Win2k & NT 4 Source Code leaked?

By on February 12, 2004, 3:48 PM
Neowin has learned of shocking and potentially devastating news. It would appear that two packages are circulating on the internet, one being the source code to Windows 2000, and the other being the source code to Windows NT. At this time, it is hard to establish whether or not full code has leaked, and this will undoubtedly remain the situation until an attempt is made to compile them. Microsoft are currently unavailable for comment surrounding this leak so we have no official response from them at the time of writing.

Read more: [URL=http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=17509&category=main#comments]Neowin[/URL] (currently down due to excessive traffic).
[COLOR=red]Posting any links to the source or pictures/fragments etc will get you banned and reported to MS anti piracy division![/COLOR]




User Comments: 14

Got something to say? Post a comment
Spike said:
MS source code leaked??I can't decide whether to think this is a good thing for purposes of customising/understanding the windows OS, or whether it means Crackers will find it a lot easier to break into, or may be even through our computer systems.hmm. I'll go with the first argument. it's better. Crackers will crack, source code or not. If anything, a full source code (if it is full) out in the public domain could result in computer fanatics/geeks/ knowing how to secure our systems and secureing them. It could destroy M$ though if recent source codes proved any of the suspicions many people seem to have, or if it becomes 'public domain' by default!
Didou said:
The HL2 bandit strikes again !!!Here's now stolen the source code to the OS everyone is waiting for !!!Uh wait a minute, no one's waiting for 2K & NT4.I bet they got hacked by using Outlook.[img]http://users.skynet.be/fa426454/images/Smilies/
eadfunny.gif[/img]This keeps getting better & better.;)
Spike said:
Obviously, it's not the source code to XP or 98SE, or server 2003, but given XP's heavy basis on NT and 2000, there's a lot that can be taken from it?
Didou said:
Well XP is codenamed NT 5.1 while 2K is 5.0. That pretty much tells you how close they are.
Spike said:
ah. pretty close then. pml.Someone had to leak the source to a windows version sooner or later. It's Microsoft. If it's employees are anything like the company they work for. Well, there's money in it! lmao :D
acidosmosis said:
This would be more of a good thing.People can have proof now that MS isn't "hiding" things in their code.Sooner or later people will realize that accusing MS of not doing their job, or having crappy software is nothing but a fad/cliche. After all, can you do better? Has anyone done better? Obviously not because who is #1?
filthy_mcnasty said:
acid i agreebut wow, this would be huge
Spike said:
If you honestly believe M$ got to number one purely because they write good software you are mistaken! They got to number one, firstly by stealing DOS and IBM taking it up for its PCXT, the first standard pc. Then they took support away from IBM, improved DOS, and wrote the first windows. This was a success. They then wrote the second version, which people bought because it was compatible with the first, but mainly because it's what they already knew.The truth of the matter is, that M$ are at the top mainly on account of the fact that they were the leading edge at the beginning, people got used to windows, and people stick to what they know.
Nodsu said:
Absolutely correct. How good something is is not determined by its success or how many poor users have to sit behind it. Refer to the IE thread if you have to :p
Rick said:
Hasn't this happened a few times before? ;)
Nodsu said:
Heh.I remember reading the Windows source code too. It went something likewhile(!crashed){ display_copyright_message(); do_nothing();}
Spike said:
PML @ Nodsu.That, even with mylimited knowledge of programming, I find incredibly funny.
Per Hansson said:
Oops, Is this Microsoft's new security thinking?[url]http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Upcoming/ind
x.html[/url]
Per Hansson said:
Oops, here is a statement on Mainsoft server that they had access to the Microsoft source, coincidence perhaps?[url]http://mainsoft.com/news/press_releases/2000_3_
2_01.html[/url]Oh, and yes, don't forget this part also:[COLOR=royalblue]Where it was ganked from:There is a core dump file inside the windows 2000 (sp1) archive, it clearly shows that the source was stolen from a system at Mainsoft. The following url confirms that they did have access to the leaked code. [url]http://mainsoft.com/news/press_releases/2000_3_22_[/url] 01.htmlThe actual strings which confirm this:PWD=/usr/ms/win2k_sp1/private/security/msv_sspiDOMAIN=m
insoft.comREPLYTO=eyala@mainsoft.comORGANIZATION=Mainsoft Co. Ltd.MWBATCH_SERVER=lod:8000MSOFTLM_HOST=@xorMAINSOFTLM_HOST=
xorXAPPLRESDIR=/il2/users/eyala/app-defaultsEDITOR=viBASE_
IBPATH=/usr/lib[/COLOR]Source: Post on Slashdot
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.