviously have nothing at all to add

> to

> the conversation at hand, which coming from you is about par for the

> course. </span>

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:32:35 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> Dan and I have had many fruitful discussions in the past.</span>

 

That doesn't surprise me.

Have you got nothing better to do? I'm not going to waste my time with an

off-topic discussion with you, even an on-topic discussion with you

wouldn't be a very productive use of time.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

Transistor: A sibling, opposite of transbrother.

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

Buh-bye!

 

Paul Adare - MVP wrote:<span style="color:blue">

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:32:35 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

> <span style="color:green">

>> Dan and I have had many fruitful discussions in the past.</span>

>

> That doesn't surprise me.

> Have you got nothing better to do? I'm not going to waste my time with an

> off-topic discussion with you, even an on-topic discussion with you

> wouldn't be a very productive use of time.</span>

Posted

Paul - nipping in with a question!

 

I notice that you are an MVP

 

I notice that Robear Dyer is a MS MPV

 

Does the MS make PA Bear 'special' in some way?

 

Dave

 

"Paul Adare - MVP" <pkadare@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:ypc9xklb4sqk$.twvg0n5omxof$.dlg@40tude.net...<span style="color:blue">

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:32:35 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

><span style="color:green">

>> Dan and I have had many fruitful discussions in the past.</span>

>

> That doesn't surprise me.

> Have you got nothing better to do? I'm not going to waste my time with an

> off-topic discussion with you, even an on-topic discussion with you

> wouldn't be a very productive use of time.

>

> --

> Paul Adare

> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

> http://www.identit.ca

> Transistor: A sibling, opposite of transbrother.

> </span>

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:56:52 +0100, ~BD~ wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> I notice that you are an MVP

>

> I notice that Robear Dyer is a MS MPV

>

> Does the MS make PA Bear 'special' in some way?</span>

 

Not at all. We're both Microsoft Valuable Professionals, just have

different ways of indicating that. Doesn't really make either of us

particularly special at all.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach. Those who cannot teach,

HACK!

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 02:53:09 -0400, Paul Adare - MVP wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> We're both Microsoft Valuable Professionals</span>

 

Sorry Microsoft Most Valuable Professionals.

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

Thrashing is just virtual crashing.

Posted

Thanks for answering Paul.

 

My question was rather 'tongue-in-cheek' - I should have added a style_emoticons/ or <wink> !

 

Maybe if you peruse this thread you'll have a better understanding!

Re: POSSIBLE HACK...PLEASE, PLEASE HELP! (Nine threads below this one!)

 

Dave

 

PS your correction noted .......... 'Most'

 

 

"Paul Adare - MVP" <pkadare@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1o6rdguugf8z9.gp6rzhyuy826$.dlg@40tude.net...<span style="color:blue">

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:56:52 +0100, ~BD~ wrote:

><span style="color:green">

>> I notice that you are an MVP

>>

>> I notice that Robear Dyer is a MS MPV

>>

>> Does the MS make PA Bear 'special' in some way?</span>

>

> Not at all. We're both Microsoft Valuable Professionals, just have

> different ways of indicating that. Doesn't really make either of us

> particularly special at all.

>

> --

> Paul Adare

> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

> http://www.identit.ca

> Those who can, do. Those who cannot, teach. Those who cannot teach,

> HACK!

> </span>

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 08:08:19 +0100, ~BD~ wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> Maybe if you peruse this thread you'll have a better understanding!

> Re: POSSIBLE HACK...PLEASE, PLEASE HELP! (Nine threads below this one!)</span>

 

I really have no desire to get involved in a discussion about Ahuma or any

other forum. It doesn't belong here. If you and PA have a problem with each

other then you should you take it out of here.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

This screen intentionally left blank.

Posted

You are right, of course, Paul. (You appreciate that you are PA too!! <grin>)

 

I had hoped you might have been able to respond to this item in that thread:

 

"I wonder if you can tell me why it is that if I type www.Aumha.com into my

browser address bar I'm whisked off to this URL - http://downloadprograms.biz/?rid=544620 "

 

This is a technical question and should have a straight-forward answer.

