2017-05-30 4:36 GMT+02:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <l...@lkcl.net>:
> --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 10:48 PM, David Niklas <do...@mail.com> wrote: > > > I am just a tad confused. > > 1. You started a reverse engineering project on NT domains. > > 2. You presented your success to MS as a security problem. > > and also a collaboration and interoperability opportunity (which > worked extremely successfully). > > and it also galvanised them to do a proper documentation effort. > basically there wasn't any. at all. the code had been organically > develeped by engineers that were getting on for retirement age. as > they were the only ones left who understood the security implications, > they began a rather urgent process called the "CIFS Initiative" to > document the protocol so that their *own engineers could understand > it*. > > frickin funny, really. > > > 3. You were hired. > > 4. Someone in MS complained. > > some fuckwit in the brain-washed marketing department, yes. what's > hilarious is that microsoft's own employees - the ones with good > reputations and standing - had to tell this particular specimen of > brainwashed fuckwittery, "you _do_ realise what this one individual > could do to our company if you ever pissed him off??" > > :) > > > > So, the FLOSS folks never saw your work anyway? > > they did.... and they resented it, very very badly. the so-called > leaders of the samba team *really* did not like the fact that i knew > more than them about MSRPC, and that the work that i spearheaded > increased the codebase of samba at the time by a whopping THIRTY > PERCENT. > > so they engineereed a way to get me out. > > by 2003 someone in the FLOSS community tracked my work on Exchange > 5.5 reverse-engineering, copied it, reimplemnted it, and did not tell > anyone that i was the one who had done the reverse-engineering. > > 20 years later samba is considered to be a failure. samba 4 was > something like 10 years in the making, and yet failed to deliver. > companies that had held on to samba 3, which the samba developers > STOPPED work on because they didn't understand it properly, were > struggling to keep it up and running and were totally incensed when > samba 4 was finally released and was even worse and even harder to > configure. > > they pushed me out and FLOSS has suffered as a result, because the > complexity is so high it's beyond their ability to cope. > You're sounding like libv here ;-) > > l. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk > _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk
