Vista Security Discussions Get a Rocky Start

narramissic writes "A technical glitch Thursday morning prevented many security vendors from participating in the first online discussion regarding Microsoft's plans for opening up the Vista kernel, ITworld reports. In a blog posting on the subject, Microsoft Senior Product Manager Stephen Toulouse wrote, 'We had a glitch where we sent out a messed up link. ... We're very sorry about that, it certainly was not intentional and we definitely see that was not a good thing for people to experience on such an important topic.'"

Comments

What a relief!

[justinbach]

'We had a glitch where we sent out a messed up link. ... We're very sorry about that, it certainly was not intentional and we definitely see that was not a good thing for people to experience on such an important topic.'"

Phew! It was just an accident!

Re:What a relief!

[zoobsolar]

For a bunch of folks that make some of the largest saleries in the entire world's IT industry, they sure do screw up a lot {read very often; too much}. I say the world continues to petition Microsoft. Simply assure Microsoft that we [the public at large] have no plans on buying their new product until they can prove its stability and that it conforms to user demands. This would include the stability and accuracy of information they release regarding said product. Otherwise the public could easily ensure that MS does not continue to "make the big bucks".

Re:What a relief!

[bberens]

Oh please, get over yourself. Someone made a typo on a firewall rule or an e-mail and you go on some huge rant about how MS sucks and consumers everywhere should stop buying their products. It's not a religion, it's a tool. MS has some of the best tools available on the market for some tasks. Other companies like Apple, IBM, Sun, etc. have better tools for some tasks. When you try to convince people to alter the MS intertia by ranting over this insignificant thing then you give the 'other' camp a bad name. And it doesn't matter whether you're an Apple fanboy, linux fanboy, or just anti-MS. There's two main categories in most of the business world: MS and other. You give other a bad name.

Re:What a relief!

[zoobsolar]

I hardly think 5 sentences can be considered a huge rant. I am not anti-MS. I never said that MS sucks. I simply refered to their constant "oops" incompetence. Scour your beloved internet for the many hundreds of articles pointing out the simple fact that Microsoft, in short, gets in a hurry and releases software, documentation, links, emails prematurely. The bottom line to MS employees I intended to make is simple: You are paid 'the big bucks', so kindly check your work before you release it. Maybe you are the over zealous one. Or maybe you are a MS employee and the truth hurts? Bahahaha I will leave making assumptions to you. You seem to be much better at it than myself. And a final note, yes, technology is becoming a religion and a way of life. It is how many of us feed our children and keep a roof over our heads.

So...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sending out messed up operating systems is also a glitch I take it?

Re:So...

[Monsuco]

I think judging by the way MS works, if the OS isn't messed up that is a glitch.

Re:So...

[Anonymous Coward]

At least they weren't selling products with viruses pre-loaded at the factory, as Apple seems to be in the habit of doing.

Security experts biggest question...

[__aaclcg7560]

'We had a glitch where we sent out a messed up link. ... We're very sorry about that, it certainly was not intentional and we definitely see that was not a good thing for people to experience on such an important topic.'

Was it a glitch, a bug or a feature? Inquiring minds want to know...

Re:Security experts biggest question...

[littlem]

Well, there'll be a patch out a month on Tuesday...

Re:Security experts biggest question...

[lostboy2]

Was it a glitch, a bug or a feature? Inquiring minds want to know...

It's a WAD

Huh...

[tygerstripes]

Yeah, well, it was a link to an IIS server.

Re:Huh...

[recordMyRides]

That sound you heard? That was the sound of someone losing their job.

Re:Huh...

[tygerstripes]

What, like... that strange meaty clattering sound as though a ballistic chair were hitting a peon?

Re:Huh...

[Overly Critical Guy]

Microsofties don't lose their jobs; they just get sent to the MSN group.

A Rocky Start For Vista?

[Analein]

You mean like Steve Ballmer jogging along the beach, throwing sparring chairs at punching dolls while some 80s influenced background music accompanies his efforts to fucking kill everybody? Nice, really.

Re:A Rocky Start For Vista?

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve Ballmer doesn't jog along the beach. The beach moves beneath his feet.

Re:A Rocky Start For Vista?

[Analein]

We can argue about that, but the real question is wether Mr. T will defeat Ballmer :/

Re:A Rocky Start For Vista?

[jejones]

That's Elizabethan-influenced music; Bill Conti quotes an anonymous Elizabethan fanfare at the beginning of "Gonna Fly Now."

Re:A Rocky Start For Vista?

[HoboMaster]

With or without a chair as a weapon?

Re:A Rocky Start For Vista?

