MICROSOFT BTFO

>>58820055
>Windows 10 0-day is MASSIVE
First paragraph:
>The exploit is probably not worth worrying about
k

File: 12745719811.jpg (134KB, 1080x1283px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1080x1283px

IT'S OVER LADS

MICROSOFT HAS LOST
WINCUCCS HAVE LEFT THE STAGE
PAJEET SHILLS BLOWN THE FUCK OUT

File: 1468884845983.jpg (41KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 480x360px

>>58820085
DAMAGE CONTROL... like clockwork, MS (paid?) shills spring to action.

I am tired of this. Between the fuckery of MS and the amount of software I -have- to replace in order to make linux usable, I'm not finding computing fun at all

>>58820085
S H I L L
H
I
L
L

File: 1470024131138.png (71KB, 1268x332px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1268x332px

It's being used in the wild. Be careful if you use that toddler OS for anything. just don't connect to anything.

>>58820115
B-but I won't be able to play overwatch now

>>58820085
Yes, Microsoft also said
>Use windows 10 and edge, you're safer then!
They're obviously full of shit.

>>58820148
kek'd.

dont forget goyim, Edge is also faster!

Does anyone on this fucking board read the damn article before posting?

>>58820186
no, they are shilling alternative operating systems whilst grasping every straw they can find
let them have their moment of glory
and when replying in these threads never forget to sage

>>58820186
>reading the article before posting

He doesn't understand broad culture

>fill your company with poojeets
what could possibly go wrong

File: osoutlook.png (200KB, 1385x945px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1385x945px

>>58820055

And yet, your little toy hobbyist OS is still irrelevant in the real world.

Keep shitposting, it might drive your numbers up a bit.

>>58820108
try MacOS

>>58821553
>data from 2014
>"Windows survey"
Really activates my neurons

>>58820186

Of course not, this is the freetard containment board.
The only way to get people to read an article in the OP would be to post something that shits over their pet meme software, then they'd comb through the article and the author's credentials five times to find something to mock him for.

>>58821603
Thank you for your shilling, pajeet.

File: shill.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>58821603

>>58821580
I'm sure Linux has managed to reverse its 10 to 1 defeat in marketshare to Windows Server in the past three years, anon.

>>58821648
>>58821655

Like clockwork.

>>58820055
If there are malicious samba shares in my local network then a bsod is the least of my problems.

>>58820055
>Arse Technica

New thread:

>>58821942
>>58821942
>>58821942

File: concern.jpg (108KB, 784x708px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 784x708px

>>58820055
Op-ed: Windows 10 0day exploit goes wild, and so do Microsoft marketers
>so do Microsoft marketers

>>58822277
/v/ in a nutshell

>>58821603
Why is this board full of angry /v/toddlers who think videogames are technology?

File: windows10.jpg (803KB, 1536x1536px) Image search: [Google]

803KB, 1536x1536px

>>58820168

>>58820055
> Windows 10 0-day is MASSIVE
It is? How? Do you connect to unknown SMB servers every day?

>>58820055
>file-sharing protocol
Oh fuck, I sure do hope my network isn't already fucked to hell and back, they'll be able to exploit my Windows machines if it is!

>>58820055
>ask a big corporation a question
>get a generic response
OH MY GOD MICROSOFT SO WRONG
SO VERY WRONG

Christ you faggots should give the news media corporations a lesson on how to spin headlines.

>>58822767
>Action Center
I don't even know any computer illiterates that give a shit about what Action Center says and doesn't just disable it.

>>58820168
Edge is complete shit. Fucking Gnome Web/Epiphany is better than that shit.

>>58820055
BOTNET
O
T
N
E
T

>>58820055
Really makes you lay an egg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHoi8OqWUF0

>>58820085
>probably

>>58824103
What specific issue do you have with Edge?

>>58820108
Computers were built for scientific reasons! The time is long overdue to finally stop their idiotic misuse.

>>58821562
And spend thousands on hardware that self destructs two days after the warranty? No thanks.

Does it make you shake in impudent rage knowing that posting these threads every day will never make your joke of an OS pass 1% desktop market penetration?

