Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Discloses Security Flaws in XP and WMPlayer
An anonymous reader writes: "Salon is running a story on Microsoft's disclosure of a number of security flaws in WinXP and Windows Media Player, versions 6.4 and 7.1. The story also states that there are 2 critical vulnerabilities in Commerce Server 2000. Will I ever get the bang for my MS buck?"
After seeing holes in OpenBSD and Apache recently, I guess it's Microsoft's turn again. ;)
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default. asp?url=/technet/security/bulletin/MS02-032.asp
Would it have killed ya to post this as well Timmy? =P
If only real player didn't tank out a few years back (my window stills says it's buffering) and if quicktime was widely supported, this wouldn't even be an issue. Everyone seems to get forced into supporting the windows option for lack of a better option (and i'm talking about the masses here). i know all the linux buffs here can point out a million other options on a non-windows OS, but that's not gonna help my friends mother, who needs to read the instructions written on the sticky pad about how to check her yahoo mail.
my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
INT, STORE, NIGHT. CUSTOMER walks into a near empty store, he steps through the doors cautiously, peering around curious as to where the hell the clerks are.
Customer: Hello..? uh... hello...? I want ta get a copy of Windows XP. Is anybody here?
CLERK, unseen: Is it safe?
Customer: Is what safe?
Clerk: Is it safe?
Customer, preturbed: Yes... It's safe. It's very safe...
Clerk: Is it safe?
Customer: Lissen! Are you going to come out, or what?
Clerk: Is it safe?
Customer: THIS ISN'T FUNNY!
Clerk 2: It puts the lotion on its skin and puts it in the basket.
Clerk: Shut up man. Is it safe? Is it safe? IS IT SAFE?
Customer: STOP IT! I JUST WANT A COPY OF WINDOWS XP! (Customer breaks down to the floor, sobbing) I just want a copy of XP...
Clerk: Is it safe?
Customer screams and runs out of the store, climbs into his car, which immediatley spins out and slams into a fire hydrant. The car bursts into flame. The customer bails from the car and runs down the darkened, abandoned street. He gets a half dozen steps from the car, and then he, illogically and without reason, bursts into flame himself.
Clerk 1: Thirty seconds, You owe me five bucks.
Clerk 2: I don't have five bucks.
Clerk 1: Take it from the register.
On-topic discussion part.
THEY TOLD ME IT WAS SAFE! I TRUSTED YOU MICROSOFT! I TRUSTED YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOU! YOU BLEW IT UP, YOU MANIACS YOU BLEW IT UP!
"PokeySteve, are you drunk?"
"Yes, but on love.
And whisky.
But mainly whisky."
Why is it when I hit ^R that ZSH calls me a cocksucker?
Microsoft has also anounced that this is to be the last free patch. All subsequent security patches will be available only to registered users at $14.95 per user licence. Very fair price, after all you can't have programmers working for nothing, that would be unamerican.
If there were security bugs in Linux or Freeamp, would it warrant front page news?
Yes. If there were a security bug in Linux, Mozilla, XMMS, FreeAmp, etc, that allowed your computer to be compromised, it would warrant front page news on Slashdot.
Or was that supposed to be one of those rhetorical questions?
Most software is expected to have bugs. But when it comes to OS great care should be taken into removing these, especially those involving security. But bug tracking is an art form. You can never remove bugs 100% as the difficulty in finding the bug increases dramatically as you approach 100%.
When it comes to software like the media player, this is much more serious. This goes into much more than just one single OS. I run Win95, Win98 and Win2000, and all these may be affected. On top of that the media player keep posting me to update the software. Wouldn't it be nice if the system gave me the option to update to the most stable and secure version or the latest version? You might think I have that option, as I may choose not to download the latest, but make my way through the download jungle to find an earlier version. But this jungle is impossible to move through for ordinary people.
I understand that Microsoft wait with disclosure of the bug until they have a patch. This is often criticized, but in some cases it make sense.
-:) Oh no - not again.
www.rednebula.com
Not wishing to be Flamebaity at all. MS have a lot of things severely wrong with them. For once they've dealt with an issue in timely fashion. This is not the Anti-MS rhetoric you're looking for.
Perhaps that is why this is news? eg. Man bites Dog, MS Fixes Security Flaw in Time?
superblog.org: all your favourite blogs on o
...don't the Linux vendors (especially IBM) flog this issue for all it's worth? I really think this is where the fight for market share should be.
However, the fact that it isn't makes me think that the vendors aren't entirely confident with the Linux security offer.
Perhaps it's too technical - there are plenty of security patches for GNU/GPL/Linux - I use that title advisedly, as they are rarely in the kernel (at least one a week AFAICS) - but they are generally on a faster turnaround than MS. But it's still not brilliant....hmmmm. Must think about this some more.