[qwertyman66]

*Insert obligatory Chuck Norris reference here*

Oh the irony

[otacon]

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt and simply believe it was an accident, but it seems too coincidental considering all the recent controversy with security vendors and what not. And the excuse he gives, it's almost like that was the first thing that popped into his head, not the answer I'd expect from a "Microsoft Senior Product Manager" nonetheless

Re:Oh the irony

[Shivetya]

you must be one those "explosives planted by the government brought down the towers" types eh?

on a side note, Apple's excuse for a virus on some video iPods was given a pass....

Re:Oh the irony

[Anonymous Coward]

you must be one of those "governments never lie about anything nor kill their own people" types, eh?

Re:Oh the irony

[Eternauta3k]

you must be one those "explosives planted by the government brought down the towers" types eh?

Actually, they planted explosives in all major buildings in the US. They just hoped a terrorist would hit one.

Re:Oh the irony

[Overly Critical Guy]

Okay, I'll bite. What does some random 1962 operation have to do with kooks claiming 9/11 was staged without any valid scrap of evidence whatsoever?

Re:Oh the irony

[Overly Critical Guy]

What excuse? Apple said they regretted missing the virus while wishing that Windows was hardier against them, since it was an infected Windows machine on the assembly line that introduced the virus into their devices.

Re:Oh the irony

[spun]

It's not some randome 1962 operation. Let's look at what was specifically proposed:

• Starting rumors about Cuba by using clandestine radios.
• Staging mock attacks, sabotages and riots at Guantanamo Bay and blaming it on Cuban forces.
• Firebombing and sinking an American ship at the Guantanamo Bay American military base -- reminiscent of the USS Maine incident at Havana in 1898, which started the Spanish-American War -- or destroy American aircraft and blame it on Cuban forces. (The document's first suggestion regarding the sinking of a U.S. ship is to blow up a manned ship and hence would result in U.S. Navy members being killed, with a secondary suggestion of possibly using unmanned drones and fake funerals instead.)
• "Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type sic planes would be useful as complementary actions."
• Destroying an unmanned drone masquerading as a commercial aircraft supposedly full of "college students off on a holiday". This proposal was the one supported by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
• Staging a "terror campaign", including the "real or simulated" sinking of Cuban refugees
• "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States. We could sink a boatload of Cubans enroute sic to Florida (real or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in the United States even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized."
• Burning crops by dropping incendiary devices in Haiti, Dominican Republic or elsewhere.

It was a false flag operation. It was reported that the only reason it wasn't carried out was that Kennedy rejected the plan. I'm not saying 9/11 was a false flag operation, but you have to be wearing blinders not to see the similarities between this actual, documented, nearly implemented plan and what the conspiracy theorists allege about 9/11. If the US government nearly did it once, isn't it possible that, under a more hawkish president, we might actually have done what the conspiracies allege?

Re:Oh the irony

[Crispin Glover]

I hear FOX TV and Chris Carter had something to do with planning 9/11 too!

Re:Oh the irony

[Overly Critical Guy]

you have to be wearing blinders not to see the similarities between this actual, documented, nearly implemented plan and what the conspiracy theorists allege about 9/11.

On the contrary, I just have to have common sense. I guess Bin Laden, the Taliban, Al Queda, Britain, both sides of Congress, and the entire military are also in on the conspiracy? Is there a martian in your bedroom?

Re:Oh the irony

[spun]

Hey, I don't actually think 9/11 was planned and carried out by Americans. I think I was fairly clear about that in my reply. I was simply responding to your question, "what does some random 1962 operation have to do with kooks claiming 9/11 was staged without any valid scrap of evidence whatsoever?" You asked a question, I answered it. It wasn't a random operation, it was a planned and documented US false flag operation that is exactly what the kooks are claiming happened on 9/11.

If common sense keeps you from seeing "the similarities between this actual, documented, nearly implemented plan and what the conspiracy theorists allege about 9/11." then I'm glad I don't have your brand of common sense. I mean, not to be insulting or anything, but did you fail reading comprehension? You did read the part where I wrote "what the conspiracy theorists allege about 9/11," right?

Because you obviously did fail reading comprehension, I'll spell it out for you in small words. In 1962, the US Government planned and almost carried out an operation that would have made it look like Castro was a terrorist so the citizens would get behind going to war with him.

With me so far?

Now, some kooks are saying that we carried out an operation that made the Islamist fundamentalists look like terrorists so the citizens would get behind going to war.

Now do you see the similarities? Because I'm not saying the kooks are right. I'm just saying, either you're an idiot for not seeing how the two things are related, or you do see but you are playing disengenous for some unkown reason. I'm guessing the latter, and I'm guessing the reason is that you really, really don't want to think about the fact that documents prove that the US Government almost carried out an attack on it's own people in 1962.

Extra! Extra!