>>58820055

>Have to connect to a malicious SMB, something 99% of Windows users can't even figure out.

Yep, it's over. Microsoft is doomed, Linux on every desktop by this time tomorrow.

>inb4 botnets and mass panic

>>58820055
In the hours that followed the statement, outside sources made clear that the vulnerability didn't pose as grave a threat as was suggested by the CERT advisory. CERT had initially scored the flaw's severity with a 10, the maximum in the Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The main reason that the true severity was lower is that the exploit—which stems from a null pointer dereference bug in version 3 of Microsoft's server message block file server protocol—could only cause computers to crash as opposed to forcing them to execute malicious code. Another reason: to be exploited by an attacker on the Internet, a target would have to configure vulnerable machines to maintain an outgoing file share.

>>58829018
>all that shilling
Here's 50 rupees for you, Pajeet

>>58830294
kek'd

>>58821721
>>58828986
there's been 1 or 2 CVEs just in the last year where windows 10 and edge connect to network shares without user interaction

Kill yourself, you dumb fucking shit stain.

hello? good evening to you sirs, my name is Jeff, i am an american citizen,

i am using microsoft windows 10 today and it works very very good, much good, i play many games and talk to friend and family using skype and yahoo and apps from microsoft app store

there are no viris in microsoft windows, very secure operating system, my family use it, we all love it

Is this why they can't even do basic font rendering correctly?

I dont MS just fork some BSD or GNU/Linux flavor and call it a day
Not lije they already do it on cloud

>>58829676

>facts that take wind out of sails
>"its just a shill trying to do damage control"

you faggots crack me up

shill XD pajeet XD toddler os XDDDD poo in loo XDD

>>58820251
>Shilling freedom

>>58820108
Maybe you should build the software you want to see then cuck.

>bitch and moan that the system updates itself regularly whether you like it or not

You realise that's actually made it safer for situations like this? Eventually the exploit will be patched out on 99% of consumer machines because you can't disable the updates forever

>Windows is the only platform with a customer commitment to investigate reported security issues and proactively update impacted devices as soon as possible

This is such a lie. They only prioritize Microsoft Insider concerns and only do anything about others when they absolutely have to.

>>58820115
No one ever connects to any SMB servers on the internet.

>>58832904
It sounds more like an Internal organization problem. Doesn't matter since apparently the exploit outright kills windows and the remote code execution is allegedly false.

>>58832923
To outright kill windows you have manually connect to the bad SMB server. No one does this.

>>58832929
Then there are no issues then.

I think the bigger point of this article is that Microsoft does shit all for a lot of disclosed problems.

This "exploit" was reported in September but still unpatched.

>>58832875
How about something that just does exactly what it is suposed to and nothing else?

Is that too much to ask for?

>>58832953
Well, there would be a reason to be upset if they didn't patch an exploit that was actually harmful to users. This is just a harmless bug.

>>58820108

As soon as I stopped working at a Windows shop, I deleted my Windows 10 partition. macOS is not perfect, but it has a much better track record than Windows. Plus, it will be compatible with all/most of your software.

>>58833012
>macOS will be compatible with all/most of your (windows) software.
lol

>>58833030

If you really want Windows junk, just get Parallels and Window 7 without the botnet.

>>58833053
>all your software is compatible because you can just run it in emulator!
>software you like is junk anyway

Really convinced me there, macfag.

>>58820055
THE CURRENT STATE OF WINDOWS

File: _0357.jpg (148KB, 895x1498px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 895x1498px

>>58821687
It has. Just don't let the facts get in your way buddy.
https://w3techs.com/

File: _028.jpg (213KB, 1920x983px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1920x983px

>>58833075
How about supercomputers? Your beloved Microsoft isn't even competitive here.

>>58832782
so you're doing it fore free, redditard? yes, you're from there. GTFO you piece of shit.

File: VDC-realtime-unit-shipments.jpg (101KB, 1396x512px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1396x512px

>>58833095
Embedded devices? No, sorry, Microsoft's still not competitive here.
https://www.linux.com/news/embedded-linux-keeps-growing-amid-iot-disruption-says-study
https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/attachment/a61052ff4978f8c42b4f6f4b11a1b0e0

>>58833075
>>58833095
>>58833136
These will get no replies because he got eternally BTFO.

