[Rick in attack mode! I always enjoy his comments.
My favourite is still 'America's NERF-Based Security:
Reassurance Through Illusion, Rhetoric, and Fear-Mongering'
http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2001-09.html WEN]

Microsoft Makes An Offer You Can't Refuse
http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2002-09.html

Richard F. Forno
(c) 2002 - Permission granted to reproduce with appropriate credit.

Microsoft Makes An Offer You Can't Refuse

Article #2002-09

30 June 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This week, Microsoft released a much-needed security patch to fix critical
vulnerabilities in the Windows Media Player (WMP). Thanks to some enterprising
geeks taking the time to read the End-User License Agreement (EULA) accompanying
the fix, it became known that the patch did far more than simply remedy the
latest Microsoft security problem. In essence, the WMP security 'fix' contains a
Trojan Horse that few know about, since people seldom read software licenses -
but ultimately become bound by them by installing and using the software.

Instead of users being in-charge of their computers and information, the
software giant wants to reverse that paradigm, using terms like 'Secure Content'
and 'Trustworthy Computing' as feel-good pseudonyms for 'enslavement' and
'indentured servitude.'

As this Register article notes, users desiring to close this latest security
holes in WMP must also agree to allow Microsoft to install Digital Rights
Management software (copy prevention controls) on their computers, and agree
that Microsoft may update such features from time to time or even disable other
software on their computers at some point. (That last point is rather vague, and
could mean disabling anything from viruses to software from Microsoft
competitors.)

It's like Ford issuing the recall for the Firestone tires shipped on its
vehicles, and maintaining a policy that any vehicle owner getting their tires
replaced (thus increasing their safety) must agree to use Ford-brand gasoline
and allow Ford to approve where, when, and on what roads they may drive their
vehicle. Otherwise, they are free to drive anywhere they like on Firestone
tires, but are on their own if something bad happens. The only kicker is, this
isn't conveyed to Ford customers in an easily-noticed and understandable fashion
before the work gets done....so owners are bound by the new policy by unwitting
default.

Remember that Microsoft has a history of re-writing the English language to suit
its own purposes and agenda. Once again, we are witnessing Microsoft as the
ultimate social engineer, this time crafting an elaborate and
potentially-criminal Catch-22 for its customers, capitalizing on its own product
and business shortcomings and heralded by its proprietary interpretations of
modern industry buzzwords like 'security', 'trustworthiness,' and 'secure
content.'

Users should expect their software to be secure and robust at the time of
purchase, and for vendors to take responsibility for effectively fixing problems
as they are discovered, without attaching strings or legal conditions or
surreptitiously-modifying things. Unfortunately, as of this week, for Windows
users to receive this expected level of service, they must begin relinquishing
positive control of their computers and information, and potentially submit to
third-party restrictions on how they may legally use their systems in the form
of Digital Rights Management functionality. (Richard Stallman's short essay "The
Right To Read" comes to mind here.)

After all, just last week the entertainment industry was in support of proposed
legislation providing them legal protection while they disrupt and attack (e.g.,
"hack and crack") anyone they deem is violating their copyrights on peer-to-peer
environments under an innocuous-sounding term of 'technical self-help.'
Collusion with  - or the support of - Microsoft would make that quite
convenient. You can forget privacy and security as well; your needs and desires
are subordinate to those of the faceless industry cartels and the re-election
interests of various officials in Congress.

Consider similar 'protection' initiatives in neighborhoods controlled by
organized crime syndicates. Residents and shop owners are 'strongly encouraged'
to pay a recurring tribute to powerful people who in-turn insure that homes and
shops are 'safe' from crime. Those refusing or failing to pay such tribute soon
find themselves victims of increased criminal activity in the neighborhood --
but strangely, upon paying their tribute, the crime stops!

The same can be said of Microsoft in the early days of Windows. Remember how
early versions Microsoft Windows tricked users of competing DR-DOS into
switching to MS-DOS by intentionally generating fake error messages and random
crashes when it ran on anything but MS-DOS? Ironically, upon running Windows on
MS-DOS after dumping DR-DOS, these particular problems vanished immediately.

Given this latest tidbit, coupled with the "Palladium" concept from last week
and various legislative proposals, one wonders if Microsoft isn't purposely
manufacturing problems (or capitalizing on their legacy of exploit-prone
software) to help facilitate such Draconian controls over users and their
information to protect its market and defacto technical dominance, not to
mention the ability of Hollywood cartels to influence society by enacting an
techno-legal dictatorship over all electronic content, media, and devices?

A friend recently suggested that Microsoft is a prime example of 'capitalism
gone bad' - noting that the company embodies every manipulative, avaricious,
socially-indifferent negative stereotype of capitalism that Marx and Engels, in
what until now has been widely regarded as their paranoid schizophrenia,
envisioned over a hundred years ago.  Come to think of it, Microsoft seems to
have as its eventual goal the reversal of every advance in consumer rights and
fair trade philosophy that has been so laboriously won during the last century
and a half of true innovation, seeking to partner with whoever is willing to
join in its exploitative efforts.

Want your Windows system to have protection from hackers, crackers, and crashes?
Better fork over your tribute and sacrifice your independence to Redmond -
otherwise you stand an increased chance of experiencing 'problems' of one sort
or other, either from external cyber-criminals or Microsoft, acting alone or on
behalf of its partners in the entertainment industry. Such actions might be what
the legal community calls racketeering, or at the very least, conspiracy to
commit extortion.

Are we witnessing the rebirth of Microsoft as a 'family-oriented business' --
with Steve Ballmer serving as both President and Capo de Tutti Capi?

See also
The Microsoft-English Dictionary 1.5
http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2001-04.html




IWS INFOCON Mailing List
@ IWS - The Information Warfare Site
http://www.iwar.org.uk


Reply via email to