Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Security IT

Microsoft 'Trustworthy Computing' Turns 10 185

Posted by Soulskill
from the eat-your-cake-at-your-desk dept.
gManZboy writes "Bill Gates fired off his famous Trustworthy Computing memo to Microsoft employees on Jan. 15, 2002, amid a series of high-profile attacks on Windows computers and browsers in the form of worms and viruses like Code Red and 'Anna Kournikova.' The onslaught forced Gates to declare a security emergency within Microsoft, and halt production while the company's 8,500 software engineers sifted through millions of lines of source code to identify and fix vulnerabilities. The hiatus cost Microsoft $100 million. Today, the stakes are much higher. 'TWC Next' will include a focus on cloud services such as Azure, the company says."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft 'Trustworthy Computing' Turns 10

Comments Filter:
  • It's true that Win 7 is a step ahead for windoze systems. It' practically workable! That is if you happen to like the way it works, because to tweak it even just a bit, you need to either be an expert or then buy a customising software.

    But "Trustworthy Computing" has much more heinous objectives than making your windoze box more secure. It wants to make UEFI standards so that no other OS's can be run on a machine that uses M$ OS. It wants to make listening to your own music dependent on the presence of a TP

    • I guess it's in their interest to suck up to MPAA, RIAA and book publishers?

      That, or your completely unsubstantiated premises are wrong. And personally I can't see why a declining company, with a reputation as bad as MS, would entertain the notion of further alienating users by further locking down their platform against the users' interests, so that really just leaves the false premise possibility.

  • by LoudMusic (199347) on Friday January 13, 2012 @05:24PM (#38692256)

    The profession of inventing numbers has always intrigued me. The article says, "The hiatus cost Microsoft $100 million." Well, sure they can figure out how much money they usually make in a time frame, and how much money they didn't make during this time frame, and BAM you've got a number. But that number, $100,000,000, just seems a bit too ... round. It seems like someone said, "Hey, call the department that makes up numbers. We need one that's not so small it seems insignificant but not so big no one believes it. Not too cold, not too hot. Not too lumpy, not too soft. Something that's juuussssssttt right." Which is certainly a shorter route to 'news' than actually doing the work to figure out what it actually cost. It also sounds like something a 7 year old would say on the playground in a screaming match about fathers' occupations, "OH? Yeah?! Well! My dad works for Microsoft and they lost a hundred million dollars!"

    And how can they know that's what it would have been? Maybe that was the month, had they asked, that Apple would have sold out to Microsoft. But they didn't ask and no one will ever know. Would have been more than a hundred million dollars, for sure.

    Yes, wildly off topic, but it's the crazy shit that goes through my brain.

    • The profession of inventing numbers has always intrigued me. The article says, "The hiatus cost Microsoft $100 million." Well, sure they can figure out how much money they usually make in a time frame, and how much money they didn't make during this time frame, and BAM you've got a number.

      Well, back of the envelope, 8,500 employees, times 100/hr times three weeks ( 120 hours) and you have 102 million. Labor costs alone could easily account for it.

      So, if the average engineer spent three weeks searching, and

  • Fewer points of failure. Yay Cloud!

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...