>>58822873
Having a windows computer on the network means your network is already compromised.

File: 1474500624058.png (163KB, 653x892px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 653x892px

Hello, sir! I work in that department. But our department is trying to figure out what the problem is.
Meanwhile you can do the needful and complete our short telemetry survey, my friend

>screaming about a fuckin null ptr deref
You guys do realize it literally isn't possible to exploit this? The first virtual page in memory is unwritable.
All you can do with this is crash windows

>>58822767
i am fine with this
Google's chrome tactics are pretty obvious too
many people use it because the thing was shoved in through google earth or the google search bar
so it is always good to have a bully finding another bully

on a side note: Edge works pretty good

>>58833095
You're absolutely right because Windows isn't designed for the supercomputer market.

It is primarily a desktop and server operating system.

>>58833550
That's exactly what they say in the article.

Of course no one cares about that when there is a lynching up for grabs!

As the article itself states, it is very unlikely to even get BSODed by this exploit because you need to set up an outgoing share to get hit by it.

File: 1485655365739.png (51KB, 209x450px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 209x450px

>>58833550
>useless exploits getting hyped
Another day on /g/, but It won't justify the ignorance of ms.

>>58833136
>>58833333
>embedded and real-time are the same thing
>real-time on linux

Couldn't get a Win7 VM to crash with the PoC.

>>58833075

How does a web server survey disprove the one I posted? Web servers are just a tiny fraction of all servers.

Linux hasn't reversed it, as a matter of fact, it has always had a grip on webservers since even way before the survey I posted.

Public facing http servers are supposed to be cheap for mass shared hosting. They're just front-ends. No mission critical system runs Linux though. Only sucky wordpress pages with fucking PHP on. Serious stuff runs on ASP.NET or ColdFusion.

>>58833095

Not mission critical, they don't store any data, they're just number crunchers.

Also, the Top 500 supercomputers are memes. Your everyday university supercomputer always runs Windows HPC Server.

>>58833136

Yet again a kind of device that does nothing serious.

You're literally grasping at straws by posting those niche markets at this point.

>>58834671
>Supercomputers are memes
Yeah, those "memes" which help us in these fields: quantum mechanics,weather forecasting,climate research,molecular modeling, cryptanalysis. Useless, right?
>Embedded devices
>Grasping at straws
Oh, really? My "strawman arguments" are supported by evidence. Your opposing viewpoints somehow don't have any sources to back up your claims. Isn't that weird?

File: this_triggers_the_freetard.png (11KB, 750x530px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 750x530px

>>58835047
>Useless, right?
I never said they're useless. I said they're not mission critical. If a supercomputer blows up, you just buy another one. Also, again, Windows HPC Server.

>y-you don't have evidence
You must've missed this post: >>58821553

Also pic related.

>>58835078
>2015 Windows survey of 330 business technology professional shows
That's clearly not a large enough data sample.
And what about your graph? What's the year the test was done in? How many participants there were? Where's the link to a website which published that graph? Funny how you missed that.

>>58835128
>I'll just call into question the validity of his graph because it's too damaging to my case
Too bad for you it's real:
https://community.spiceworks.com/networking/articles/2462-server-virtualization-and-os-trends

>>58835157
Finally, a source, after almost 24 hours.

>And what OSes are running in virtual machines and on physical servers around the world? It turns out like with client OSes, Microsoft is dominant. Fully 87.7% of the physical servers and VMs in the Spiceworks network (which are mostly on-premises) run Microsoft Windows Server.

>And few are using the latest operating systems. While 23.6% of server OSes were Windows Server 2012, 45.4% were still Windows Server 2008 (making it the most popular server OS), and 17.9% of VMs and servers were stuck on the end-of-life Windows Server 2003.

>Linux machines run up the bulk of the remaining machines, with Red Hat Enterprise Linux at 1.2% and all other Linux varieties coming in at a cumulative 10.5% of server OS market share.

Not a single mention of how many participants were there.