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft employee sends an email with an incorrect URL in it! Collapse of Micrsoft predicted! End of the world is nigh! Extra, Extra, read all about it!

Slashdot has just sunk to a new low of pointlessness in their "articles". Urgh.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[PreacherTom]

Oh, come on. This is the definition of amusing irony.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[tygerstripes]

Not meant as criticism, but: the word "exemplar" might be more appropriate.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're also missing a "not" between "is" and "the".

Re:Extra! Extra!

[Anonymous Coward]

No, this is an example of a shitty non-story posted by the editors to give the Slashbots yet another chance for a bit of mindless Microsoft bashing and general child-like giggling.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[tygerstripes]

You must be new here...

Re:Extra! Extra!

[Dunbal]

Slashdot has just sunk to a new low of pointlessness in their "articles". Urgh.

      You think that's bad - wait for the dupe.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

You really, must be new here.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[zootm]

If there'd been a security problem with the site, I'd agree with you, but this elicited a proper "meh" from me. Slow news day, I suppose (not so weirded out by it appearing on Slashdot, but someone wrote an article about this).

Re:Extra! Extra!

[Skater]

I think you and the AC that posted right above you should get together and hash it out. He's claiming it's a conspiracy.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh God, if only. My ID is just within the 11,000 range.

Re:Extra! Extra!

[Overly Critical Guy]

Slashdot has just sunk to a new low of pointlessness in their "articles". Urgh.

No, they haven't, though it's amusing to see Microsoft employees posting anonymously now to defend the homeland.

It's a big deal that Microsoft apparently doesn't vet its own URLs before sending them out to third-parties, especially for such an important set of interoperability discussions. The guy didn't even check the link before he sent it out? It's a competence thing (lack thereof). These things just seem to happen with Microsoft, don't they?

Symantec was one of the vendors shut out

[morgan_greywolf]

FTFA:

Most of Symantec's team, for example, was unable to attend. "It turned out that everybody on our team was not able to make the first meeting but one guy," said Cris Paden, a Symantec spokesman.

Symantec and Microsoft have a long history of a love/hate relationship and Microsoft has put more and more things into its operating system products that have closed entire markets for Symantec (and it's predecessors).

Re:Symantec was one of the vendors shut out

[Anonymous Coward]

Symantec and Microsoft have a long history of a love/hate relationship and Microsoft has put more and more things into its operating system products that have closed entire markets for Symantec (and it's predecessors).

What's your point? That's the nature of the "work around defects in the operating system" market. Eventually, even Microsoft fixes them, and you don't have a market anymore. I hate Microsoft, and I still can't blame them for this. It's not like they're the first vendor to include, say, a filesystem that doesn't require constant defragmentation, or a stateful firewall.

Re:Symantec was one of the vendors shut out

[Anonymous Coward]

Symantec just milked Microsoft security flaws and when they try to fix them in Vista went ballistic because they do not want to lose revenue stream

I hate Symantec product more then Microsoft -- they produce bloated horrible "scurity" applications that have simply no right to exist on rational marketplace. But FUD is a huge selling machine for this crap.

Re:Symantec was one of the vendors shut out

[dircha]

What's your point? That's the nature of the "work around defects in the operating system" market. Eventually, even Microsoft fixes them, and you don't have a market anymore. I hate Microsoft, and I still can't blame them for this. It's not like they're the first vendor to include, say, a filesystem that doesn't require constant defragmentation, or a stateful firewall.

And what's your point? Lest you forget, Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. When you break the law, you have to play by a different set of rules. If Microsoft wasn't willing to do the time, it shouldn't have committed the crime. We are talking about a company which, had it not been for a new sympathetic administration, might very well have been split in two for its wrongdoings.

Malicious programs which infect and spread through true defects in the operating system are only one part of the target of these markets. No one is arguing that Microsoft shouldn't resolve true defects in its operating systems.

Re:Symantec was one of the vendors shut out

[Anonymous Coward]

No one is arguing that Microsoft shouldn't resolve true defects in its operating systems.

If you're not, then I have no idea what you are arguing. Should Microsoft not have put in a better filesystem? Should Microsoft not have included a stateful firewall? Should they not have security and anti-malware features in Internet Explorer? What should they be doing differently to allow Symantec to thrive?

More eyes is a good thing

[BadAnalogyGuy]

While it seems more a move to placate a rabid EU, this move is actually pretty good for all users.

First, not all users will get the APIs. In fact, only a tiny fraction of users, all of whom work at security and anti-virus companies, will get to see these opened APIs. Why then is it good news?

