Meltdown & Spectre --update--

Yeah, sometimes it does not warrant any extra security to be cutting edge... This I know.

That a hardware-vulnerability has gone unchecked for a couple of decades, however, eluded even me. Even more that it wasn't even addressed / announced before very recently.

Turns out, almost every computing-device I own has these bugs. And I find myself in a situation where I do as very many others do with vulnerable equipment, with little to no chance of patching; I just isolate them.

Don't get me wrong, I've taken measures and patched / disabled low-level functions as best I could. But when the issue is basically invisible (ring -3), there's limits to what I can do to fix it.

The ass-hats who made the shit have to fix it properly, or someone considerably smarter than me have to do what they can to mitigate as the circumstances will allow.

Which, from what I understand isn't much, and it's massively complicated to boot. The complications are the reasons for the "considerable performance slow-down" that will result from the software-fixes to the issue.

---

***UPDATE***

Seems these bugs / vulnerabilities have been blown totally out of proportion for the average computer-user.

Slowdowns only present themselves at huge workloads (think Big Data databases, enterprise computing, etc.), so average-Joe won't even notice any difference... I've been pretty buzy patching / fixing my affected systems lately, both at work and at home, and I can't say I've noticed any significant slowdowns in any way.

Not that I've got huge workloads, or global-spanning database-queries running 24/7, but I've definitely got bigger and heavier workloads than the average man.

--- If people just patch their systems regularly, they'll be fine ---

---

If you want to be sure you actually have the bugs, you can run this bash-script on Linux systems:

#!/usr/bin/env bash
echo "cpuinfo           : "$(cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep 'model name' | awk 'NR==1' | awk '{ print $4" "$5" "$6" "$7" "$8" "$9 }');
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep -i bugs | head -1;

Google Chrome / Chromium browser

I have been a promoter for Google-branded software for some time now. Basically, because they do it right!

And I am especially fond of Google's Chrome / Chromium browser(s). They have adequate security (sandboxing, etc.), superb' GUI-handling / -principles (tabs, integrated tools, etc.). It is the all-in-one multi-purpose web-tool for both users and developers in my opinion, and a lot of others.

But, I tend to hear a lot of complaining about "chrome getting slower over time", "chrome tends to crash rather abruptly", "it's beta-software, don't use it, use explorer", and the like.

I only have one thing to say about the matter:
STOP INSTALLING PLUGINS AND EXTENSIONS WITHOUT CAUTION!

Extending and plugging a software-package can be a good thing, indeed, when it's necessary to, but it really is a double-edged sword technology... too many extensions slows loading / writing and even exiting of a program / OS. OS-specific resource-handling suffers as well, which in turn is misinterpreted as performance-issues of the program itself.

---

This particular advice also concerns operating systems (you know; OS X, Windows and Linux), the more crap (especially third-party bloatware and/or fake-service(s)) that hog up precious resources, the more sluggish and decrepit your system will appear to be.

Mac OS X and Windows also suffer from bloatware, malware and occasionally; viruses. Of which all can be prevented and removed, easily. If you prepare!

Updating core system components is vital! If a system is properly updated, it makes it that much more hard for a potential cracker to break in / steal / hi-jack / sabotage.

Be vigilant, clean your shit (browser-cache(s), OS-specific temp-files, etc) and secure your system(s) to the best of your ability (or the abilities of a more competent friend / family-member / co-worker).

WinSCPbeen in heavy use over the years...

I hadn't given it much thought, but I have been using ONE Windows-application quite extensively over the past years. WinSCP.

For a simple-faced filemanager, it has many uses. But it's main feature is to connect to SSH / SFTP / FTP servers, handle files locally / remotely, transfer files, etc. A networked client-server file-manager application.

Before the early years of 2000, there were no decent graphical file-managers for cross-platform transfers and handling. Especially not with proper support for the Secure SHell v2 protocol.

WinSCP had this from the beginning (mainly with the scp program at first, then the SFTPv2 protocol. more recently WinSCP opts for switching to SFTPv3 protocol if available, for added security).

I can't recommend this program enough for it's easy transfer, handling and other file-related operations. I have never had any serious problems with it. It just works, and it works pretty damn good too.

It's interface is a beautiful interpretation of earlier, rather similar :P command-line designer guidelines.

