LWN.net Logo

Vice President Gates

From:  Leon Brooks <leon@cyberknights.com.au>
To:  charles.cooper@cnet.com
Subject:  Vice President Gates
Date:  Sun, 22 Sep 2002 09:11:30 +0800
Cc:  letters@news.com, letters@lwn.net

Hi Charles!

At http://msnbc-cnet.com.com/2010-1071-958721.html you wrote:
> the image of Bill Gates getting his marching orders from President
> George [W] Bush just doesn't compute.

Before dealing with your main point, I don't think you understand how the 
people dealing with *any* nation's security think, and your conclusions will 
be invalid until you do.

William Henry "Trey" Gates III or one of his subordinates may or may not shut 
down China's computers (hey, CodeRed4 may well do that anyway...), but you're 
about to bet one and a half billion lives, including yours, on whether he 
does or not. Does this impact your thinking? It would impact mine.

The question flips from "is it certain that Bill can pull our collective 
plugs?" to "is it *possible* that Bill could pull our collective plugs?" - 
and of course that flips the answer from "Ha, ha" to "Yes."

Now, as to whether Bill has the capability to actually do this, let's use 
Microsoft's own words:

   "The OS Product or OS Components contain components that enable and
    facilitate the use of certain Internet-based services. You
    acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the
    version of the OS Product and/or its components that you are
    utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the OS Product that
    will be automatically downloaded to your computer."
    [Text from the Windows 2000 SP3 EULA and Windows XP SP1 EULA]

The implication is that Microsoft can alter the software on your computer at 
will, AND you agreed to let them do that when you installed it.

Wouldn't it be handy - but not for China - if a wartime update to Windows was 
or included a TCP stack that stopped recognising Chinese IP addresses at a 
specific date and propagated itself as hard as it could by fair means or foul 
until then?

As to *how* Microsoft propose do that, well, why not just read the source code 
yourself and find out? (-:

Finally, given that Microsoft seem to have both means and opportunity, how 
about motive? Bush orders Gates, so-so, maybe. National Guard orders Gates at 
gunpoint is quite a different scenario. CIA plant pushes button for Gates yet 
another. Is a troublemaking cracker from Saint Petersburg unprecedented?

The possibilities are myriad. Just don't be dumb enough to say that it's 
impossible.

Cheers; Leon

-- 
http://www.cyberknights.com.au/  Modern tools, traditional dedication
http://slpwa.linux.org.au/       Member, Linux Professionals West Aus
http://linux.conf.au/            THE Australian Linux Technical Conf:
                                 22-25 January 2003, Perth: be there!


(Log in to post comments)

Vice President Gates

Posted Sep 30, 2002 1:34 UTC (Mon) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

There is a common principle of strategy that says that you don't play for what you think your opponent *will* do...

you plan for what he *can* do.

This seems a pertinent time to point that out.
-- jra

Copyright © 2002, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds