The Module (sci-fi)

[minthaka]

I had a weird thought last night:
What if the MS managed in the future to build in a sectret Module into WindowsWhoKnows. And if it would be able to read and write Linux file systems. And if it would know where are passwords and other vital scripts kept in different distros. And the user running dual systems, without knowing about the Module would encounter strange failures when he would try to boot Linux instead MS Garbage, like missing identification, wrong password, no fstab etc. What would be then ?

[Javasnob]

People might single-boot Linux more?

[cousinlucky]

Please do not give more inspiration the Gates Gang.

[Juan Pablo]

Microsoft programmes are too stupid to do something like this without hosing the whole Windows OS

[Roxoff]

Microsoft programmes are too stupid to do something like this without hosing the whole Windows OS

But the source code for ext3, Reiser FS, XFS, etc. are all open source - they wouldn't have to do anything, they'd just have to incorporate the source code. If they told nobody how they'd done it, they could ignore the GPL - nobody could prove anything 'cos windows is closed-source. Actually, I wonder how many times Microsoft have already done that?

[CodeRoot]

People might single-boot Linux more?

Surely this is truely the proper answer/solution...

[Oxygen]

But the source code for ext3, Reiser FS, XFS, etc. are all open source - they wouldn't have to do anything, they'd just have to incorporate the source code. If they told nobody how they'd done it, they could ignore the GPL - nobody could prove anything 'cos windows is closed-source. Actually, I wonder how many times Microsoft have already done that?

Under the GPL license, correct me if I'm wrong, but if you use GPLed code don't you have to release all the code as GPL?

[Juan Pablo]

Under the GPL license, correct me if I'm wrong, but if you use GPLed code don't you have to release all the code as GPL?

Yes, but it would be impossible to probe they are using GPL code because Windows is closed-source

ps: In my post I was also hoping Microsoft would respect the GPL ...

[Vergil83]

And the user running dual systems, without knowing about the Module would encounte
r strange failures when he would try to boot Linux instead MS Garbage, like missing identification, wrong password, no fstab etc. What would be then ?

That could be quickly found out and MS could be sued. Also, MS could be used by the US gov again for monopolist actions, in the EU, etc...

But the source code for ext3, Reiser FS, XFS, etc. are all open source - they wouldn't have to do anything, they'd just have to incorporate the source code. If they told nobody how they'd done it, they could ignore the GPL - nobody could prove anything 'cos windows is closed-source. Actually, I wonder how many times Microsoft have already done that?

Ext3, etc.. are NOT open source. File systems don't have licenses. The tools to use the file system do.They are "open" because how they work can be viewed by anyone. MS could write their own ext3 kernel tool and they would be fine. Or they could pay someone else (there are closed source windows ext3 acesss programs).
http://www.fs-driver.org/

Yes, but it would be impossible to probe they are using GPL code because Windows is closed-source

This doesn't mean that non MS people can't see their source code, just that it can't be used without permission from MS. With the gpl you can.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1624933,00.asp

[Roxoff]

Ext3, etc.. are NOT open source. File systems don't have licenses. The tools to use the file system do.They are "open" because how they work can be viewed by anyone. MS could write their own ext3 kernel tool and they would be fine. Or they could pay someone else (there are closed source windows ext3 acesss programs).
http://www.fs-driver.org/

Ahhh c'mon Virgil, I didn't say the filesystems were open source, I said the source was available under the GPL. Do keep up.