Lord Juan writes: Scott Charney, Corporate Vice President of Trustworthy Computing is proposing that computers should obtain a "heal certificate" in order to access the Internet, and that people who refuse to get their computers certificated are throttled or forbidden access. While it is true that botnets and malware are a huge problem this days, I fail to see why people who takes care of their own computers and specially people who is not using Microsoft products at all should be subject to this health checks upon the menace of end with their connections affected. The BBC just ran an article about this proposals, from the BBC article:
His proposal, presented at the International Security Solutions Europe (ISSE) Conference in Berlin, Germany, is for all computers to have a "health certificate" to prove that it is uninfected before it connects to the net.
"Although the conditions to be checked may change over time, current experience suggests that such health checks should ensure that software patches are applied, a firewall is installed and configured correctly, an antivirus program with current signatures is running, and the machine is not currently infected with known malware," he wrote in the accompanying paper.
Lord Juan writes: My eyes could not believe when I read the same old tired argument of "Copying is Stealing" we are all used to hear coming from the entertainment industry, coming from the Managing Editor of the Linux Today website. Linux and the entire Free Software ecosystem is based on the idea of Copy and Share. I wouldn't have expected that a Linux related website would take a position regarding the legality or illegality of the entertainment content, but to plainly say that "Copying is Stealing" and use the argument that "Linux and Free/Open Source software are entirely dependent on copyrights, and some FOSS fans get pretty righteous on the subject, especially for GPL violations. And yet when it comes to music, movies, and books some think the same respect for copyrights doesn't apply, and it's OK to collect copies of works without paying for them. We can hardly criticize the RIAA, MPAA, ASCAP, Sony BMG, and all the other hostile, clueless over-reaching forces of darkness without having clean hands ourselves." thus missing the point that the GPL is intended to allow the copying and sharing of the source code by using copyright law against itself, it just something that is beyond my comprehension.