09.03.10
Posted in GNU/Linux, Site News at 4:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The world’s fastest supercomputer, running GNU/Linux
Summary: We deal with the old question, how many people who read Techrights use GNU/Linux?
APROPOS MARKET SHARE, SEVERAL years ago we used to publish a breakdown of operating systems extracted from readers of Techrights. We are still asked about this sometimes, but it’s not possible to carry on doing for two reasons: 1) we use a Varnish cache server to reduce load on the server, so most requests never touch the server (Apache/PHP/CMS) and are instead served quickly through a medium; 2) we don’t collect logs (except short-term, for troubleshooting purposes) as they serve nothing but privacy misuses.
“It underplays the prevalence and ubiquity of desktop GNU/Linux worldwide.”When we gauged market share in 2006-2008, around 35-40% of the readers of Techrights* used GNU/Linux (a decent proportion also used BSD). We don’t know how it stacks up anymore. It doesn’t really matter, either. What we can reluctantly deduce from this is that particular sites that don’t reach ‘usage surveys’ (privacy nightmare) tend to congregate privacy-aware and computer-savvy individuals. It underplays the prevalence and ubiquity of desktop GNU/Linux worldwide.
In other site news, yesterday Techrights climbed to 924th place in Netcraft traffic ranks. We have also transitioned the IRC channels to syndicate through Identi.ca rather than Twitter (due to the OAuth fiasco). █
____
* Known just as “Boycott Novell” at the time, before it became one among several parts.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
08.28.10
Posted in Site News at 5:32 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Novell takes the blow investors have been expecting for a while; S&P is downgrading Novell and analysts are concerned amid takeover expectations
NOVELL keeps looking for a way out of the mess it’s in. Novell news got dominated by financial writings, mostly negative ones. S&P is downgrading Novell. It also downgraded Microsoft recently.
The report says: “Standard & Poor’s analyst Jim Yin this morning cut his rating on Novell (NOVL) to Sell from Hold after the company’s disappointing July quarter results after the close yesterday.”
Another new article says that “Novell Inc. Falls Short of Analyst Expectation” and adds: “We’ll have to see if this negative announcement hurts NOVL’s stock price in the near term. NOVL has lost -0.08 percent during the past month and is currently above its 200-day moving average.”
Here is some Novell coverage which came before the results [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12] and some of the coverage which came afterwards [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20]. Novell’s stock took a dive, which some people took advantage of. The dive would have been worse had Novell not warned about poor results in advance. We have already covered these results twice before [1, 2]. Here are some numbers broken down by areas of operation:
Revenue from the Security, Management and Operating Platforms division, which includes the Linux business, fell from $110 million to $108 million. The Collaboration division had revenues of $69 million, a good $11 million less than in the previous year.
More recently these results were also covered in:
A site filled with Microsoft boosters said, “Hey, Novell: No News is Bad News”
When pressed on the issue during last night’s earnings call, Novell treasurer Rob Kain waved it away: “As soon as the Board has reached a conclusion, we will make a public statement on it.” This is the second quarterly report since the failed buyout offer, and we’re all still in the dark.
To Novell’s credit, investors seem to have plenty of patience for the process. Share prices have wavered around the original buyout price, give or take about 10%. That’s a much higher level than where the stock was trading before this drama started. Still, I’d like to remind CEO Ron Hovsepian and his team that not every play for a higher bid works out as planned.
Could VMware buy Novel as several sources have been guessing for months [1, 2]? It is said by Egbert that Novell’s secrecy is not helping:
“We remain concerned over management’s silence in relation to the company’s strategic review process. The prolonged process is weighing on sales. We think management is focused on selling the company, but as time goes by, the original offer of $5.75 is becoming increasingly attractive,” said Katherine Egbert, an analyst at Jefferies.
Piper Jaffray is just neutral on Novell. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
08.21.10
Posted in Site News at 11:55 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: The crossing of another milestone and return to normal posting pace
This is post #11,001 in Techrights. We are currently catching up with Microsoft news for the most part. Normal operation will hopefully resume tomorrow after an on-off affair in recent days. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
08.18.10
Posted in Site News at 5:51 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Joint effort of Free(dom) software supporters has paid off
Summary: Techrights is ranked 951st in Netcraft
TECHRIGHTS is delighted to announce that it has finally reached the goal of being ranked among the top 1000 sites as measured by Netcraft traffic ranks (biased in favour of UNIX/Linux). It took almost 4 years to achieve. For comparison’s sake, Techrights is now ranked 951st, LXer is ranked 6954th, LinuxToday is 1264th, Groklaw is 1321st, TuxMachines is 3095th, Phoronix is 3466th, Debian is 2291st, Ubuntu is 826th, Novell is 1581st, and Google is 2nd. A lot of the traffic served by Techrights comes from links to our 10,981 blog posts, hundreds of Wiki pages that mostly help organise/group those posts, but especially from blog subscribers (the full content RSS feed is served hundreds of thousands of times per month). These is no substitute for insightful regular readers who we hope will continue to contribute. It’s only readership that gives the site a reason to carry on investigating and coverage improves as time goes by because more ground gets covered.
