Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

borncity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 543 posts

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#181

Post by zigzag312 »

ryanlol wrote: post #153
zigzag312 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that, one one hand they are implementing features "in the name of security" that limit the owner of a computer what he/she can do with it and on the other hand they are adding backdoors so that government agencies (or anyone with right information) can spy on citizen that use this "secure" OS.

I will personally pay you twenty thousand US dollars (in the cryptocurrency of your choice, bank transfer, western union, whatever) if you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Microsoft has ever secretly shipped a backdoor in their OS so government agencies could spy on their users. Perhaps you will be the first person to actually prove the existence of the NSAKEY backdoor? (I doubt it.)

You might be right and there is no backdoor that was intentionally implemented. Although, numerous leaks do show that neither are always law-abiding saints, so a backdoor might not be too far fetched. From what I've heard (I may be wrong since I'm not from US), US company is not allowed to publicly disclose requests from NSA, so proving it would be very difficult.

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#182

Post by [deleted] »

maccolgan wrote: post #145
garganzol wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a slippery slope way of thinking. One would argue that appearance of computers is similarly evil, but many of us can confirm that this is not true. It all depends on who uses the tool and their motives, not on the tool itself. The tool is powerful but it's totally neutral. And can be used for both bad (dominance, ransom) and good things (security).

>who uses the tool and their motives, not on the tool itself. The tool is powerful but it's totally neutral. What if we had computer control like gun control?

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#183

Post by andrekandre »

jeroenhd wrote: post #170
eps wrote: post #25

In related news - ever wondered why Windows 11 can't be installed on "older computers"? You know, the ones that don't have a TPM chip? Now you know. Windows 11 completes the lock-up of the OS. That's why Windows 11 exists in the first place. All other changes are secondary. Microsoft knows they would've not been able to pull shit like this as a Windows 10 update, so they were effectively forced to do a version increa…

Microsoft is doing its absolute best to move everyone to the Windows store by packaging the new apps everyone should be making into weird formats such as appx and msix which can't or previously couldn't be easily installed without command line funkiness. Luckily, Microsofts own incompetence is preventing this plan from working. There's another part to the exclusion of old hardware, which is that modern chips are a lo…

  > modern chips are a lot more reselient against crashes
sorry for a basic question, but im not sure how a chip itself is more resistant to a crash (in os? user space?)...

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#184

Post by frankzander »

slaymaker1907 wrote: post #165
schmorptron wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does a TPM chip actually bring any relevant security advantages for end users, or is it just for DRM?

It brings enormous security benefits to end users. TPMs drastically reduce entropy/complexity requirements for things like passwords/pins since the TPM can rate limit guess attempts. Doing that without a TPM is impossible since an attacker can always read the encrypted password off of the drive/directly from memory and then brute force it.

an who of an average user does need that? I'm not an average user but I never need that. I also know no one who can't wait to get it or even think about wanting it. I only read in blogs or HN that one would need it. I think "you need that because of security" is PR/propaganda from certain companies.

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#185

Post by xondono »

amyjess wrote: post #29

Because of things like this, I'm at the point where I consider the invention of public-key encryption to be the worst thing that's ever happened to the world. If governments had _immediately_ preemptively classified anything related to assymetric encryption—and actively enforced the classified status—as soon as the first research into it started appearing, the world would be a much better place than it is now.

Yes, because governments are trustworthy entities incapable of unethical behavior! /s

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#186

Post by ptx »

ryanlol wrote: post #153
zigzag312 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that, one one hand they are implementing features "in the name of security" that limit the owner of a computer what he/she can do with it and on the other hand they are adding backdoors so that government agencies (or anyone with right information) can spy on citizen that use this "secure" OS.

I will personally pay you twenty thousand US dollars (in the cryptocurrency of your choice, bank transfer, western union, whatever) if you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Microsoft has ever secretly shipped a backdoor in their OS so government agencies could spy on their users. Perhaps you will be the first person to actually prove the existence of the NSAKEY backdoor? (I doubt it.)

They don't need a backdoor anymore. Microsoft now routinely collects your data and pushes mandatory updates through the front door.

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#187

Post by ls65536 »

jeroenhd wrote: post #170
eps wrote: post #25

In related news - ever wondered why Windows 11 can't be installed on "older computers"? You know, the ones that don't have a TPM chip? Now you know. Windows 11 completes the lock-up of the OS. That's why Windows 11 exists in the first place. All other changes are secondary. Microsoft knows they would've not been able to pull shit like this as a Windows 10 update, so they were effectively forced to do a version increa…

Microsoft is doing its absolute best to move everyone to the Windows store by packaging the new apps everyone should be making into weird formats such as appx and msix which can't or previously couldn't be easily installed without command line funkiness. Luckily, Microsofts own incompetence is preventing this plan from working. There's another part to the exclusion of old hardware, which is that modern chips are a lo…

> modern chips are a lot more reselient against crashes according to the telemetry Microsoft collects

Sort of a side point, but this got me wondering...Is there something inherently less stable about these older chips, or maybe is their stability somehow a function of their lifetime that would really matter here? My own anecdata (which is from a far smaller dataset than what I imagine Microsoft would have access to) would suggest that this isn't really the case, at least for anything otherwise capable of running something like Windows 10 or Windows 11, but I'd be interested in reading more about it.

Is it that old systems tend to not be physically maintained as well thus resulting in cooling issues and more overheating?

Is it that these "crashes" are application crashes due to the attempted execution of instructions in (newer) x86 extensions not implemented by these (older) chips?

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#188

Post by Causality1 »

ddalex wrote: post #108
dTal wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Dan would eventually find out about the free kernels, even entire free operating systems, that had existed around the turn of the century. But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer's root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that." --Richard Stallman, "The Right To Read"

Stallman was ALMOST right. The fight is not about which programs the user can run, but who controls the user data

Are you aware of the enormous amounts of blood, sweat, and tears expended by people on XDA Developers just to unlock bootloader to use functions as simple as custom gesture controls?

Re: Microsoft no longer signs Windows drivers for Process Hacker

#189

Post by gavinray »

pjmlp wrote: post #134
gavinray wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relevant tweets from self: https://twitter.com/GavinRayDev/status/1446459866059612162 https://twitter.com/GavinRayDev/status/1446460168389136395 WINE and the very popular/well maintained Linux distros have gotten so good in recent years that the scenario is nearly identical to Windows + WSL2, except with the DE reversed. And WINE is never going to run entirely as smooth/easy as regular Windows, though it's pretty dam…

If a full Windows/Linux ever happens, expect it to be as free beer as ChromeOS and Android are when not installed via official OEM distributions. It will be the same driver dance and boot loader stories since Linux exists.

I am fine with this tbh, I am a pragmatic person.

In spirit, I love FOSS, though I won't cripple myself by sticking to if something that works better for me comes along/use it to my own detriment.

In fact, I would be willing to pay a good amount of money for Windows 98/Windows 2000 with a modern kernel, x64 support, and icing on the cake would be a Linux shell.

If there was "Ubuntu: Windows 2000 UI Edition" they could take my money.

Post reply on HN