>>58835328
>almost 24 hours
>02/07/17(Tue)10:19:48 No.58835078
>02/07/17(Tue)10:31:28 No.58835157
>10:31:28 - 10:19:48 = 11 minutes 40 seconds
And the search for intelligent Loonix life continues...

>>58835355
>Can't defend his arguments
>Resorts to ad hominem attacks
>And the search for intelligent Loonix life continues...
How surprising... And you know full well which post I was referring to. It was this one:
>>58821553
And what led me to belive that it was your is:
>>58835078
>y-you don't have evidence
>You must've missed this post: >>58821553
And again, you're not attacking my arguments.

>>58835415
Look, you have no arguments.

You can't supply me a constant stream of fallacies and expect arguments back.

You're a massive hypocrite for accusing me of using fallacies, but you also are a sophist, because that's an obvious attempt to win the argument by debate technique instead of logical reasoning.

You are a troll and I should ignore you, but just so the unwary reader doesn't get lured by your rhetoric, I'm gonna keep going.

>I was referring to this post
The image contains source information in it, but in reality you never asked for its source in the past 24 hours. If only you had requested it, you'd have gotten it - but you didn't, and then one day later you tried to make me look bad by not posting it. Here it goes though:

http://www.informationweek.com/software/operating-systems/2015-server-os-outlook-cloudy-chance-of-containers/d/d-id/1316553

So now that you have links to all the graphs I've posted, what are you gonna do? Just keep denying their legitimacy? You can't do that anymore. Or attack their sample sizes? Study some statistics please, anyone with basic probability knowledge knows sample sizes don't have to be as big as mere intuition would lead you to believe. They just have to be representative - that is, they have to unbiased, random samples.

Your samples aren't random.

>y-your samples aren't large enough
They are big enough to be representative (remember sqrt(n)+1?), but even if they weren't, your samples are simply biased. They consist of samples from specific markets. You can't extrapolate the web server market to all servers.

>m-muh super computers
Again, your sample is biased: it only contains the ones in the top 500 list. It's not a random sample.

>>58835494
I have no arguments and I resorted to ad hominem attacks? Where exactly? Remember, it was you who made this post:
>>58835355
>And the search for intelligent Loonix life continues...
And as far as my arguments go:
>>58833075
>>58833095
>>58833136
Are we just ignoring these now?
https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2016/02/22/february-2016-web-server-survey.html
>In theFebruary 2016survey we received responses from933,892,520sites and5,796,210web-facing computers.
>In terms of web-facing computers, Apache maintains a much clearer lead with a 47.8% share of the market. Microsoft also takes second place by this metric, albeit with a share that is more than 20 percentage points behind Apache. However, both Apache and Microsoft suffered small losses in market share as nginx continues to exhibit strong growth: This month, nginx gained 21,100 computers, increasing its market share by 0.26 points to 13.96%.
Let's also not forget that Android is clearly ahead of Windows in the mobile device market.
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3516317

>>58835589
>n-no I didn't
I've exposed your cheap tricks, don't pretend you didn't.

>Are we just ignoring these now?
I have addressed those.

I am not denying your stats, but you just keep posting web servers and cellphones. You're just reinforcing the theory that Linux only thrives in limited, specific markets.

>>58835652
>I'm not denying your stats, but you just keep posting web servers and cellphones.
We all know that Linux doesn't have the majority of market share in regards to desktop operating systems, but does or is a leader in every other field. And why would I bother posting ~2% market share that Linux has on desktop computers to prove that it is in fact a relevant OS in the real world? And again, you said that you agree, so, what's the dispute about now?

How are cellphones and web servers specific markets? Almost everyone has access to cellphones and if you're working in an IT field, you're most likely than not to be in touch with servers.
>n-no I didn't
>I've exposed your cheap tricks, don't pretend you didn't.
If I hate something, I hate insincerity and slander. Here are my posts in this thread:
>>58835589
>>58835415
>>58835328
>>58835128
>>58835047
>>58833075
>>58833095
>>58833136
>>58833333
>These will get no replies because he got eternally BTFO.
This may be questionable, but then again, it was made after I provided sources for my claims.

File: 22.jpg (307KB, 1080x1657px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 1080x1657px

>>58835792