 

Dave

 

 

"Paul Adare - MVP" <pkadare@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:1ocj7u0qftf6w.18lypu7v0touz$.dlg@40tude.net...<span style="color:blue">

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 08:08:19 +0100, ~BD~ wrote:

><span style="color:green">

>> Maybe if you peruse this thread you'll have a better understanding!

>> Re: POSSIBLE HACK...PLEASE, PLEASE HELP! (Nine threads below this one!)</span>

>

> I really have no desire to get involved in a discussion about Ahuma or any

> other forum. It doesn't belong here. If you and PA have a problem with each

> other then you should you take it out of here.

>

> --

> Paul Adare

> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

> http://www.identit.ca

> This screen intentionally left blank.

> </span>

Guest Shenan Stanley
Posted

<snipped>

 

~BD~ wrote:<span style="color:blue">

> You are right, of course, Paul. (You appreciate that you are PA

> too!! <grin>)

> I had hoped you might have been able to respond to this item in

> that thread:

> "I wonder if you can tell me why it is that if I type www.Aumha.com

> into my browser address bar I'm whisked off to this URL -

> http://downloadprograms.biz/?rid=544620 "

> This is a technical question and should have a straight-forward

> answer.</span>

 

Sure - which means you could research it and discover how domain names and

such work pretty easily using Google and other fine internet search

engines - where I am sure you could find a wealth of useful information.

 

Technical questions - when meant as technical questions - have answers you

can learn the answer to from books/published works - and in the case of a

technical 'Internet' question - searching for the answer on the Internet

would be a fine place to start...

 

First thing - whois on the web page in question:

http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whoi...com&type=domain

http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/resu...omain=Aumha.com

 

Which gives you a link to:

http://search.yahoo.com/search/dir?p=AUMHA.COM

 

Which has a link to:

http://www.castlecops.com/a5944-F_Secure_W...You_Google.html

 

Which can be used to give you a timeframe for reference (Friday, 29 April

2005) although they have a site listed I know nothing about - makes me think

"typo in the warning message." However - for those who can realize that -

the search continues (unless you want to ask the non-technical question of

why "negster22" on "Friday, 29 April 2005" typed "Ahumha.org" instead of

"Aumha.org" in their posting as a warning to others?)

 

Knowing that aumha.org is the site you are referring to here (in reference

to you pointing to the following thread - the last (at this time) response

by you asking the question you repeat in partial above):

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.p...95d6909031bbe63

 

I'll get you a whois result for that web page as well:

http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whoi...org&type=domain

http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/resu...omain=Aumha.org

 

The answer may or may not be technical. My bet is very much against it

being a technical answer that you would get if anyone cared to answer - and

I fully believe you likely know that and are asking the question as nothing

more than a rub. ;-)

 

Many people own just the .net, .com or .org representation of a given web

page. Either because they see no point in owning everything, doesn't feel

like paying for all of the different names each year, etc. Personal choice.

 

If you think of it as a name (which is what it is) - then it is completely

different than any other and if someone makes a mistake with the name - that

is their bad. If I call you Boater Dan - instead of Boater Dave - my bad.

 

Now you may wish to argue that the site is an important resource and should

have all the possible names someone could accidentally put in associated

with it. However - that's not even realistic in my opinion. After all -

the first link I came up with using your query (AUMHA.COM) had some person

asking about a situation and typing the actual web page address incorrectly

by one letter - should everyone purchase all the sites one letter off from

theirs so this mistake means nothing? If I call you Boater Davie - is that

the same person even? All that is different is the second (or last) name -

same as aumha.org vs aumha.com... And by even more letters than the mistake

made on the 3 year old posting I refer to.

 

Perhaps you are just trying to point out that they should - because of what

the site is supposed to represent - at least own all the domains (last

names, if you will) that someone could use. Not realistic for a place being

ran by an individual doing this because they desire to - not for profit - in

my opinion. Consider the cost of getting all available domains... .com,

..net, .mobi, .org, .us, .us.com, .info, .tv, .cc, .bz, .biz, .co.uk, all

come to mind, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. It could get quite

expensive very quickly to own all those names.