In recent days we’ve expanded our real-time communication activities (IRC) to more channels and managed to post daily links on a more regular basis. These accumulations of links are the most popular posts and the vast majority of communication takes place in IRC, which makes interaction by many people very rapid. There will soon be an article about Techrights in a printed magazine. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
08.10.10
Posted in Site News at 11:25 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Techrights is trying to make IRC logs look right, with less obscenity and more focus
TODAY will be a slow day at Techrights because we are re-organising the IRC channels and the way logs are posted. Stay tuned for a new format and a division that makes the IRC channels more topic-focused. We have also begun drafting a policy for the IRC channels because someone in the #boycottnovell channel was abusing Jono Bacon and this does not need to be tolerated (regulars protested and said there need to be rules).
As always, it helps to remind that the content of IRC logs (and comments) should not be treated as the site’s views to which yours truly can be made liable. We are open to many views, but responsibility for their expression (at times it gets vile) is another matter altogether. Freedom of speech is a top priority, but when speech becomes a weapon, then someone ought to blow the whistle and moderate. It’s a rarity anyway. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.28.10
Posted in Site News at 1:46 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Translation of last week’s talk about threats to software freedom
I
was delighted to see that some people found the 2-hour talk, which I prepared in the train on my Palm PDA (with external keyboard), valuable enough to translate it.
One reader of Techrights has kindly produced an ODP version and PDF version of the talk, as some people had requested it. He also produced a Spanish translation of it (contents as plain text below).
- Present and future threats to software freedom [ODP, PDF]
- Presente y futuras amenazas a la libertad del software [ODP, PDF]
Feel free to reuse these and teach others to keep software free (libre). █
Manchester Software Libre
Presente y futuras amenazas a la libertad del software
Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Universidad de Manchester
La libertad del software que usamos constantemente se enfrenta a retos que hay que reconocer con el fin de hacerles frente. En esta presentación, varios de ellos se destacan y son unos pocos ejemplos proporcionados.
Son diapositivas minimalistas para no distraer y animar a más interacciones Por favor, no interrumpir al orador, pero hagan preguntas
Hoy estamos sacando las consideraciones técnicas fuera del tema.
En su lugar …
No nos sorprende saber que los meritos tecnicos de por sí solas no garantizan la victoria
Temas de desafíos (con las intersecciones entre ellas):
1. Marco legal
2. Software filosofía
3. Competencia
Información general
Marco legal
* La legislación del gobierno
* Las patentes de software
* Contratación
normas *
Visión de conjunto – CTD.
Software filosofía
* Paradigmas de negocios (como la adquisición en comparación con el apoyo y mantenimiento)
* Escasez artificial frente a la abundancia
* Conceptos erróneos acerca de la transparencia
* Exclusiones (por motivos ético-político)
Visión de conjunto – CTD.
Competencia
* Publicidad
* Agrupación
* Sistemas heredados / lock-in
conflictos de intereses *
Gobierno legislación
* Distribución del presupuesto y asignación (más sobre esto más adelante)
* Criptografía de exportación
* DMCA contra el descifrado
* ACTA
* Grupos de presión
tratados Transnacional
DMCA – sofoca la ingeniería inversa, el acceso a los medios de comunicación, copia de seguridad, el intercambio, la piratería
ACTA – derechos de autor, patentes, y potencialmente usuarios de Internet en seguimiento (agrupados con la lucha de la medicina falsa)
Las patentes de software
* Las patentes de software sólo es válido en algunos países, pero existen lagunas (ambigüedad “como tal”)
* En Europa, la legalización formal de la reforma solicitada por los nombres diferentes (unificación / armonización / UPLS / Patente Comunitaria)
Sistemas piramidales
* Acaparadores de patentes (por ejemplo, Intellectual Ventures)
* Cruce de licencias (vendedores), las piscinas (por ejemplo, RPX)
Las patentes de software – CTD.
Patentes ofertas
* Secreto, se trata de excluir la competencia
* No revele información sobre patentes reales (el método OCS)
* Los beneficios económicos a los titulares de patentes no importa la elección de los productos comprados (monopolio frente a la ejecución)
Ejemplos de casos de patentes contra Linux
* Apple vs Android / HTC
* Apple amenaza a Palm patente (ahora HP)
* El caso de Apple, Nokia puede incluir Maemo / Meego
* Acacia contra Red Hat, Novell
* Microsoft contra Linux distribuidores (por ejemplo, TomTom)
* OIN defiende “buenas” las patentes de software, sofoca abolishers de las patentes del software
Papel de Novell
* Génesis de las denuncias de patentes contra Linux – mayo-noviembre de 2006 (Novell se acercó a Microsoft)
* Reacción en “Boicot a Novell” campaña (ahora parte de Techrights)
* Novell cuenta con gran cartera de patentes de software (el más alto por empleado), en su mayoría vende software propietario
* Habilitar el dominio de APIs de Microsoft (por ejemplo, Mono, Moonlight)
Papel de Novell – CTD.
