On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > And if you've kept track you'd know that the NSA had > > it's own backdoor in windows. > > My understanding was that this was disproved, some variable had been > called something beginning with NSA in Windows, and everyone instantly > thought it was an NSA back-door. Microsoft quickly denied this to > most people's satisfaction. Logically, if the NSA did want a > back-door in Windows, they are hardly going to permit any mention of > "NSA" in the code that does it! > > Ian.
This is true. but it would simplest as in the GUID wasn't noticed for a what year back. And for some company to have their hands on such a big slice of the desktop-market it isn't that hard to imagine the NSA or whatever intelligence agencie to have their way. Far as I know the NSA has an active policy on having their hands on third-party key's. All in the name of democracy. But the point keeps standing how do you garantee user anonimity, on not seriously audited OS's. Keeping in mind that windows has a fair share of the desktop-market. And for that matter security auditing is still in a premature stadium when it comes to linux ( see latest CAP_SUID problem). So not to have every user plough through their OS's source several pitfalls should be taken care of by a client or a node. What exactly i havn't figured out yet so I wont go into that.. Cheers Jigal abolish law and order anarchy rules. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000815/0be635ea/attachment.pgp>
