Feeds

* Posts by Trevor_Pott

4733 posts • joined 31 May 2010

The internet just BROKE under its own weight – we explain how

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: It's happening, get over it

No, if you really want to know what we - the people- want, look up Network Prefix Translation.

Full bore overloaded NAPT is - and let me get the proper invective to hand here - "fucking clownshoes". There's absolutely zero rational requirement for it in IPv6. It shouldn't be used. Period.

What there is a requirement for is network prefix translation. This is a very simple 1:1 mapping of an internal address space system to one or more external IPv6 subnets. This allows for instant renumbering, ISP fail-over and more without breaking end-to-end irreparably.

Is end-to-end, that sacred holy of holies broken? Yes. Is it broken in a meaningful manner? No. The 1:1 relationship means that we can easily code around it.

Whether you like it or not, network prefix translation is the natrual compromise and it will be what is implemented on a large scale. Get used to it. There's no room for dogma in IT. Only actual solutions.

5
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: DPI of RDP seems implausible.

You can still "traffic manage", even if you aren't peering into the sessions. It's still rude.

7
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Please refrain from NAT66

I don't disagree with any particular point, but there are some problems that are out of the techies' hands:

1) IPv6 is asstastic for anyone excepting weathy enterprises and backbone providers that don't have the sorts of concerns faces by the under-1000 seat crowd.

2) "The business" is generally not ready or willing to invest in replace what works just fine today with a more expensive thing that will hopefully prepare us for the future.

3) Pretty much everyone who isn't already wedded to IPv6 is really just hoping that the ivory tower types will capitulate, we'll get our IPv6 NAT and nobody will have to actually change how they do things.

As for "it's a little late to keep banging on about the problems" I heartily disagree. I've been banging that drum for the better part of a decade, and so have many others. The issue here is simple: do we - the majority - accept the dogmatic implementation of IPv6, or do we tell the ivory tower types what to go do with themselves and implement a NATed version, with all the benefits - and downsides - that it entails.

That war is emphatically not over yet. It will be decided by hardware and software availability as well as adoption and general practice. Not by RFCs and snarky internet disdain. All the powerpoint slides and wringing of hands in the world won't make people believers, nor will it make them behave how you want them to.

So we're all sitting here staying at eachother across the neutral zone, waiting for someone else to make the first move. Meanwhile, ISPs are dragging their feet, as are consumer gadget vendors.

...and the Ivory Tower types offer nothing but dogma...and no solutions.

Your comment is itself evidence of how intractable this issue has become. I raise real world issues that don't have practicable solutions for the majority of businesses and individuals and you all but accuse me of going out of my way to lay on the rails and withhold "progress". As though I am somehow not doing my "civic duty" by encouraging people to bite down on the dogma and take one for Uncle Sam.

Well, I don't know about you, but even if I were inclined to close my eyes and thinking of England on this, my ISPs don't even offer me things like "BGP for SMB accounts" that would allow me to solve the problems in the dogmatic fashion. Nor do my apps support on-the-fly renumbering.

So what are the solutions? Hmm? And why should we all just ignore them in the spirit of camaraderie? It seems to me it's a hell of a lot easier to punch the prickly ponces in the paunch and do the One Thing They Decry.

They aren't My People, so I'm down with that. You?

9
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Please refrain from NAT66

So your solution to the tried, tested and true $150 dual-WAN IPv4 NAT box is a new, expensive solution that requires:

1) Someone to know how to configure it (because SMB versions don't exist)

2) The router advertisement daemon never to fail

3) All applications to be able to cope with renumbering on the fly with zero errors

4) DNS to work without flaw in order to cope with the renumbering

5) BGP advertisement and management so that anything I'm hosting locally can be accessed form the net.

And to top it off you threw in a "supply and demand" argument which is an ivory tower way of fobbing the problem off as belonging to someone else, without solving any of the issues to hand.

Awesome.

So you have no solutions. Only dogma. What you demand that everyone use to suit your religion is demonstrably worse for this very critical use case than what went before, but we are expected to just suck it up without complaint...why exactly?