Tales from a Windows-free life

I completely stopped using Windows around 2002, and I've really enjoyed it, very, very much :)

Since then I've been distro-hopping (swapping different Linux-versions, more commonly known as "distributions", or "distros") through everything from Slackware Linux to Ubuntu. It's been a rocky and unstable ride to be quite honest, but it's been an awesome learning-experience.

I can't even begin to count all the problems concerning re-installation of Windows on both my hands. Yes, that's BOTH hands! I really, REALLY hate re-installing Windows. And if you're a super-user like me, who likes to play around with your computer-systems, you've done a re-install a couple of dozen times (or maybe even more).

Doing a windows-update after a fresh installation can take HOURS... Suffice to say it's a tedious and boooooooring task. Yes, I can hear a comment in the distance saying "why not use an up-to-date installation disc with all the Service Packs included?", well, the problem with that option is this: Windows AIN'T FREE. But that is not the only reason why I've renounced Microsoft-products alltogether. License this and license that, non-disclosure agreements and what-not. I'm sick and tired of it. Not to mention the installation-hell it is to install Windows onto a laptop, or (God forbid) a NETBOOK! After doing tenfolds of re-installations in the 90s and the early 2000s, my conclusion for personal operating system and software-usage came to this: No More Windows For Me!

I'm not giving Windows or Microsoft the finger. I've used their software for quite some time earlier in my computing-life. Even as far back as DOS and Windows 3.11. I'm just saying it's not for me anymore. I need more options and alternatives to doing computing tasks, I don't like being locked-in to one, and ONLY one solution.

Doing a fresh Linux installation, can take MINUTES, at most an hour or two. And if you're nice about it and don't include a shitload of third-party addons, you're likely to only do this ONCE! One time, and only doing updates and release-upgrades every now and then afterwards. Ok, so installing operating systems is not for everyone. But you can always ask a nice geek/nerd-friend to do this for you. Doing updates and upgrades nowadays is rather straightforward. The system asks if you want to update/upgrade, you press "Yes", you type in your password; and HEY PRESTO! It's over and done with.

I admit, being experimental with a Linux-system can do irrepearable damage, but hey, that's how we learn. And it pays off to use a system you can sacrifice for such a project. I did, multiple times. That's why it's called "experimental".

After doing all my experimenting on Linux and figuring out how it works, I decided to use a mainstream-distro to save me from headaches when trying to get things working. That's why the choice fell on Ubuntu.

After switching to Ubuntu in early 2009 (from Slackware Linux, which I still like), I've never looked back. Ubuntu serves my every computing need. It includes almost every public proprietary technology, from Flash to Java. Allthough it has to be added manually, doing so is not hard. It is explained in great detail all over the web, you just have to look for it. And, Ubuntu offers alternative programs to just about every web-service available today. Another great point for pro-linux, is that it runs on just about any hardware available as well. Can you say the same for Vista? Or Windows 7? I think not...

Nuff said ;)

"Linux er død (igjen)" - Eller?

Jaja, skal si meg enig i at Linux på skrivebordet kanskje aldri når frem til mannen i gata. Men ikke fordi det ikke er mulig, vanskeligere, eller utilgjengelig. Ingen av disse utsagnene stemmer i det hele tatt.

Det hele dreier seg mer om uvitenhet enn noe annet. Og det at folk er "vant" med det de er vant til (les: Windows / Mac OS X).

Tankegangen blant gjennomsnittet er at programvare laget av store programvare-selskaper som selger dette, er "bedre" enn gratis programvare. Dette stemmer ikke alltid heller.

Skjønt fri programvare kanskje ikke har de samme funksjonene som betalt programvare, betyr det ikke nødvendigvis at de ikke kan gjøre akkurat den samme jobben (gjerne bedre i mange tilfeller), men at de utføres på alternative måter (dette fordi proprietær programvare ofte har lisenser og patenter krøllet inn i oppskriftene for å beskytte opphavsretten, men det har også visse frie prosjekter, deriblant Linux kjernen).

Jeg er nokså enig i det mange sier om at Linux er for avanserte brukere, eller såkalte "super-brukere", jeg er selv en super-bruker. Og når man besitter denne kompetansen, krever man gjerne litt mer av programvaren man bruker. Jeg gikk personlig over til fri programvare og Linux fordi jeg var drittlei av å være begrenset i hvordan jeg kunne benytte programvare, forandre den og dele den videre.

