Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DirectX Flaw Leaves Windows Vulnerable

Posted by michael on from the windows-update-time-again dept.

cryonic*angel writes "Just when you thought it was safe to start buying music from BuyMusic, another another Windows security flaw is found, in DirectX this time, that basically affects every possible windows configuration that is still supported. I wonder, will they indemnify me for this?"

5 of 530 comments (clear)

  1. *cough* *ahem* by Scalli0n · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    linux user *cough* *ahem* no need for me to care *cough* *ahem*

    --
    Sig & Below
    Yuck Fou
  2. Win2k solution - you some sort of drone? by DrSkwid · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    solution

    the only solution Win2k should be in is with hydrochloric acid

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  3. Re:Patched by TheRaven64 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Where's Linux update?

    There is no such thing as Linux Update, because Linux is not an operating system. RedHat Linux is an operating system, and comes with up2date. Debian GNU/Linux is an operating system, and comes with apt. The BSDs are all operating systems, and come with their own update methods. Windows is (arguably) an operating systems (although some might argue that it should include a C compiler to be classed as such) and it includes windows update.

    To sumarise, operating systems come with update mechanisms, kernels don't. Asking why Linux doesn't come with an update mechanism is like asking why the NT kernel doesn't include a spreadsheet (although don't ask that near any of the emacs team, or they might get ideas...)

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  4. YABOP by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Yet Another Buffer-Overflow Problem. Sheeesh.

    Why do people obstinately continue to program in C, a pretty stupid language that allows buffer overflows?

    One would have thought that, by now, programmers would have LEARNED to code in order to prevent buffer overflows...

    But, noooo. The egoistical code jocks think they are 1337 by coding obscure and obfuscated C code, and their clueless PHBs let that CCC (Crappy C Code) go by...

    Perhaps everyone who let a buffer overflow error slip by should be COMPELLED to program in COBOL for a year (who ever heard of buffer-overflows in COBOL programs???).

  5. Re:Frequency of Windows Patches by caffeinex36 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Honestly, who the hell wants to hack/0wn an OSx desktop. Wouldnt be of much use to the kiddies....now own 20000 windowsXP desktops and you have yourself something to brag about on IRC. Also, not many people are familiar with looking for vulnerabilities in OSX.

    It's not becuase they are not there...its just nooone is looking for them.

    -Rob