I believe my inclination is not "kowtow to the brethren" but say "up yer jacksie" and just use NAT anyways.

Wibbly wobble wubble. SOLUTIONS, jacksie-baby. Not dogma. Can you handle it?

Edit: additional bonus points for SLAAC, which makes the entire infrastructure absolutely reliant on DNS, most likely under the asinine premise that DNS will always work in a "real man"'s setup. That's grand. No chance of managing and maintaining your infrastructure when the DNS goes down, or the stupid router robot eats it's own face.

Pay no attention to the daemon behind the curtain! Practical implementation concerns are "just details" anyways, hmm?

38
4
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Please refrain from NAT66

I still don't see a viable solution for renumbering/WAN redundancy. I see lots of dogma. I see no solutions.

Or do you want to trot out how none of that is your problem, and it's up to everyone else to pay (and pay and pay and pay) to meet your religious requirements one more time?

I prefer concrete, affordable, and currently applicable solutions. Ones that work for the 99%, without dismissing the needs of the 99% as "irrelevant".

18
3
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: The internet is full

Obligatory Dilbert.

49
0

Canadian ISP Shaw falls over with 'routing' sickness

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: How dependent we have become!

Nyet. There are so many fiddly little agreements, so many stupid little routes put in for political and financial reasons that the basis of routing on which the internet was founded - get the fucking packet there in the most efficient manner possible - seems to no longer apply. At least not for everyone, and certainly not all of the time.

3
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: The 512 BGP Routes problem, presumably?

I'm investigating exactly that. The big question then is "why do we have some sites where all protocols work except a specific few?"

I suppose it's possible that, for example, RDP (and not just to 3389, but all RDP!) is being sent to a DPI system and that hitting the 512K limit has screwed up routing for that protocol. I'll buy that as a possibility, but doing DPI on RDP sessions is really, really rude. I wonder if this didn't have some sort of cascade effect on DPI systems beyond just the basic routing issue.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Ugh. Best of luck to all concerned

Aha, but what good is cloud computing if the network to gain you access is down?

6
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: How dependent we have become!

Rogers, Bell and Telus are fine...but anything that would transit the Shaw network due to routing or peering is pretty much blackholed. Which means the Canadian internet is pretty much borked.

0
0

Microsoft throws old versions of Internet Explorer under the bus

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Best Browser

"Not to mention that Chrome is spyware by design."

So is windows.

Now excuse me, I need to search for my private documents on my local network, but have that all reported to Microsoft along with my username, e-mail address and password so that they can include Bing results.

Grand.

0
0

Google's 'right to be forgotten': One rule for celebs, another for plebs

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Who the fuck are Honey Boo-boo and Duck Dynasty?

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Slebometer

"I'd say if more than 10 distinct accounts are Googling a name in any given day then its probably someone famous."

By that barometer I'm famous. Which is rather obviously untrue. I think your metrics need revising.

1
0

Twitter can trigger psychosis in users

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Twitter driving Twitter-addicts to suicide?

You're absolutely right. I apologise to the cholera victims.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Twitter driving Twitter-addicts to suicide?

All individuals who who refuse to understand the effects of peer pressure on the vulnerable should get cholera ans shit themselves to death.

You are welcome.

0
5
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Twitter driving Twitter-addicts to suicide?

Yeah. There is. The fact that you pollute the internet with that level of disrespect for human beings.

Putz.

20
10

'POWER from AIR' backscatter tech now juices up Internet of Stuff Wi-Fi gizmos

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Once saw a wirelsse burglar alarm this could benfit

Subchannel MAC NAT! DUN DUN DUN...

[cue wailing and gnashing of teeth]

0
0

IBM can't give away its chip business: report

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: times have changed

"No it says even with lots of automation as found in IBM's Fishkill fab (been there, pretty impressive) making chips in the first world (which IBM does more than most) is not really competitive with 3rd world child and slave labor still. Can thank Congress (at least in US) partially for that."

Yeah, those human rights are such a drag...

