Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: MS Anti Virus?
From: rob () comcast net
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 16:41:30 -0500
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 11:51:46AM -0400, joe wrote:
However the worms would be blocked if people had patched their machine or otherwise properly administrated the machines they were responsible for. All of the worms that I think you are probably referring to all had patches well in advance of the worm that impacted it, blaster, slammer, sasser, etc. Home users never should have been impacted as they should be running firewall software on the internet connections. The fact that they don't isn't MS's fault, however MS is stepping up with XP SP2 to help out. On top of that they should be patching when necessary.
[snip]
Thinking that there will never be code patches required isn't realistic.
[snip] Can you explain how it's realistic to expect the millions of home Windows users out there now to know how to properly administrate their systems? If anything that's been discussed here so far is unrealistic, that must top the list. They're only starting to get the message that patching is necessary. Very arguably, Microsoft helped create this culture of technically inept users who view the computer like any other household appliance. And now what? It plans to force-feed basic computer security training and earthshaking updates down the throats of the same users to whom it's been spoon-feeding computing-through-ignorance babyfood for years and years? You say "the worms would be blocked if users would..." I say the worms wouldn't exist in the first place if Microsoft had written their software securely. It's easy for both of us to say, but which is easier to actually *do*? Microsoft has little control over what end users do, but it has complete control over the design, quality, and configuration of the software it ships. With the resources and market share they have, they ought to be leading the industry. Instead, they are the armpit of the industry. Folks who have been paying attention o'er the years know the same lies, half-truths, and PR maneuvering they hear today that they heard back then. "It'll be fixed in the next version", eh? You'll have to pardon me if I don't shit myself repeatedly in fits of white-knuckle anticipation of the next version. --- _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: MS Anti Virus?, (continued)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Chris Cappuccio (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Eric Paynter (Jun 17)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? joe (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Steffen Schumacher (Jun 17)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? joe (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Steffen Schumacher (Jun 17)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? joe (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Steffen Schumacher (Jun 17)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? Pavel Kankovsky (Jun 17)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? joe (Jun 18)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? rob (Jun 17)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? joe (Jun 18)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? st3ng4h (Jun 19)
- RE: MS Anti Virus? joe (Jun 21)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Aditya, ALD [ Aditya Lalit Deshmukh ] (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Eric Paynter (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? npguy (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Nick FitzGerald (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 17)
- Re: MS Anti Virus? Mohit Muthanna (Jun 17)