Could you expect to see them? Well, I mean, I guess everyone has been *REAL* quiet about the Apache and SSH ones on /., right?
Stop being paranoid about alleged M$ bashing.
Score:-1, Funny
Maybe Cringley's right ...
Given the revenue stream of say Win-XP compared to that of commercial Linux distributions, I am very surprised that MS still makes code with so many holes. If XP ius too big for MS to manage the development and support, then they should simplify it.
Will I ever get the bang for my MS buck?
Oh please, when was the last time you actually bought a microsoft product?
I know I'm going to hell, I'm just trying to get good seats.
--
Seeing is believing; You wouldn't have seen it if you didn't believe it.
one of my XP-running friends went through this upgrade.. It compleatly trashed all his funky video codecs.. He currently cant watch about 2/3rds of the stuff hes downloaded. Most of them being independant music videos.
has anyone else experienced this?
no
"Why on earth would there be a bug in Media player that allows uncontrolled access to the system. What we have here folks is a very good example of what a horribly designed OS Windows is..."
Why on earth would there be a bug in OpenSSH/Sendmail/Apache/BitchX that allows uncontrolled access to the system. What we have here folks is a very good example of a troll posting before it thinks, going with the crowd in its 'M$ sucks! Linux rules! Muahahha' mindset.
Software has bugs. Sometimes exploitation of those bugs, if they're severe enough, can allow an attacker to run code on the target system. This is not a flaw unique to Windows.
Please, think before you post.
Janie took my gun...
Digital Rights Management (Security). You agree that in order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management ("Secure Content"), Microsoft may provide security related updates to the OS Components that will be automatically downloaded onto your computer. These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and use other software on your computer. If we provide such a security update, we will use reasonable efforts to post notices on a web site explaining the update.
Security update? Who's security are they protecting? There is no option to uninstall media player. Your choices (if you wish to continue using Windows) areA: Leave your system open to bugs that give system level access to the next worm (imagine nimda with a malicious /default.htm)
B: Bite the bullet and install the patches. But if Microsoft releases an update that silently and without notification installs itself and 'disable(s) your ability to ... use other software', you're SOL. But hey, it's ok. Don't you know Microsoft is supporting 'Trustworthy Computing'?
Actually, it's the other way around. There is/was a bug in XFree86 that makes it crash when requested a redicoulously large font size by Mozilla (or anything else).
Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
M$ announces bug. Everybody required to download a critical update...
What's the bug?
DRM doesn't work... turns out you can hear copyrighted MP3s. This is a big security vulnerability and you mush download this patch, otherwise the finanical security of the RIAA will be at stake, and that's unamerican.
[Note: This is intended as a joke and as food for thought. This is not fact.]
Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
This morning windows updater had already downloaded the patches, all I had to do was confirm the installation.
People can whine all they want about that there are security flaws and ofcourse it's sad these still pop up, but the patches are there, the system to install them is VERY easy (just click one single button) so in the end, the end-user is not that much hurt by them, simply because the patches are installed so easily.
The discussions about 'security flaw free' software are endless and allthough they should be held, are nowhere near consensus: as long as there are humans involved in hammering out code and as long as the computer/software based checkinglogic is not up to par as where it should be, these flaws WILL be there, possibly in every tool written by man. Until computer science reaches the point where a compiler can proof that software is security flaw free, we should be grateful that the FIXES for security flaws are installed using the most easiest way: by simply clicking one single button.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
I think it's more the tone of the post. Just a few days ago a venurability in OpenSSH poped up (and was fixed). The post about that is very neutral and newslike, simply reporting the bug, it's nature and the fix. This one is whiny and sounds immature. It would be like if the OpenSSH post read:
"Security focus has a post on a huge venurability in all versions of OpenSSH from 2.9.9 to 3.3. Just another example of you getting crap for paying nothing."
I think the poster's intent was to remind everyone that MS is not the only company that has security problems and that they did deal with the issues already.
i'm waiting for someone to do a dns hijack of update.microsost.com and load a
nice new trojan on everyone's box that their av software doesn't detect. if
these morons were serious about security, they'd use ssh, not http, for
updates (and let you turn off html rendering in your email client).
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Sounds like your friend needs to take that sticky pad and write a script. Then create a big icon for the script and call it "Get Yahoo Mail, Click Here".
I have no idea if that can be done in windows. I know that it can be done with most, if not all, Linux desktop enviroments.
Linux on the desktop does not need to be "difficult". Linux remains the better option over Windows, you just have to get over being lazy. The bad news is you have to learn something new. The good news is you're gonna learn something new, and it's going to work.
So what if your friends mom can't/won't write scritps to automate her computing tasks. You do it for her for a fee (even if it's just chocolate chip cookies). You set up a Linux desktop for her once. Give her one button access to the things she wants to do and she'll be out of your hair. She damn sure won't be calling you to come fix her computer because of the daily BSOD.
. Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
From http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default
Never confuse volume with power.
"Security focus has a post on a huge venurability in all versions of OpenSSH from 2.9.9 to 3.3. Just another example of you getting crap for paying nothing."
If the openSSH people were running at 1 critical bug/two weeks this is exactly what you would read.
Since no one else has answered:
The bug is really only a technical one. In practice, it's really like that "Perrun" hoax virus, in that it requires a huge amount of setup and complete access to the system in order to gain... well, to gain complete access to the system, which an attack would already need in order to use this bug maliciously. Basically, Windows Media Player can remotely open up the system if the attacker has found a way to get a malicious executable file into IE's cache and then convinces their victim to go to a maliciously constructed website that they've setup. When the victim goes to the maliciously constructed website, Windows Media Player could then give out information that could be used to get into the system through the IE cache.
The problem lies in the specific executable file that has to be placed into the cache. In order to get the executable file into the cache, the attacker would have to have full access to the machine or trick the user into accepting it and running it. But if they could get the user to do that, they would have full control of the system anyway, just like they would if the victim was running any OS other than Windows.
So really, it's just a small, stupid bug that's being blown out of proportion. It can't do anything other than redundantly take over a computer after it has already been taken over in a different way.
>Perhaps it's too technical
*Exactly*.
In a world where we cannot convince people that MHz don't matter, and people believe that security is a product, attempting to convince them of the security issues with MS will prove fruitless.
MS will just release statistics and compare their OS with the number of security holes found in OS + Applications and people will believe it to show that Linux is less secure. They will turn up their marketing engines and hype that Open Source means Lower Security and people will believe it.
True Story: I was attempting to convince a certified MS XP technician that MS didn't understand security. Keep in mind this is someone deep within the ranks of the Microsoft Heresy (like the Cainite Heresy, but more Hideously Evil(TM)).
I cited Scheiner, cDc, L0pht, and a half-a-dozen others. I talked about how open source was a good thing, the reply I got back can be summarized:
1) Security is a product ("A firewall will make you secure")
2) He thought the only reason you would want to secure your system was to keep people from browsing the pr0n there (and seeing the other files).
3) The threat level is minimal--no one would want to break into *your* system.
4) Believing that security was a real issue was like believing everything anyone told you (down to "three headed big foots in Utah").
Of course this is absolutely absurd, but thats what he believed. While you may not be able to sell the general public on all of that, it gives an impression on how MS treats security and how their marketing department would convince their users to treat it.
Sad, but true.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
GreyWolf3000 wrote:
> Why on earth would there be a bug in Media player
> that allows uncontrolled access to the system.
> What we have here folks is a very good example of
> what a horribly designed OS Windows is...
XP isn't Palladium (yet), but it is a/the DRM OS. Microsoft's Media player is like a trap door that leads down to the core of the system. In the center of the OS, behind that trapdoor, sits a huge spider called DRM. Every file loaded, whether a document or media file, an application, or a driver, has to pass DRM's inspection. DRM checks to see that those documents and media files are legally licensed, and those drivers and applications are approved by Microsoft (don't want any of that cancerous GNU goop around). Anything that smells even slightly fishy to DRM gets pounced on and eaten. Anything that passes muster, gets passed on to the OS and applications for use.
In unix-speak, that DRM spider would be the god of root, able to tell even root what they can and cannot do. If you try to work around DRM and do what you want with the idiot box you paid for, DRM calls on his old bud DMCA, and DMCA sends the nice folks from the FBI to cart you and your PC off to separate jail cells.
Since everything the media player plays goes through DRM, it is easy to see how a media player bug could affect the whole system. And since DRM is relatively new, it will have bugs itself. And since DRM is potentially updated everytime you download a song (check your XP EULA), the potential for disaster is high. Yes it is horrible design. Then again, DRM is a horrible concept.
That's the price one pays for doing business with a company that treats their customers like potential criminals. The ironic thing is that Microsoft is the one convicted of breaking the law.
What happens when you embrace and extend Godzilla? Nuclear heartburn!
See "Godzilla 2000" (released in Japan as "Godzilla 2000 Millenium") for details.
and their repeated use of backward IN-compatibility to force people to upgrade or lose access to their old data, this phrase from "Cringely's Pulpit" scared the fuckin' crap out of me: "then encrypting the data EVEN INSIDE YOUR COMPUTER PROCESSOR."
... I'm a loss to find words to describe the enormity of the evil.
Its the ultimate in Big Brother technology. The eradication of memory or of access to memory.
Ever seen people with disorders of the hipo-thalamus? They can't form short term memories. Their lives are hard and extremely confusing since the world is a new mystery every damn day. They are extremely vulnerable to being scammed from one minute to the next.