You do realize you aren't the 1%, right? And that without all that nasty "interference" to enshrine human rights in law and then enforce it, you'd be tasting the whip too...

0
0

Who will kill power companies? TESLA, says Morgan Stanley

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: NW Nevada

Maybe, maybe not. They'll need storage facilities. And...why not make more than one GigaFactory? If the tech is gelled...

0
0

UK WhatsApp duo convicted of possessing extreme porn

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: unsolicited

"What is a reasonable time? Every circumstance may vary, but I'd have thought 99.9% of people check and clear their messages at least once per week. Most people are several times per day."

I delete my "Junk E-mail" and "Deleted Items" folders about once a year. I have rules that filter lots of incoming mail directly into "Deleted Items". I can easily receive something unsolicited and have it stick around for ages.

How often does a normal person purge their temp folders? And you and I both know that I can do all of the above and still get the data back a year later if I wanted. The law is an anti-intellectual law designed to root out dissidents and make them hangable.

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: unsolicited

"* obviously from the safety of a disposable, unregistered cell phone purchased with cash."

I don't know how it works where you're from, but buying burners has several barriers here:

1) Most shops won't sell a burner without a credit card. Cops don't like it unless they can trace who bought the burner.

2) Most places that sell disposable credit cards require a debit or credit card transaction for the same reasons.

3) Virtually every place that sells either burner cell phones or disposable credit cards has video - and often audio - surveillance.

In order to completely "wash" all traces of the purchase you should go through a few steps:

1) Buy everything in disposable credit cards.

2) Case joints that sell disposable credit cards so that you can ensure they won't be able to track you.

3) Use a mule, but never the same mule twice. (Always incorporate a backup plan!)

4) Consider buying a handful of "high value" disposable cards then using them to buy multiple low value ones at different locations. Additional buffer helps.

5) Do not invest any of your now anonymous ephemeral money into a burner with contactless payment options. You do not want any correlation of your purchases with the phone number, because if they can put your purchases and your number in the same place at the same time, they will pull your image from a camera. Tower triangulation is not accurate enough for this. Keep the phone simple. Basic voice and data. No GPS.

6) Don't use bitcoin; it's trackable. Some altcoins aren't. Do your reserach.

7) Use anonymouse credit cards to purchase hosted/colocated server space in foreign countries in order to do your online shopping/hacking/talking to journalistic sources/posting dissenting views against your government/etc.

8) There are a number of shipping forwarding companies if you want to buy things online. With a little bit of work you can even find storage facilities or virtual office providers that will accept deliveries on your behalf. Better if they are located in a neighboring town, and if you get at them using some transportation method (taxi/lyft/etc) that doesn't take your picture/record your voice/etc. Don't let them track your plates, don't ever take your cell phone to the storage facility. Never associate you with that location, or the whole thing unravels.

I could go on and on, but you get the idea.

Our society has become one which actively hunts dissidents. Even if all you want to do is establish a reasonably secure means to express a dissenting opinion online, you should probably consider much or all of the above.

How did we let it get this bad?

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: unsolicited

"And who determines a person's ability to recover a file?"

It's a terrifying law. You're actually punished for being smart. I can build a scanning tunneling microscope from parts lying around my home. In theory, I could wed that to a Raspberry Pi and - presuming I could obtain or construct stepping motors/gearing with a fine enough range - I could recover files directly from a wide variety of platters.

I can also remove the controller chip from a flash drive and replace it with something that would allow me raw access to the cells. That would allow me to pull a cell-by-cell image of the drive - something that's virtually impossible with a controller in the way - and then most likely find the deleted images in "spare" cells waiting for new writes.

So, unless I throw away ever computer storage device I own and never use electronic communications again I would vulnerable. "Extreme pornography" ends up in my spam on a semiregular basis and absolutely shows up during internet searches...usually for things so completely unrelated it's baffling.

If I lived in the UK, the knowledge inside my head would be illegal. The country has actually managed to codify thought crime.

What. The. Fuck.

2
0

What's the point of the Internet of Things?

