 |
 |
| ActiveWin | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise | VBA in Excel | Users Online: 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Network |
|
ActiveMac |
|
ActiveWin |
|
ActiveXbox |
|
DirectX |
|
Downloads |
|
FAQs |
|
Interviews |
|
MS Games & Hardware |
|
Reviews |
|
Rocky Bytes |
|
Support Center |
|
TopTechTips |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows Server 2003 |
|
Windows Vista |
|
Windows XP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
Apple/Mac |
|
Xbox/Xbox 360 |
|
News Search |
|
XML/RSS Newsfeeds |
|
Pocket PC Site |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows Vista |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows Server 2003 |
|
Windows XP |
|
Windows 7 |
|
Windows 8 |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox 360 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Xbox/Games |
|
Fable 2 |
|
|
|
Applications |
|
Windows Server 2008 R2 |
|
Windows 7 |
|
Adobe CS5 Master Collection |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Microsoft Express Mouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Interviews |
|
Mike Swanson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Advertise |
|
Affiliates |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
 |
ActiveWin.com: Microsoft Windows 2000, NT source code leaked | |
|
||
| Time: 01:00 EST/06:00 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Todd Richardson | ||
|
ActiveWin.com has confirmed yesterday’s article at NeoWin.net regarding the source codes of Windows 2000 and Windows NT being released onto the web. The files are large, weighing in at 204 MB for the compressed Windows 2000 code and 240 for the compressed Windows NT source code. Uncompressed, the Windows 2000 file takes up about 630 MB. The Washington Post estimates the total code for Windows 2000 comprises roughly 40 gigabytes. For a company that has been so protective of its code, though, any leak is devastating.
It is hard to say just what effect this will have on the IT industry. Some extremists have gone as far as predict the fall of Windows dominance. They say that crackers will be able to design viruses that will do much more harm, since they would be able to better manipulate the OS and that they would be able to create many new viruses since they can find vulnerabilities more easily. This could create havoc for businesses, since Windows 2000 is still widely used in such an environment. Consumers, however, would have less to fear as Windows 2000 is not meant for general use and most home users are on the newer Windows XP. Windows XP, however, is built on top of Windows 2000. It is unknown if Windows 2000 code that leaked was also used in Windows XP.
We’ll bring you more news as we get it. |
||
|
Read Only Comments Return to News |
Displaying Comments 1 through 21 of 21 |
This is an archived static copy of ActiveWin.com. |
| #1 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 05:08:13 PM |
|
"DO NOT LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN!!! DO NOT LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN!!!"
Ummm, parker, the source code for Windows 2000 and NT 4 are in the wild... Your pathetic little diversion about a minor OS project isn't really going to distract anyone from this monumental event. |
| #2 By 1658 (24.15.133.255) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 05:25:58 PM |
|
And your pathetic little assumption that this totally unverified news story is 100% true, and that is to be considered a monumental event is just as superficial as anything anyone else may have posted.
The day I see something constructive come from one of your posts, or TechLarry's posts for that matter, I think I'll fart camels. I work for the company and I can tell you that thus far, no one on the campus that my team has talked to has any idea where the hell this story came from. That's not saying that it isn't true, however, let's just hold our wads and commentary shall we until we get some hard evidence? Don't bother flaming back, I won't read it and certainly won't respond. |
| #3 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 05:31:39 PM |
|
Oooo, poor aamendala! I can tell you I'm looking at the code right now. Look's real. Run around the campus if you want. Fart camels if you want. Hold your wad if you want.
This is MONUMENTAL! (You can read that too if you want.) This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, February 12, 2004 at 17:33. |
| #4 By 11888 (64.230.11.31) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 05:40:07 PM |
| lol, how did TechLarry get dragged into this? |
| #5 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 05:52:39 PM |
|
I don't think I'm in trouble.
I think Microsoft is in trouble. |
| #6 By 11888 (64.230.11.31) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 06:20:25 PM |
| It was probably TechLarry who put it in there! DAMN HIM! |
| #7 By 531 (66.190.60.156) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 06:29:20 PM |
|
There's also:
tcp-ip tutorial.eml mobileq-apache.eml letter to children - 2.eml and apache_install.eml um... I kinda doubt this. |
| #8 By 665 (64.126.80.41) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 06:49:56 PM |
| jpursell, I don't think MS Piracy team is going to go after each user who obtains the code, so you shouldn't get all high and mighty... it makes you look a little silly. They will go after the person or persons who released the code. |
| #9 By 1868 (141.133.156.217) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 07:19:33 PM |
| Black Friday for the IT industry...OMG |
| #10 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 07:27:38 PM |
|
Yes, I do. Go ahead and report me, jpursell.
Zeo, it's Thursday. This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, February 12, 2004 at 19:30. |
| #11 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 07:47:12 PM |
| No, I'm not. |
| #12 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 08:00:51 PM |
|
#2 Do you do ANYTHING other than close your eyes and start running around and yelling that everyone should be looking somewhere else instead?
#12 " I will be happy to report you." Get a life. Nothing happened in regards to all the users that have the leaked MS DOS v6.22 source code. Anyways, let's first see if this is indeed true or not, there's a whole list of directories and files which look a little odd, but it is possible that they are left overs from the early NT days. Only the developers know if those files are real or not. aamendala - since you work (and admit it) for MS, maybe you can shed some light on this. Does this look real? Do the filenames at least look valid? |
| #13 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 08:01:58 PM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
| #14 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 08:19:52 PM |
|
That's DAMN clever, mooresa!
DAMN clever! (On a side note, I'd love to meet a b!tch as foul-mouthed as me!) This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, February 12, 2004 at 20:23. |
| #15 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 08:37:31 PM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
| #16 By 531 (66.190.60.156) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 09:40:41 PM |
|
From what I know, only a very few people have access to the source without those special tools you mentioned. Certainly, everyone in the Shared Source program is going in through a secured viewer.
As far as C# goes, there wouldn't be any in WinNT/Win2k. |
| #17 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 09:51:25 PM |
|
C# wouldn't be included with NT/2k sources. Longhorn is the first OS to use managed code extensively. NT/2k and previous are C/C++.
Speaking of source access, I remember an MS employee saying you needed a smartcard for VPN access. You definitely need one for building (and I believe Workstation) access. With the build system MS uses, I don't think one person (except maybe some select execs) can access the full source. This could be authentic, but I wonder how it was obtained. In any case, according to eWeek, it isn't the full source. |
| #18 By 531 (66.190.60.156) at Thursday, February 12, 2004 10:27:45 PM |
| Washington Post seems to be claiming that Microsoft has confirmed the leak. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37648-2004Feb12.html |
| #19 By 531 (66.190.60.156) at Friday, February 13, 2004 02:05:15 AM |
| It's a no-win situation for Microsoft, tripix. If the Linux community finds it, they will have been right all along. If they don't they'll say that it's in the part of the code that wasn't leaked. That's how these conspiracy theory wackos work. |
| #20 By 5912 (82.74.70.225) at Friday, February 13, 2004 04:42:44 AM |
|
#25
It would more likely be ordinary C++ |
| #21 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at Friday, February 13, 2004 01:36:17 PM |
|
Server 2k3 and XP are C/C++
C# is dependent upon the .NET Framework which was only included with Server 2k3. Even though the Framework was included, the majority of OS code is still C/C++. Longhorn marks the shift to managed code for the OS. |
