Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Won't Offer Patch Before Worm Strikes?

Posted by Zonk on from the i-object? dept.

techmuse writes "According to an article in Information Week, Microsoft is aware that the 'Kama Sutra/Blackworm/MyWife' worm will hit on Friday, overwriting office documents, but will not release a patch until its regular monthly patch release on February 14th. Unless, that is, you subscribe to one of Microsoft's pay security services, in which case your machine will have the worm removed in advance." From the article: "The blog offered no explanation why the tool wouldn't be updated earlier, nor did Microsoft immediately respond to questions. Each month, Microsoft pushes a revised tool to Windows users who have Automatic Update enabled for Windows Update or Microsoft Update. The Redmond, Wash.-based company has released the Malicious Software Removal Tool off-schedule once before, in August 2005, shortly after the Zotob worm began striking Windows 2000 systems."

5 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. Prior art for this MS business plan. by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nice Windows machine you've got there. Wouldn't want anything to, um, happen to it. You need insurance, and we happen to sell insurance. Capiche?

    --
    I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
  2. You get what you pay for by analog_line · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Check the license agreement for Windows XP. Nothing in there says that Microsoft will ever provide fixes, period. If you don't like their service-after-the-sale, get off the upgrade treadmill and stop buying licenses from them or buy an expanded service agreement from them. They aren't

    Software licenses are agreements that should have the full weight of contract law. There is no other way that the licenses I prefer, like the GPL, BSD, Mozilla, MIT, etc, get any legal weight. If you can't abide by the terms, take a stand, show some guts, and click "Cancel" on the install. Find some software that is licensed under terms you can accept. Don't be a sheep and agree just because it would be too hard, or make you go look for other software if you disagree.

    THIS STUFF IS IMPORTANT.

  3. Re:All should not be lost... by ShamusYoung · · Score: 5, Insightful
    How hard is it to not run software mailed to you by a stranger? If I mailed you a syringe labeled "everlasting life", would you jam it in your arm and shoot it? No? Did I mention it's FREE and that you are our LUCKY WINNAR? Cuz you are.

    What we really need is for MS to release a patch to repair the stupid and irresponsible users out there. Why haven't they fixed this obvious security loophole?

    The problem with these viruses is that they do not kill the victims. If they did, then at least we could look forward to the point when Darwinisim fixed the problem for us. :)

    --
    --This sig is in beta. Please let us know abut any errors you find.
  4. Re:All should not be lost... by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It shouldn't be, but apparently it is. People keep coming to me after they've trashed their systems. I ask way they opened an unknown attachment and they always say the same thing "But it was from my co-worker/friend/family member X. They wouldn't send me anything bad!". That's after I've told them literally dozens of times that modern viruses spoof the name of the sender and that person X's machine may be infected, or someone who has both person X and them in their address book may be infected. Don't ever open any attachment unless you know what it is. If your not sure what it is it only takes 2 seconds to hit the reply button and ask "What's this".... It never sinks in. Even after the "I love you" virus, etc. They just can't be educated.

    And no, I don't think that moving to *nix is the answer either. I've had users follow instructions included with an email virus to type in a password required to unzip the payload, then run it. Those users will certainly be willing to type in "rm *" or whatever instructions come along with a virus. Their user files, the only thing of value on the machine, are toast either way. These are the same folks that will never back up their data either, so they really are toast.

  5. Re:Simple fix by diersing · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Haven't you ever heard of iptables and port knocking for friends with dynamic IPs? --reject-with tcp-reset is your friend

    Clearly a solution for the unwashed masses. We can't seem to get people from double clicking every email attachment, I'm sure their ready to setup, configure and tweak their own IPTables.