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Fishtanks are useless

I don't know about you lot, but I actually have real world friends. If I could monitor the tank, I could ask one of the many friends I have living in the city to pop in if there's a problem. It doesn't need to change parameters. Just monitor and report. (Well, I would like it to automatically top of the tanks and feed the blighters, but you don't need "internet connected" for that.)

You lot act like you don't actually have real, live human friends. Like it's "all tech" or "all people".

We live in a world of both people and technology. You should consider mixing and matching.

1
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: No, Trevor...

I have an alarm clock that leaps of the table and drives across the room to make me chase it. So yeah. Technology can help, even with hard problems.

1
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Deep Breathing . . . for Diving into Dark Web Pools

@ amanfromMars 1 cease this coherence immediately. It's disconcerting.

5
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Deep breath . . .

"I would not, however, be caught dead with a goatee."

Noone here accused you of having taste... :P

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: not convinced, but can see potential

I don't generally swear, or even write long comments, due to passion. I do it to achieve a very selective, targeted effect in the reader. There have only been - to my knowledge - about 10 comments where I have "snapped", and truly just core dumped my emotions without some form of careful linguistic selection.

That said, I don't see anything in this thread worthy of a good riposte. People are pretty tame, even the trolls. It's like a quiet Saturday night on the lake, in forum form.

2
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: @Trevor_Pott: not convinced, but can see potential

I believe I've had THAT conversation already.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: not convinced, but can see potential

Aye. And not just you. Lots of people take pills, even when they are young, for a variety of ailments. Do you know how hard it is for someone with ADHD to remember to take their meds in the morning?

And what about something that took your blood pressure before dispensing a dose of stimulant (again, common for ADHD folks) so that it knew when it was safe, and when not?

A pill box that could track what Alzheimer's (or, for that matter others) patients took, and then either report that back to the doctor, or at least track it in aggregate to help us design better pills?

Something that tracks what we eat, and when, as well as what pills we take - and when - so that we can correlate symptoms for various things with these sorts of events and are better able to detect patterns? (For example, this would be really useful in helping to diagnose Celiac patients, IBS and a few other things.)

Hell, a toilet with an automated excretion analyser to help determine things like "are my organs shutting down" or "do I have a gall bladder infection", etc.

There are a lot of possibilities. Not all have to be internet connected. Some are better if they are.

But that was really my point in the article. It's not going to be "selling billions of units of an individual product" so much as "selling millions or tens of millions of an individual product" to meet niches.

3
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: No convinced

Is there no room for optimism at all? Life is all dour? We will die alone and unremembered after a brief period of despair and suffering that was our lives?

How sad. :(

5
3

China: Microsoft, don't shy away from our probe

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Just leave now...@Trevor

Actually, no, you're just an idiot.

If you have actually read my arguments you'd know damned well that I'm anti everything unless and until something has proven it's value to me and to my clients. As soon as it has stopped being of value, I'm against it. Value is calculated in many ways: monetary value, trustworthiness and enablement.

I have just as openly pooped on Linux and Apple as I have Microsoft. And I have praised Microsoft, Linux and Apple as well. I am not "pro" anything (except Ninite). You, however, very clearly are. And to you, anyone who doesn't agree with your prejudices must obviously be biased.

So piss off. I don't have time for those who can't separate "disagrees with my view on who is worthy of worship" from bias. You are irrelevant and you are annoying.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Just leave now...@Trevor

"Be honest with yourself, Trevor. You know have a freetard Linux agenda and you will never be satisfied until you get your way."

You're an idiot.

2
0

Synology and the NAS-ty malware-flingers: What can be learned

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: "It's an expensive ask..." but necessary

Actually, it is considered by most experts to be an important part of defense in depth. It eliminates 80%+ of the attacks in a single move. The rest of the attacks then must be dealt with by other means...but it would prevent the current crisis, as the existing malware only looks at default ports.

Sometimes, obfuscation is all that's required. Other times, you need more. But don't discount the value of obfuscation when so many attackers are just plain lazy.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Conflict of interest?