Jeg er nokså enig i Richard M. Stallmans (grunnleggeren av GNU og FSF) ideologi om at all innovasjon og oppskriftene på dette skal kunne deles, og at alle skal ha de samme rettighetene på det samme grunnlaget. Men at alt skal være gratis uten unntak, er å gå for langt. Det er nok av plass for begge typer programvare i vår verden.

Link til ITAvisen.no:
http://www.itavisen.no/853888/linux-er-dod-(igjen)

A few words...

Ok, to start off, I've always said people obsess about desirable objects of irrelevance.

This is exactly what I think of the fuss about iPad, iPod, iPhone, and the like.

I used to be an Apple fanboy, using Macintosh machines and software for DTP/PR illustration and artwork purposes. But these days, what's the point?

"Think different"?

Well, Apple-machines run on the same hardware as PCs running Microsoft Windows these days. Suffice to say Apple has definitely shifted the last decade, and not for the better if you ask me.

iPhone? - I actually love my HTC Desire Google Android smartphone very much thank you.

iPod? - My HTC Desire runs Spotify and has my entire favorites collection stored offline on the SD-card.

iPad? - Nooot really my bag. I think I'll be waiting a little while for some ubuntu pre-installed pc-pad, which does not restrict my computing in any way, and is way cheaper per high-spec component compared to Apple-products.

There's a major difference between the phrases "need to have" and "just works". I prefer the second, but then again maybe I have a little more than average understanding of technology, to better cope with the situation should the software not function as advertised. That's the major problem with OSS software, it does not come with a guarantee of operation, you either have to make it work yourself, or pay for the support to get it working. Mind you, the linux-support available is extraordinarily useful and easy compared to big proprietary ISVs.

I've given up telling people about these facts. The only people that listen to such advice about computer equipment and/or software choices, are people that eventually prefer Linux over Mac OS X and Windows as their everyday OS.

Sure, I can understand that in Scandinavia, we have a rather sore relationship with the word "free". The past has not proven the word to have any positive meaning in any areas, This was also why the OSS community split from the FSF in the 90s. The wrong words for the right thing if you ask me.

I think it's awesome that I can download software-packages from the Internet via University and/or ISP mirror-servers, and make a computer-device work out-of-the-box on an operating system I got the same way :) way to go Torvalds, FSF and the OSS communities!

I SALUTE YOU! ;D

Edit, 10:44PM:

My point with "need to have" and "just works", was the freedom of choice.

Sure, if need be, I can save up to what Apple products costs, OR, I can have what just works, to do what I want for a fraction of the price and no agreements telling me I can't do this or I can't do that.

I'll do whatever I want to with my computer equipment thank you very much! The hardware itself was quite expensive, so I refuse to be locked-in at any ISV, where my digital rights are virtually non-existant, system-usage is governed by one proprietary entity for which I even have to pay for every regular release.

Thanks..., but NO THANKS.

Windows 7

Reading today's news headlines, you'll be sure to hit an article or two saying the Linux ommunity loves Windows 7. And yes, this is a fact. Even Linus Torvalds himself has been caught promoting Win7 (picture above).

From tuxradar.com: "It's official: we love Windows 7"

And according to them, their pagehits and search requests seem to indicate that people are actually validating operating systems before shelling off their precious $$$'s without as much as a question. Since the release of Win7, tuxradar has been receiving page requests for two specific articles on their site: Linux vs Windows 7 and Benchmarked: Ubuntu vs Vista vs Windows 7.

I find this really pleasing, foremost because if these visitors are non tech-savvy people, it shows that the efforts of the open source communities are finally showing some kind of influence on how people determine their computing needs.

This also shows the effect social networking has had on people's Internet habits, most of the hits on these pages are probably linking from blogs, social networks, IRC, twitter and the like. The electron-generations are finally getting recognition from 'the pinkies' (squares, conservatives, whatever you like to call them).

I've been testing Win7 RC myself in a virtual machine @ work, and I must admit, Microsoft has really pulled it off this time.

It's fast, secure, intuitive, goodlooking and it just works!

And as a result of all that linking, people are getting more aware about Linux and it's surrounding communities!

WIN - WIN

NVIDIA & Linux

Phoronix.com recently interviewed one of NVIDIA's core linux driver engineers --Alan Ritger-- along with their technical marketing manager --Sean Kilbride-- about their development processes, IDE's, test-tools, etc. It proved to be quite an interesting read.

According to Ritger, NVIDIA engineers uses 'Perforce' for code management on big projects and/or big modifications, but are also able to maintain their own source tree with either git or quilt before submitting their changes to Perforce for quality assurance and to be included in the mainline code tree @ NVIDIA.