 

Here's a link to a list of top level domains...

http://data.iana.org/TLD/tlds-alpha-by-domain.txt

Not as well kept up - but another with more information behind each:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Inter...p-level_domains

 

The .org (which the aumha.org site obviously uses) is one of the original

top-level domains. Read more about its original purpose and how that has

been modified over the years here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.org

 

Which can, specifically - lead you to this:

".org is one of the seven original "generic" Top Level Domains. It is

currently the Internet's fifth-largest TLD, with over two million

registrations worldwide. .org was originally intended as a "miscellaneous"

TLD for organizations that weren't commercial entities, educational

institutions, network providers, or governmental agencies. In recent years

registration in .org has become open and unrestricted (it will stay that way

under its new operator.)"

 

You seem to be essentially asking why the top-level domain being different

takes you to a site you did not expect to be taken to - and from your

postings, one could easily surmise you expected to be take to the one with

the .org top-level domain instead of where ever the .com top-level domain

version takes you.

 

 

The technical answer is easy:

Boater Dave and Boater Erik are different people - as denoted by their

different chosen 'surname' (if you will give the leeway that is a first and

last name.) No different here where aumha.org is different than aumha.com -

as denoted by their different top-level domain designation.

 

If you wish to go deeper and less technical - the owner of aumha.org is not

the owner of aumha.com. The owners of the two different sites have chosen

to point their individual sites to different name servers as well as have

different content. If you wish to specifically answer your question - you

must ask the proper people.

 

In this case, given your exact question wording and the information above,

specifically...

 

"I wonder if you can tell me why it is that if I type www.Aumha.com into my

browser address bar I'm whisked off to this URL -

http://downloadprograms.biz/?rid=544620 ?"

 

along with :

 

http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/resu...omain=Aumha.com

 

The answer to your 'technical' query will come from asking

domainadmin@navigationcatalyst.com - if they feel like answering why they

pointed their given web page the way they have. After all - your query is,

per the wording, about the aumha.com address - which they

(navigationcatalyst.com) own and according to the whois - administer (decide

what is done with it.)

 

 

Ask yourself if you would ask the same gist of a question while looking

through a telephone directory for a large city: "Why is it when you call

the listing for "Dave Peterson", you get a different person answering the

phone than when you call "Dave McCraw"?" ;-)

 

--

Shenan Stanley

MS-MVP

--

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Posted

Shenan - Thank you for such a comprehensive and thought-provoking answer. I

really do appreciate your guidance!

 

When I googled ............. I ended up here:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-...G=Google+Search

 

The first result is www.minscape.com If I type that into my address bar,

or follow the link, I get taken to exactly the same place as if I type in

Aumha.com. Hmmmm!

 

The fourth entry is Naive question about a URL - Malwarebytes Security

Forums posted by me to determine alternate views. You may be interested to

follow up on this.

 

My only concern is that the bad guys don't win. I believe you feel the same

way.

 

Dave

 

"Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:OLJQw3$7IHA.3624@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue">

> <snipped></span>

<snipped>

Guest Shenan Stanley
Posted

~BD~ wrote:

<snipped><span style="color:blue">

> When I googled ............. I ended up here:

> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-...G=Google+Search

>

> The first result is www.minscape.com If I type that into my

> address bar, or follow the link, I get taken to exactly the same

> place as if I type in Aumha.com. Hmmmm!</span>

<snipped>

 

The second link found in your given search (above) is more interesting to

me...

http://www.robtex.com/dns/aumha.com.html

Really lays out more detail.