* La oferta de “paz IP mental” como propuesta de valor añadido
* FUD (miedo, incertidumbre y duda) – componente visible y oculto / componente implícito
* Solución: recompensa para un comportamiento razonable, denunciar la conducta contraproducente
Obtención
* Tradición versus la novedad
* Proveedores y “puertas giratorias”
* La falta de licitación
* Dependencias dentro del sistema existente
* La asignación presupuestaria depende de las expectativas
Normas
* De hecho, en comparación real
* Organismos de coacción de las normas
* Documentación
* Unilaterales mejoras
Negocios paradigmas
* La distribución gratuita
* Igual que el propietario (gratis / dumping)
* Permite el intercambio de apoyo y mantenimiento (servicios) con base en la habilidad, la escasez
* Barrera: analogías que implica “comunismo”, “virus”, “no fiable”, etc
Conceptos erróneos de código fuente
* Una mayor transparencia mejora el control, la calidad del código
* Posibilidad de copiar (Plurk)
* Código compartido de responsabilidad (no hay más seguro que muchos EULAs)
* Ejecución de los pedidos educados para el cumplimiento, los asentamientos
Publicidad / Fútbol Base / AstroTurf
* Sobre todo amoral o inmoral por naturaleza
* OEM recomendaciones son anuncios
* El valor percibido
* PR organismos manipular periodistas (regalos, las burlas, el acoso a través de editores)
* Monitoreo de la reputación, por ejemplo, en la Wikipedia
* Agentes contratados (a través de agencias periféricas) para burlarse de la competencia
Bundling
* Supresión de la elección
* Percepción de la integración del mercado (monocultivo)
* La insistencia de que los clientes exigen lo que están obligados a recibir
* Aumento de la dependencia del mercado a través de ISV
* Navegador / system/x86 operativo …
Los sistemas legados / lock-in
* Con la ayuda de agrupación
* Sistema interconectado con otros sistemas
* Diseñado para elevar las barreras de salida
* Diferentes bloqueo en capas: Hardware / arquitectura, base de datos, formatos de archivo, los procesos de negocio …
Los conflictos de intereses
* Recursos Humanos (HR) expedirá
* Empresa que compra contrata de la compañía que vende
* Empresa que asesora a contrata de la compañía que compra / vende
* Relaciones interpersonales Popular / preferencias / hábitos / dogma no cambian durante la noche
* La cultura corporativa depende de la dirección y los accionistas
* El proteccionismo, los planes para un futuro después de salir / retirarse
Barrera Ejemplo # 1
Suscripción como parte obligatoria del modelo de negocio – “empresa” y “comunidad” Edición
Propietario requisitos previos
Barrera Ejemplo # 2
* Adquisición de la investigación sesgada
“Mentiras, malditas mentiras y estadísticas”
* Publicidad / contratos en parte diseñados para los conflictos de intereses
* Colocación de las figuras y los métodos de resultados que exige
* Hay que pagar el impuesto “analista” – altos presupuestos necesarios para influir en el consenso
Barrera Ejemplo # 3
Soborno, Memorando de Entendimiento (“Proyecto Mariscal “)
Barrera Ejemplo # 4
* Falsificación spin
* EDGI (detalles en Comes vs Microsoft)
“Ellos se van a volver adictos, y entonces vamos a encontrar la manera de que pagen en la próxima década.”
-Bill Gates
“Es más fácil para nuestro software para competir con Linux cuando hay piratería que cuando no hay.”
-Bill Gates
Lobo con piel de oveja
* KHTML frente WebKit
* Las empresas creado / dirigido por el ex ejecutivos de Microsoft generar dinero de GPL FUD, y añadió la dependencia de software propietario
* Licencias de software que Microsoft controla
* Juntas y conferencias apiladas por las compañías de software propietario en “Open Source” banner
Mensajes para llevar a casa
* Los obstáculos técnicos se imponen a servir como defensores de los puntos fuertes de software propietario
* Despiadado, el comportamiento abrasivo recompensado
* La riqueza otorga facultades a las decisiones de impacto, la percepción, la ley
* Educación para destacar estas cuestiones
* Pruebas que deben aportarse para una respuesta eficaz (por ejemplo, exhibe verificable tribunal, exponiendo citas inadecuado, el amiguismo)
Techrights.org acumula y organiza la información, las iniciativas de campañas de sensibilización
Discusión
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.27.10
Posted in Microsoft, Security, Servers, Site News, Windows at 11:27 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Our server has been under some kind of attack for the past day and a half, but we promise/vow to increase our posting pace rather than slow down as a result
IT IS within our capacity to make more posts in this Web site and due to disruptors we will publish more.