I think if you put the management interface of any device onto the internet you're nothing more than a lesson waiting to be taught to others. So to be entirely fair, when asked, I vehemently advise against it, be they Synology or not.

Naked admin: just say no!

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Conflict of interest?

"Isn't it a conflict of interest for Trevor to report on Synology while touting their gear to his own customers? Obviously he wouldn't want them to go bust. What exactly is his interest in the company?"

I am not entirely sure why it would be a conflict of interest to report on Synology while selling it to my customers. I sell Microsoft software and services to my customers too, and I tear them a new arse every other day. Any vendor is disposable, and - to be perfectly blunt - I don't make my living selling computers. I keep my hand it in because doing so allows me to keep a presence at the coalface of IT, making sure my skills stay sharp and that I have knowledge and experience relevant to the IT companies I report on.

What might represent a conflict of interest - but I honestly feel does not - is that i am currently engaged with Synology on a very narrow contract to provide them a VMworld booth demo. This demo consists of a Supermicro FatTwin server, A Supermicro Switch and a Synology RackStation all configured to run various workloads that stress the Synology storage. The contract is very narrowly defined, and I have no other role (such as ongoing consulting, etc) beyond that specific deliverable.

Given the voluminous red tape that is Synology's internal marketing spend processes, there is zero reason to believe I would get another contract from them. So, being frank, there is no incentive on my part to be nice to them. I have a fixed contract that says "I gets my money if I deliver the goods" and there's nothing in there about not pissing off the natives.

And I piss off the natives rather a lot. They weren't exactly happy I ran a pair of pieces that said, in essence, "Synology made mistakes and needs to reorganize themselves internally and spend a stonking huge pile of money to make things better in the long run."

I've never tried to hide who I am working with. You can always find out information about my open-ended engagements at http://www.trevorpott.com/about/ under "disclosure".

I don't list narrowly focused, fixed-deliverable contracts unless those contracts compel me to advocate on behalf of a client. Once more being blunt: I get so many jobs creating whitepapers, blogs, demo videos, booth demos and so forth that the fixed-deliverable stuff all blurs together. They don't make me any more or less happy about a company.

A great example is Microsoft. They gave me a free year of MSDN so that I would be able to have licences to write about their software. Didn't make me any more charitable towards them.

VMware ensures I have a suite of the latest licenses, if you read my writing over at SearchVMware, I don't exactly pull punches with them either...and the VMware licenses I get are enough to run my lab.

Bottom line: if there is ever something I - or any of the circle of professionals I trust to help me make these judgements - feel presents the possibility for conflict of interest, that will be listed in the disclosure section of my personal website for all to see.

In the meantime and betweentime, I will report on anything interesting I turn up - positive or negative - with as little personal bias as I am capable of demonstrating. I will also use and abuse any and all of my contacts within every vendor I can to advocate on behalf of "the little guy": the end customer, end user and the sub-1000 seat SMB.

As regards Synology, this means using all my connections there to try to get them to take a more serious approach to security. But I don't give Synology any more of a break than I would any other company.

Well, except Ninite. They get a free pass no matter what. But I'm allowed to be an unashamed fanboy of at least one company, aren't I?

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Remember it's not just Synology

"You could at least slap all of them equally for their incompetence over the years."

I do.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

If it was a fnord, you wouldn't be able to see it.

As for Synology, I've got meetings scheduled with them to go over the issues here and try to convince them to invest heavily in security. So far, they seem receptive.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: re: Fail2Ban

Fail2Ban is capable of more analysis than simply "block X number of failed logins". That just happens to be the only thing most people use it for. :)

Also: Fail2Ban wouldn't have stopped this attack, but it would stop many others. And my point here is "defense in depth." That there are layers that need to be here. I would, for example, configure Fail2Ban - or the auth system it protects - to reject any root or admin-priv user if that user was logging in from anything excepting the local subnet. Very important...

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: "It's an expensive ask..." but necessary

I can't say I completely disagree. At the same time, the balance between security and usability is still something tech companies are pouring research dollars into.