 

Another link found shows that people have made this 'typo' for years...

http://forums.cnet.com/5208-7813_102-0.htm...essageID=267140

( 5/31/04 )

 

Also - this hosts file:

http://hosts-file.net/hphosts-partial.asp

Distributed by the owners of this page:

http://hosts-file.net/

 

Includes aumha.com in their list (as well as www.aumha.com) and more

information on that is something they do give:

http://hosts-file.net/?s=aumha.com

http://hosts-file.net/?s=www.aumha.com

 

Those sites were added for a specific reason to that HOSTS file...

 

"GRM - sites engaged in astroturfing otherwise known as grass roots

marketing

For full details on what constitues astroturfing, please see;

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Astroturfing"

 

In any case - hopefull you can reason out that the owner of a site has no

obligation to purchase/create every iteration of their site name -

especially when it comes to .org sites in my humble opinion and also when it

comes to top-level domain differentiation. I know many "Dave's" in my life

outside these newsgroups. When I call them up, email them, go out with

them - I'm pretty sure it is not you. ;-)

 

Another example of a good site people could type in incorrectly and get to

something they were not expecting...

http://www.betanews.com/

http://www.betanews.org/

 

 

What does it all mean? People should be more careful. ;-)

 

--

Shenan Stanley

MS-MVP

--

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Posted

How can I answer all that? <wink>

 

Here is a stab! http://www.weirdity.com/internet/eoti.html

 

Dave

 

"Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23mZVGMB8IHA.3624@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue">

> ~BD~ wrote:

> <snipped></span>

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

<plonk yet another of BoaterDave's posting aliases>

 

~BD~ wrote:<span style="color:blue">

> Shenan - Thank you for such a comprehensive and thought-provoking answer.

> I

> really do appreciate your guidance!

>

> When I googled ............. I ended up here:

> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-...G=Google+Search

>

> The first result is www.minscape.com If I type that into my address bar,

> or follow the link, I get taken to exactly the same place as if I type in

> Aumha.com. Hmmmm!

>

> The fourth entry is Naive question about a URL - Malwarebytes Security

> Forums posted by me to determine alternate views. You may be interested to

> follow up on this.

>

> My only concern is that the bad guys don't win. I believe you feel the

> same

> way.

>

> Dave

>

> "Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:OLJQw3$7IHA.3624@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<span style="color:green">

>> <snipped></span>

> <snipped> </span>

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 19:31:02 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> <plonk yet another of BoaterDave's posting aliases></span>

 

Announcing this accomplishes less than nothing. Apparently you've got

nothing better to do than to announce to BD that it is time for him to

change his From header again. As an "MS" MVP one would assume that you'd be

smarter than that. Apparently not.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

If a program is useful, it must be changed.

Guest Paul Adare - MVP
Posted

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 19:31:02 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> My only concern is that the bad guys don't win.</span>

 

Then start educating yourself and try to have at least a rudimentary

knowledge of the who the bad guys are. Redirecting ahuma.com is not a sign

of a bad guy.

 

--

Paul Adare

MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

http://www.identit.ca

Every program is a part of some other program, and rarely fits.

Guest Root Kit
Posted

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:07:59 -0400, Paul Adare - MVP

<pkadare@gmail.com> wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

>Then start educating yourself and try to have at least a rudimentary

>knowledge of the who the bad guys are. Redirecting ahuma.com is not a sign

>of a bad guy.</span>

 

Dan? .... Where are you Dan? ... An MVP's knowledge is being

questioned! - We can't have that, can we?

Posted

Robear is a really good guy and I am disappointed that Microsoft hires MVP's

like you Paul that do not live up to your name in helping the little people.

I guess you are just interested in the big bucks from the cooperations.

 

"Paul Adare - MVP" wrote:

<span style="color:blue">

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:32:35 -0400, PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

> <span style="color:green">

> > Dan and I have had many fruitful discussions in the past.</span>

>

> That doesn't surprise me.

> Have you got nothing better to do? I'm not going to waste my time with an

> off-topic discussion with you, even an on-topic discussion with you

> wouldn't be a very productive use of time.

>

> --

> Paul Adare

> MVP - Identity Lifecycle Manager

> http://www.identit.ca

> Transistor: A sibling, opposite of transbrother.

> </span>

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...