Phoronix also asked which IDE's and/or text editors they use, and Ritger said most engineers @ NVIDIA use either emacs or vim for their day-to-day development work. We're talking hardcore oldschool command-line development tools here.

Ritger also said most engineers use x86 as their base platform for driver development, but also focus alot on x86_64 for testing because most OEMs utilize 64bit nowadays.

Testing (which won't come as a shock to most linux-enthusiasts) is mostly done with in-house OpenGL test-tools, modified by engineers to reflect additional OpenGL extensions that are added and to accomodate for new GPU cores to be thoroughly tested. Games used in testing range from Quake 3, Doom 3 all the way up to ETQW. Testing frameworks include Viewperf, Unigine Tropics, Maya and yes, they even tend to use glxgears as a simple sanity test from time to time ;)

What DID shock me in the intervew however, was the question of how much codebase is shared between Linux and Windows, and the answer is, the OpenGL codebase shares A WHOPPING 90%! Yes, both Linux and Windows share a massive 90% of the NVIDIA OpenGL codebase. The X Windows driver is more UNIX-focused, but shares some code from the NVIDIA display drivers from other platforms and systems.

The main focus of the Linux NVIDIA driver development groups are for the Linux workstations used in the TV/movie-industry for advanced 3D work. But since their test-tools include a few popular computer games, the gaming aspect of it all is not completely forgotten :)

Even Ritger himself does a round of xpilot from time to time ;D

Link:
http://www.phoronix.com/ - 8-page interview

LSE: Windows > Linux

Da ser det ut som London-børsen går over fra Windows til Linux.

I skrivende stund benytter LSE (London Stock Exchange) systemet TradElect levert av Accenture, basert på Microsofts .NET plattform. Nylig kjøpte LSE opp softwareselskapet MillenniumIT på Sri Lanka, som nå lover et bedre transaksjonsystem basert på Linux og Solaris. LSE sier at det egenutviklede systemet fra MillenniumIT er svært skalerbart, mye lettere, kvikkere og enklere å innstallere.

Og siden Oslo Børs er en av samarbeidspartnerene til LSE, skal vi ikke se bort ifra at de tar i bruk det nye MellenniumIT-systemet også. Men i første omgang vil de benytte TradElect mot slutten av 2010, nettopp det systemet LSE nå forkaster.

Link:

http://www.digi.no/ - norsk artikkel

http://blogs.computerworld.com/ - engelsk artikkel

Oppdatering torsdag 8 oktober:

Nå ser det ut som Oslo Børs vurderer å se an hvordan LSE gir tilbakemelding på MillenniumIT-systemet. Istedenfor å gå over til TradElect slik som de hadde planlagt, ser det ut som de heller går for Solaris/Linux-løsningen LSE nå går over på allikevel.

Link:

http://www.hardware.no/ - Oslo Børs vurderer Linux-løsning

Linux' kjerne-utvikling

Linus Torvalds innrømmer at kodebasen i Linux-kjernen har blitt oppblåst og stagnerer utviklingen. Rapporter fra Intel som har fulgt med på Linux kjerne-utviklingen nøye de siste årene, tilsier at ytelsen har falt rundt 2 prosentpoeng hver hovedoppgradering. Som igjen vil si at ytelsen har falt rundt 12 prosentpoeng bare på de siste 10 kjerne-oppdateringene.

I 1994, da Linux 1.0 ble sluppet, var hele kodebasen på 176 250 kodelinjer, mens i versjon 2.6.40 er basen på hele 11 637 173 kodelinjer. Til sammenligning har Windows Vista opptil 50 millioner kodelinjer, men Linux har dog ikke alle applikasjonene innebygd i operativ systemet slik som har vært normen i Windows de siste 10 årene.

Linus legger til at utviklingen sannsynligvis ikke er til å unngå, men at det ikke går utover stabiliteten.

Linus har nå også gitt retningslinjer på hvordan man legger til ny kode til kjerne-prosjektet, siden det er dette som har satt en stopper for selvutvikling innenfor kjerne-gruppen, og heller lagt mye mer vekt på validering og kvalitetssikring av eksterne bidrag til kjernen. Blant punktene har han bedt bidragsytere å kommentere hva koden deres gjør, "for å gjøre det enklere å ordne og godkjenne bidragene i forhold til funksjonene brukere forventer å se".