I personally can't claim to have all of the answers. Some, yes, but certainly not all. I think any among us who did try to claim that would be a fool; if they had the surefire answers, they'd be a mad billionaire.

So absolutely there needs to be a refocus on security within Synology. I'd like to be among the first to pound on the table about this. But this has to be balanced with usability and perhaps that means that - for now - we can't have both.

For now, at least, security is a shared responsibility, whether you're using a Synology NAS, a Supermicro IMPI controller, a Dell thin client or an HP display management computer. Systems that are largely unattended and unmanaged still need TLC. It sucks, but it's the state of technology today.

What really needs to happen is a lot of the smaller players need to get together and pool their resources into helping solve the problems to hand. A great example would be the Application Layer Gateway firewall I want. That's a beefy requirement. It take a log of RAM and a lot of CPU, at least when you're talking in the context of IoT devices.

A baseband management controller, or a low-end ARM NAS, or even your average display management computer is going to have trouble handling a proper one. Throw on monitoring, reporting, communications, etc...suddenly we start getting into the realm of a Big Ask for such small equipment.

So I think real research is required how. How can we do more with less? How can we shrink the requirements of some of this stuff so that we stay within the power/parts/price limits for that product category but still maintain both usability and security?

As I said above, I certainly don't have all the answers. I wish I did.

I could use the billions.

5
0

Ransomware attack hits Synology's NAS boxen

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: so .... if I don't run EZ-Internet ....

If your Synology doesn't have ports open to the net, you should be safe. But do run updates on the thing anyways. If your computer were ever infected in the future, and your Synology was left unpatched, it could be pwned at that point. Updating now will patch the hole.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

They're putting together a complete PR campaign around this. Their PR guy is horribly overworked, and he has been reaching out to tech journalists around the world on this. My article - and others like it - are the first line of their efforts to reach customers.

I suspect an e-mail blast is being prepared, though I personally think that should have been done about 10 minutes after learning this was an issue. Still; I do know that they will be issuing most (if not all) of the advice I wrote in this article, probably later today.

We'll see over time how the response shapes up, and I'll work with their PR guys - and hopefully their brass - to make sure they do better next time. People's files are being encrypted. Who knows how many memories are being lost. It's the least I can do.

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

The second piece has been published, for those curious.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Advice please

Edit the firewall on your router, not your Synology NAS. Your Synology NAS should never be plugged directly into the internet. There should always be a router in between. If you have any questions whatsoever, contact Synology immediately, and they'll walk you through locking this down.

Edit: others go there first. :)

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: @Trevor.

Absolutely. Please go to the Synology Download Center and download the update or new version of DSM for your device. You'll be able to log into your Distation or Rackstation locally and then go into "Start --> Control panel --> Update and restore (which is under "system")". Here you'll be able to feed it the file you downloaded.

I've done the above many times. It's safe and works well.

2
0

Yes, we know Active Directory cloud sync is a MESS, says Microsoft

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

"That's what makes you Special."

Shiny. Do I get a short yellow school bus? I could turn it into a testlab on wheels!

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: But does it work?

Aye, saw it. There are 384 work mails (down from 1021 when I woke up an hour ago) to go before I can start getting into the "El Reg" folder. I'll dig myself out eventually...

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: But does it work?

That AC is so far in the "RUN, DEAR $DEITY RUN!!!!!!!" part of the crazy/hot graph that a careful reexamination might be required. :)

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: But does it work?

@Steven Raith don't bother the Anonymous Coward you're talking to is a Microsoft marketing shill. Worse, it's not capable of rational thought. Just ignore it. Hopefully it'll do the world a favor by getting ebola and dying alone.

1
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: But does it work?

Several options exist. They're all a little bit prickly. Worth a blog, perhaps.

1
1

Microsoft KILLS Windows 8.1 Update 2 and Patch Tuesday

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: And meanwhile in Munich…

Microsoft is the world's premier supplier of Contempt as a Service. Their offerings are unmatched, whether you reside in Germany, the United States, China, or anywhere in between. Subscribe today!

52
4