Some angry users aren't going to stop Microsoft from obeying the government. When the government orders something to be done, it gets done, regardless of how many people ask for it. I know the win2k source got leaked a while back, did anybody conduct a formal review of it?
<br><br>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/14/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">glymr</b> <<a href="mailto:glymr_darkmoon@ml1.net">glymr_darkmoon@ml1.net</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>Hash: RIPEMD160<br><br>Tony wrote:<br>><br>> Yes they could get code signed in theory, but it makes it that much
<br>> harder - im sure Microsoft wouldn't be very keen on signing code<br>> for government organisations to spy on people - imagine the impact<br>> on their sales if it became public knowledge. Anyway, you can spot
<br>> any changes in your boot config checksums and be immediately<br>> alerted to a change.<br><br>and it should be pointed out that microsoft has already been roasted<br>publicly for putting a government key into some version of windows, i
<br>can't remember which, they've done it once, i doubt they'd dare to do<br>it again though because people know they did it and would be looking<br>for evidence of it now.<br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>Version: GnuPG
v1.4.3 (MingW32)<br><br>iD8DBQFEZ6ZoGkOzwaes7JsRA6BVAJ966ok03emE4fpaRCB7ImOyMujVVQCcD8II<br>0VZ2I+3AD1gL/0Wc45Q+ezY=<br>=p9SM<br>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br><br></blockquote></div><br>