Disse punktene har også gitt Linus mer frihet til å bidra med egen kode i kjernen igjen.

Link:

http://www.digi.no/

Migrering, WinXP og Win7

For de fleste, vil det å bytte fra Windows XP, til Windows 7 være en smal sak. De fleste har fått det for seg at "...skal man bytte OS, bytter man maskin". I-og-for-seg, er jo det helt greit forsåvidt. Men for de som måtte ville oppgradere direkte fra XP til 7, så er ikke dette en dans på roser, tvertimot...

Microsoft har laget migrerings-verktøy for "Vista-til-7", og testing av dette verktøyet viser at en full sikkerhetskopiering og gjenoppretting kan ta alt fra et par timer, helt opptil 20 timer. Grunnene til dette er så mangt, bl.a. nye sikkerhetsrutiner og filsystem-sikkerhet som krever at Vista-generert data konverteres til nyere format. Dersom en er en superbruker, kan disse data-mengdene også fort løpe opp i et par hundretalls gigabytes. Om ikke terabytes.

Legg merke til at denne metoden for migrering gjelder brukere av Windows Vista.

Kritikere og eksperter skriver nå at migrering fra XP til 7 er nærmest sagt et mareritt. ALT må gjøres manuelt fordi M$ ikke har laget verktøy for denne hensikten. Hvorfor? Kanskje fordi de satser på at alle som bruker XP bare skal hive ut tusener av pengene deres for å få en "Windows 7 sertifisert" datamaskin. Om de virkelig forventer at dette skjer, vet jeg ikke.

De fleste jeg kjenner, gidder ikke å "migrere" fra et OS til et nytt. De benytter bare "kjøp-og-virk" metoden, fordi de da slipper mye av data-administreringen som inngår i en oppgradering.

Jeg kommer nok IKKE til å gjøre det slik, jeg kommer nok heller til å sjekke minimumskravene for Win7, og tilpasse systemet til maskinen jeg vil bruke det på. Jeg tar også backup av mine bruker-data nettopp fordi jeg ikke orker å gjøre alt arbeidet som må gjøres hver gang OSet må oppgraderes.

Hvis du finner på å oppgradere fra Vista til 7, må du også tenke på oppgraderingsavgiften til M$. Brukeravtalen Vista-brukere har godtatt, viser til at Microsoft reserverer seg retten til å kreve mer penger av deg som forbruker dersom du vil oppgradere til et nyere system. Og det er her de har vært eksepsjonelt smarte på det juridiske.

Skal du f.eks. oppgradere fra en Windows Vista Business lisens, må du oppgradere til samme Win7-versjon, altså: "Windows 7 Professional" (som har en grossist-pris på rundt $299 (rundt 1750NOK)). Riktignok får du rabatt når du eier en "Professional" versjon fra før, men dersom du ikke gjør det, og f.eks. har en maskin med "Windows Vista Home", må du nok ut med full grossistpris dersom du vil ha en "Professional"-versjon av Win7.

Eier du XP --samme hvilken versjon-- så må du uansett ut med full grossistpris for en Windows 7 kopi, en får ikke rabatt med XP, rett og slett fordi Windows 7 bygger videre på Vista-teknologi, og siden Vista faller under vedlikeholdsperioden til Win7, holder Vista-lisenser for rabatt-tilbudet.

Er du fremdeles personlig Microsoft-tilhenger?

Link:

http://www.computerworld.com/

2000/XP sikkerhet? LuLz? *sukk*

Som nevnt tidligere i et engelsk-språklig innlegg (linken i enden av innlegget), fortalte jeg om et nyfunnet sikkerhetshull som i grunnen burde være klassifisert som høy-risiko, men som Microsoft har ned-prioritert både for Windows 2000 og XP fordi "systemene er såpass utdaterte at det ikke lar seg gjennomføre å oppdatere disse", og anbefaler heller brukere av Windows 2000 å benytte den innebygde Windows-brannmuren som erstatning for en sikkerhetsfiks... ehm, javel?

Bare for å nevne det, så er hullet fikset i både Windows Vista, 7 og Server 2008.

Et genialt fremsteg av Microsoft, å faktisk snakke rett fra levra og fortelle at de ikke har tenkt å fortsette oppdatering av det mest brukte systemet på nettet den dag i dag.

