Re: [Full-Disclosure] IE Web Browser: "Sitting Duck"

From: Barry Fitzgerald (bkfsec_at_sdf.lonestar.org)
Date: 07/07/04

  • Next message: Andrew Poodle: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE Web Browser: "Sitting Duck"" 
    To: joe <mvp@joeware.net>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 09:55:50 -0400

    joe wrote:

    >It is a core component of the current Windows UI, this is not the same as
    >being a core component of Windows. Explorer is simply a UI shell that sits
    >on the operating system known as Windows. The entire shell is replaceable
    >and has been for a long time, since at least Win3.1.
    >
    >
    >

    I appreciate the technical explanation even though I knew, well, all and
    more of it.

    You probably could have saved some time if you had read my relatively
    short message fully and seen that I did acknowledge that IE is not part
    of the kernel (which is really what you're trying to say) and that it's
    a part of MS Windows as a software distribution. I'm fully aware that
    you can replace the shell in windows.

    However, IE and the windows UI is a part of MS Windows as a software
    distribution and it's an essential part. I dare say that if you remove
    the UI and DLLs of MS Windows, all you have left is a relatively crappy
    kernel with a lot of software that won't work.

    The MS Windows UI and Internet Explorer are a core part of the MS
    Windows operating system. When you remove them, you break compatibility
    with many of the available programs and I'd venture to say that
    Microsoft would not support a highly modified system like the ones that
    you're describing.

    One can remove the Glibc from any GNU/Linux distribution. I wish them
    luck trying to run programs that are dynamically linked.

    Is the Glibc a core part of Linux the kernel? Of course not.

    Is the Glibc a core part of the GNU/Linux OS distribution? Yes, it is.

    I think that for all of the technical explanations that you've given,
    you're losing the argument on one simple phrase: software distribution.

                    -Barry

    p.s. Come on people. We went through the "what does an OS really
    constitute?" argument back in like 1996. This isn't bloody kindergarten.

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

  • Next message: Andrew Poodle: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] IE Web Browser: "Sitting Duck""

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: More Microsoft updates!
      ... Windows also is a distro of a kernel, some core utilities, a default ... patches/updates/problems than any Linux distribution. ... "not so bad" statement is patently FALSE when a level comparison is ...
      (comp.security.misc)
    • Re: Scalable processor support
      ... I'm saying that Windows XP Home supports Multicore processors such as the Intel Core 2 Duo or its AMD counterparts on a single socket. ... OEM don't provide a upgrade path option so driver package implementation is very time consuming. ... WinXP is designed to install and upgrade the existing operating system while simultaneously preserving your applications and data, and translating as many personalized settings as possible. ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
    • Re: Upgrading
      ... I have 3 hard drives, which I plan to transfer to the new rig. ... Running Windows 2000 Professional. ... GHz Core 2 Duo ... Some sort of PCI-Express video card. ...
      (alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt)
    • Re: what IA-32, IA-64 and intel 64 are
      ... Does 32-bit version of Windows OS only run on IA-32 CPU based PC? ... Memory Limits for Windows Releaseshttp://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx ... and some are quad core, meaning it is like having two or four processors, ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
    • Re: new to Fedora Core 4
      ... > Utilities 2002 be compatible with Fedora Core 4? ... > Windows XP, can I copy and paste it from my cd to this operating system? ...
      (Fedora)