Security Flaws May Be Microsoft's Undoing

tarpitt writes: "According to this article in the LA Times, repeated software flaws in Microsoft products has begun to raise concerns that they 'threaten the stability of a major piece of the world economy and to raise questions about Microsoft's future.' Flawed security is seen as a stumbling block to accepting Microsoft sponsored on-line services. It is also driving discussion about making software manufacturers liable for damages caused by flawed products." This piece in eWeek on troubles with XP's automatic updates is an interesting companion; releasing often doesn't seem to be enough. Update: 01/15 15:00 GMT by J : Bruce Schneier's January Crypto-Gram came out this morning, and is also topical: "Microsoft treats security vulnerabilities as public relations problems. Until that changes, expect more of this kind of nonsense..."

Comments

I despise XP

[Dolly_Llama]

The final straw for me came when XP on boot would demand i send error reports to the mothership without explaining what went wrong AND since these were tied into IE, I'd get a POP-UP AD!!

I'm buying a powerbook tomorrow, I swear to Bob..

Re:I despise XP

[hyphz]

I'd think a more serious one is this:

In XP, go to your user manager, and go to "Create Account".

When asked for the name of the account, type "Helpassistant".

Give the account limited access and press OK... XP will report that THE ACCOUNT ALREADY EXISTS!

EVERY copy of XP contains this account hardwired. It can't be edited because it never appears as an option on the list of users. It may not be possible to locally log in with it, but it certainly can be logged on with remotely.

Nobody knows the password yet (except MS) - or even if the password is the same or varies with the Windows version - but if I was a hacker I know what I'd be working on.

(Oh, and as for "it's just for helpers to fix your machine for you".. of course it is. Yes, and if it was a backdoor account it'd obviously be called "Backdoor", wouldn't it? :) )

Re:YAMA

[Glonk]

I'm sick of MS apologists. Microsoft makes shit. It's shit that's getting better, but it's still shit. Don't whine and say it's unfair. They have the money, the power, and the resources to make what is far and away the best software in the world. And yet we get articles like this, and we get people like you whining about how MS is being treated unfairly. Forget it.

My friends, the parent post is the reason why most people don't look upon Linux as a realistic alternative. It's supported, in general, by a bunch of pimply-faced teenagers full of angst and with statements filled with cuss-words and a hate for the status quo.

You really want to change how MS software works? Go work for them. Or go make software to compete with them. Trolling on Slashdot does nothing but destroys any possible attempt at Linux getting a serious outlook from the PHBs.

Re:Thoughts on liabity and my keyboard

[anichan]

If you walked over and helped him build it, with his concent, since you didn't excange any money then there still wouldn't be a problem unless you represented that you were an experienced builder when you were not. The court would throw it out since the neighbor could have told you to leave, basically.

No company in their right mind would ever become liable for software. It's just too risky. You test it the best you can and, after it seems to work well for awhile (say, the F-16 flight computer software) you don't *ever* change it.

I win a lot of things. I got you pissed off without even trying. But I run Linux, Mac OS X, and OpenBSD on x86,ppc, and sparc, respectfully. I guess I still have your respect. At least, I hope I do. I wouldn't be able to sleep in a /. poster didn't like me.

BTW, you're so cool. I hope I can be just like you when I grow up.

Re:This is why Linux is so pathetic

[inkless1]

Um yeah. You know I heard somewhere something about a monopoly. So Linux is pathetic because someone else broke the law. OK.

inky