Nå håper jeg at folk begynner å tenke på hvilket system og programvare-leverandør de har tenkt å benytte fremover i tid basert på dette. Men sannsynligheten er nok den at folk bare fortsetter å hive de hardt tjente pengene sine rett i Microsofts lommer uten spørsmål eller kritikk som vanlig.

Snakket mye med folk på jobb om dette, og de sier det samme som Microsoft, når XP fases HELT ut av sikkerhetsteamet, er det rett og slett bare å bytte til Windows 7, men det er her de fleste kommer til å få seg et realt sjokk. Microsoft har bare lagd oppgraderings-avtaler med folk som har kjøpt nyere datamaskiner med Windows Vista pre-innstallert, vi som sitter med XP på systemet og vil oppgradere og sikre oss selv, må nok dessverre ut med hele grossist-prisen for Windows 7 virker det som.

P.S.:

Nå kan feilen diskuteres hvorvidt den er kritisk eller ei, men når slike hull blir publisert offentlig, er det bare et tidsspørsmål før black-hats lager exploits og benytter feilen for alt den er verdt...

Linker:

http://blog.pizslacker.org/

http://www.hardware.no/

http://www.itavisen.no/

Abandoning 2000/XP security updates?

Oh well, it was fun while it lasted...

Seems M$ is dropping security patching for Windows XP, according to this security bulletin regarding a rather serious flaw in the Windows TCP/IP-stack, which enables a black-hat (or any person with technical expertise and malicious intent, really) to easily take control of any Win 2000/XP-computer running a listening service (webserver, SMB file-sharing, FTP, etc.). Microsoft on the other hand, chuffs the flaw, saying the vulnerability only affects a minor percentage of their business-oriented Windows 2000 user-base.

The only thing that concerns me (and a lot of IT critics online) about that statement, is that Windows XP is based on Win 2000. I wouldn't say the Windows XP user-base is a minor percentage, especially when statistics show that around 70% of web-users are on that platform. If this is a ploy from Microsoft to force people to switch to Win 7, it's a bad tactical move. Not only because of the security implications involved, but also Microsoft's decline on the customer-relationship front, as well as business-relations.

Will "The Silicon Valley Giant" ever learn from it's mistakes? Apparently, NO...

Ok, so the flaw isn't high-risk, but it CAN be without proper configuration! My point being that revoking security updates from a product currently in sale is a bad move.

EXPLANATION:

Ultimately, if an attacker gets through with specially crafted TCP-packets (TCP injection/prediction techniques), he can generate a DoS-condition, which halts the affected machine. But as the system can regain control again as soon as the attack-wave dissipates, Microsoft does not regard it as particularly high-risk.

All-in-all there are too many variables in the case-studies to make any good judgement on how risky this hole actually is, but it allows for DoS attacks, and therefore also the possibility of takeover.

Update, thursday september 17th:

To be fair, this flaw only affects advanced users with mal-configured listening-services, but that's not to say, once one IS taken over by a malicious black-hat, it can't be used for destruction and malcontent. If the machine resides in a network with other 2000/XP-machines, it's suddenly (probably) in the trusted IP-range, and therefore poses a risk as a penetration-tool to spread malware internally. There's a lot of vectors to exploit in this scenario, unfortunately... Let's just hope this flaw gets resolved before major abuse occurs.

Link:

http://www.itworld.com/

Root webserver down

My domain webserver @ "www.pizslacker.org" is currently down for maintenance and localizational reasons.

I had to move the darn box because it produced a whole lot of PC-exhaust raising the room temperature quite excessively, put simply, using obsolete hardware has it's caveats.

I moved the linux-server into the room containing the access-gateway to the ISP, hooked up a SOHO switch to spread one of the three RJ45 connectors on the gateway, and am planning to hook up a second server-box running Windows.

The plan is to have one L.A.M.P.-setup ("Linux-Apache-MySQL-PHP" capable linux-box) and a W.I.M.A.-setup ("Windows-IIS-MySQL-ASP" capable windows-box), and to port my web-applications between the two. This will both strengthen my knowledge of AJAX-programming in both *nix- and Win32-environments. But also, force me to troubleshoot any weird and abstract problems that may occur in the process, thus making me learn the frameworks from the ground up.

January 22. - remember this date fellow geeks!

This article @ computerworld.com, discusses and reflects on the software giants vs. open-source. It describes what situation the IT industry is facing taking the financial crisis into consideration.

http://blogs.computerworld.com/being_anti_linux_is_bad_for_your_business_health