By “disruptors” we refer to bots that hammer on our server constantly in big amounts, since 10AM (GMT) yesterday. If you were unable to reach the Web site at times, this is why. Earlier today we suffered a 3-hour downtime because of that nuisance and although it would not quite qualify as DDOS in the full sense*, it has exactly the same effect (even though we suffered some really heavy DDOS attacks last year, lasting days).
“If you were unable to reach the Web site at times, this is why.”We try not spend so much time discussing it as it only feeds agitators and encourages them. In fact, this will be the last post which mentions this subject. There are more worthy news to focus on. We have always gotten past technical difficulties at the end.
If anything, all this obnoxious ordeal we’ve had since yesterday morning will motivate rather than demoralise. We won’t be stopped by such trash. If someone is trying to impede this Web site’s operation/speech, it will only make things worse for that someone.
Speaking of Windows zombies, watch how people’s pockets are being emptied because of Trojan horses for Windows.
Trojan horses that were planted onto the victims’ computers would generate a fake error message and request that the victim re-enter the authorization code. This way, amounts up to €4,000 were transferred to money mules and thence to Eastern Europe. The worrying part is that many cases were never reported to the police, because the bank preferred to refund the money to the victim rather than risking its reputation. The extent of this type of fraud is unknown.
These people lose a lot more than access to their Web site. What is the true damage caused by Windows? Some say trillions of dollars [1, 2]. █
______
* The bots actually identify themselves as Microsoft bots for the most part (far fewer of Yahoo! and anything else, but mostly fake Microsoft bots with forged user-agent strings that don’t make sense). We do filter out what we can, but sometimes the load takes Apache out of commission.
Permalink
Send this to a friend
07.26.10
Posted in Microsoft, Security, Site News, Windows at 8:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Technical problems all day today (so far) are caused by bots that identify themselves as “MSIE 4.01; Windows NT; MS Search 6.0 Robot”
MICROSOFT KEEPS reminding us why it is cancer on the Web. For about 5 hours thus far today we have had our server hardly capable of serving pages. Microsoft bots keep hammering on it and there is no simple solution to this. We occasionally have problems with Windows zombies (sometimes lasting days and forcing us to move between hosts), but so do many other Web sites, including goodbyemicrosoft.net. Earlier today we found out more about those zombie attacks goodbyemicrosoft.net has been subjected to for weeks. Interestingly enough, in the latest post which discusses this ongoing issue the administrator of goodbyemicrosoft.net points out that Microsoft bought goodbyemicrosoft.com. That’s right. And the zombie attacks on goodbyemicrosoft.net have been so persistent and long that its owner considered just shutting it down.
But now I’ve invested some time in it, so I don’t want to just shut it down. Hence the search for a new domain name. goodbyemicrosoft.com was taken, so I registered goodbyemicrosoft.org. (Not yet active…give me a few weeks.)
Then I began to wonder…was goodbyemicrosoft.com a kindred spirit? Visiting that web address just returns a Bing search page, so I figured the domain had been registered and parked. So I decided to try a whois search, where I found the owner is:
Domain Administrator
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond WA 98052
US
In other Windows vulnerabilities news, this week we have:
i. Spy rootkit goes after key Indian, Iranian systems
Sophisticated malicious software which infects critical infrastructure systems is spreading in the wild, according to security companies.
ii. Internet Worm Targets SCADA
Stuxnet is a new Internet worm that specifically targets Siemens WinCC SCADA systems: used to control production at industrial plants such as oil rigs, refineries, electronics production, and so on. The worm seems to uploads plant info (schematics and production information) to an external website. Moreover, owners of these SCADA systems cannot change the default password because it would cause the software to break down.
iii. Stuxnet malware threat continues, targets control systems
The recently discovered Stuxnet malware, which takes advantage of a zero-day Microsoft Windows Shell vulnerability, is being used in targeted attacks to penetrate industrial control systems, particularly in the United States, according to security researchers.
Microsoft is cancer on the Web and until it fixes its broken operating system (it probably won’t ever happen) webmasters will continue to live in fear and agony (the agony of having to waste valuable time dealing with Windows bots). We believe we may have found a temporary way of filtering out the junk (screenshot below), but it takes a lot of time and bots find ways around the limitations that also block genuine requests (update: and at the moment of posting the hammering/attacks resume again). In another site of mine I had to change files/addresses in order to escape months of traffic abuse/DDOS against the Wiki — abuse which cost a lot of time and money for extra bandwidth. That ended last month. Microsoft’s real cost to the economy is immeasurable. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
