Google tweaks toolbar to block pop-ups. The search giant is in the process of releasing a new browser toolbar that lets people block pop-up ads and easily update their blogs as they surf the Web. [CNET News.com] 5:22:08 PM ![]() |
Microsoft Warns of Windows 2000 Server Flaw - Microsoft Corp. on Wednesday issued a bulletin warning users of a flaw in a Windows 2000 Server component that could allow attackers to execute code on vulnerable machines. The flaw does not affect machines running Windows NT, XP or Windows Server 2003. - Eweek Patch 'em if you got 'em, though this one requires that you be running Windows Media Services and IIS to open the hole. Of course if the pattern holds, in a couple of days MSFT will anounce that the vulnerbility is open on all servers. 1:05:15 PM ![]() |
Law Professor Examines SCO Case
from the legal-eagle dept. An anonymous submitter writes "This law professor from the University of California points out weakness in SCO's legal bluster, and further takes a poke at closed software, for those hungry for more SCO scraps. At the end, he references Slashdot for more info ('itself a demonstration of the power of dispersed individuals working together')." [Slashdot] 12:34:59 PM ![]() |
Windows 2000 fixes creep onto Web. Tech forum site Neowin posts what it claims are links to the fourth service pack for Windows 2000 from Microsoft. [CNET News.com] 12:31:45 PM ![]() |
WiFi Exposes Sensitive Student Data
from the a-great-thing-if-implemented-carefully dept. cfarivar writes "'Like leaving a vault open, the Palo Alto Unified School District failed to place a number of highly sensitive computer files containing student information in a locked location on its network. Using a laptop with a wireless card outside the district's main office, the Palo Alto Weekly gained access to such data as grades, home phone numbers and addresses, emergency medical information complete with full-color photos of students and a psychological evaluation." [Slashdot] 10:46:46 AM ![]() |
I, Cringely | The Pulpit:"The IBM lawyers (who ARE IP lawyers) will strongly argue that none of this matters since we have a case of a single person who did two very similar implementations based on his earlier research. Both his UNIX and Linux versions (works B and C) were derived from his original research (work A) which was not exclusively limited to UNIX. His paper shows that was the case and while SCO may see it as the smoking gun, IBM will see it as the proof of innocence. " Excellent piece on the SCO v. IBM dustup that explores the actual origin of the code that SCO says IBM inserted into Linux in violation of its licenses. 10:36:50 AM ![]() |