Whoever proposed this inside of M$ is an absolute diabolical monster. A human being (given the events of the last two centuries and the incredible slaughter perpetrated on each other, that is NOT a compliment,) with delusions of god-hood. One that looks bad even compared with the most the megalomaniacal tyrant to slaughter people in order to change their minds about something.
At least when you kill people, you're show for the sub-simian scum you are and/but your victims a're well and truly safe from further predation.
But this deliberate creation of the potential for maiming of the aggregate memory of an entire culture makes the death camps is so utterly base, so vile, so despicable, so
And M$ will find enough "Judas Goats," enough imbeciles to plunge mankind into a second dark ages. Would that the road to the coming Hell was not paved with moot intentions and banal disregard.
Slavering drooling monsters and utter despicable despots, we can overthrow. But our doom will come in the form of some utterly reasonable man in a suit who's just doing his job.
There are a hundred million graves prematurely filled by the victims of some utterly reasonable men in some (uni)form of suit, who's just doing his job.
The ultimate triumph of Voltaire's bastards will be even more thorough and degrading than the patrician nightmare of the religious maniacs who merely preach evil and bring subjugation and death.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
"If a Linux computer falls in a valley, does Slashdot make a sound?"
:)
Heh.
"Derp de derp."
"The difference is that Linux is open about their problems - and they make an effort to keep the public informed. If a critical problem is found, the code is changed (almost immediately).
.EXE (no, not one of those web games, it was a test build of some code he was writing) but Outlook refused to admit that it had it. What happened was Outlook XP had disabled the ability to recieve .EXE files. I don't mind this by default, but there wasn't a menu option to re-enable it. Result? A Google search and a clumsy registry hack.
Microsoft hides their bugs. So for them to come out and announce bugs (and patches) before the bugs become newsworthy issues is a step in the right direction. "
I see the problem a little differently. A lot of the vulnerabilities that have been mentioned in Windows are really features that MS implemented that people have found a way to exploit. The Melissa virus comes to mind.
So what'll happen is MS will add new features, and then somebody'll find a way to be a nuisance with them. Unfortunately, what'll happen is that the resolution to the problem isn't so clear. "Do we take out the feature, or do we put a rule in it and wait for somebody to find a loophole?"
Anybody used Office XP? (heh yah right, sorry) One of my coworkers is using Outlook XP. One of his coworkers tried to send him an
I can't help but think that MS just got tired of people being hit with it and just removed it all together.
Just to be clear: I'm not arguing with you, just presenting another angle to the story. It's a big tangled mess. Windows has bugs, vulnerabilities, and features that can be used against you. I hope the Linux community is paying attention to this. I have a feeling they could develop a solution that allows the interesting features without allowing kiddie scripters to exploit them.
"Derp de derp."
The problem lies in the specific executable file that has to be placed into the cache.
Not a problem. The system will dump ANYTHING it is given into the cache. Take a virus.exe file and rename it to banner.jpg or something. The browser drops it in the cache with a randomized the name and sub-folder. Since it's not actually a jpg or whatever it may be silently ignored. If an attacker can discover the randomized name and location in the cache he can tell the OS to run it as an EXE. It isn't simple, but all the required steps HAVE been worked out and are available on the net.
So no, this is not "a small, stupid bug that's being blown out of proportion".
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Serv-U FTP has bugs that allow DoS attacks and "root"-level access from outside. Is this MS's fault?
Then when is IRSSI the fault of Linux developers?
Look at how fast major server products (OpenSSH, Apache, etc) get patched after exploits are discovered. Then look at how long it takes MS. And how MS delays (UPnP) around critical sales times like christmas.
There's no way you can say with a straight face that MS has a decent security record compared to open source projects like Linux, Apache, etc. (Hell, they barely have a decent security record compared to Sun, etc.)
Install the latest Mandrake with enough aps to replicate the functionality of Win2k Server. Now tell me how often you have to patch it to avoid remote exploits. How often during the same time does Win2k Server have to get patched?
Of course, IRSSI doesn't count here, any more than you can count mIRC against Win2k.
Look at that EULA again:
These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and use other software on your computer.
WinAmp is one of those "other software on your computer" which may be disabled. Duh.
Essentially, this is a backfit of their XP license and DRM technology for the 60% of WinSlaves that are using Win98.
Given that Windows Security is an oxmoron, there's no reason to "upgrade" your computer this way. Outlook, IE or some stupid piece of junk like a plug and play deamon that you never knew listened to the network will eat you anyway.
If you just must have M$ in your house, blind it to the network by NOT installing the network card drivers or pointing it to a bogus gateway IP number. Never use it to surf, read email or anything else that M$ will never do right. I admit that I have such a beast in the corner for talking to cameras and an old scanner. It's legal and I own it. But I'll never ever trust it. Red Hat's dual boot (GRUB) let's me get the information off of it.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.