It's good because it brings into the fold those most able to spot security issues. Despite Microsoft's money and the experience of their top engineers, they all have tunnel-vision when it comes to Windows. And it's not hard to see why, after all, it's their baby. So even though they've got top security people working for them looking deeply into these issues, the very nature of those engineers' employment makes it difficult to see some of the problems that an outside observer would be able to spot easily.

By turning the baby over to the wolves, so to speak, Microsoft is getting Vista tested by the best testing teams around. The OSS motto is "more eyes makes all bugs shallow", I look forward to that same principle working well here.

Re:More eyes is a good thing

[arth1]

First, not all users will get the APIs. In fact, only a tiny fraction of users, all of whom work at security and anti-virus companies, will get to see these opened APIs. Why then is it good news?

It's good because it brings into the fold those most able to spot security issues.

Why do you think those who work at security and AV companies are those most able to spot security issues?
I won't mention names, but some fairly well-known "security and AV companies" have made their business on buying up other companies products, redoing the interface every year so they can demand people pay for a new version, and dumbing the app down by removing functionality whenever something breaks, because they don't have people smart enough to fix things. Outsourced $10/hr drag-and-drop "programmers" will only get you so far, and expecting them to possess intuition, assembly language skills, or a love for discovering what a function can be pushed into doing is expecting far too much.

Also remember that security and AV companies don't want security -- if their products actually fixed security holes, they would put themselves out of business. They want their products to temporarily block attempts, nothing more.
Gurus, on the other hand, work to get the problems fixed, permanently, and the people who made the mistakes aware of what they did, and just why it was bad, so they don't repeat it.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:More eyes is a good thing

[tonyr1988]

The OSS motto is "more eyes makes all bugs shallow", I look forward to that same principle working well here.

Yes, but this isn't what Microsoft is doing. If they're even getting close to that philosophy, they would make it truly open. The Linux equivalent of that would be if Canonical (of Ubuntu) invited Novell to come check out their source code.

Not even in the same realm as OSS.

Re:More eyes is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't about APIs. It's about code signing.

Microsoft will hand out keys to the major security firms that will allow them a limited access to the Windows kernel... to keep them sweet and quiet. They, of course, will say thank you Microsoft and kiss Bill's ass and tell the EU that everything is fine.

Two years from now, Microsoft will revoke their key, or threaten to unless they play ball on another issue.

You, in the meantime, will have bought a PC with a TPM inside it... hardware that enforces every draconian wet dream that Bill Gates has ever had and allows your PC to act has Billy's very own prison guard. And you paid for it all, you fucking morons.

Re:More eyes is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

A secure operating system does not need to hide anything. The administrator should know all,and can set them anyway he/she wants.
If API's have to be hidden, then something is broken - or backdoors are being left open.

Linux, BSD's and Z/os are secure, as they have 'immutable' bits after booting. For whatever reason, malware is getting smarter. Hoping nobody is maintaining softice is wrong.

MS'es strategy is to allow Clark Kent programs to scribble secret settings over the shop, so that upon reboot, looks at the scribbles, and may execute them in superman mode. Trouble here, is that badguy can alter the to-be-installed programs, or forge the scribbles, then all bets are off.

Going to be interesting to put a trace on system restore, then run linux DD's to find out what was NOT restored, or not seen with sysinternals tools.

Move along....nothing to see here.

[N8F8]

To err is human.

Re:Move along....nothing to see here.

[Anonymous Coward]

To err is human.

To really foul something up, use a computer.

Re:Move along....nothing to see here.

[hotdiggitydawg]

"To err is human... but it feels divine" - Mae West

Re:Move along....nothing to see here.

[Overly Critical Guy]

So is to cheat.

Mail template to security vendors

[Znort]

Dear [insert security vendor's contact]

You couldn't attend the meeting ?

That's really too bad because many very very interesting topics were presented for the first and only time. By missing this important event, you were discalified from any further information that might be made availble in the future.

Sorry for the inconvenience
[insert name and title here]

"...we sent out a messed up link..."

[Browzer]

Like it never happened to anybody!

This is beyond bashing, this is being anal.

Re:"...we sent out a messed up link..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally I know the meaning of IANAL.

Re:"...we sent out a messed up link..."

[Lxy]

Normally I'd agree, but this is happening a little too frequently with Microsoft.

I'm subscribed to the beta announcements list. I receive a handful of e-mails every week about online sessions to discuss [new feature] of Vista. I would say close to 25% of them have spelling errors (including one that misspelled "Windows") and I recall 3 or 4 times the incorrect link has been sent out. Incorrect links get a followup correction e-mail, the misspellings never get corrected.

Accidents happen, sure, and we get over it. What amazes me that in over a year of sending these type of e-mails, Microsoft is still making these kind of mistakes.

Re:"...we sent out a messed up link..."

[Overly Critical Guy]

Oh, how ridiculous. It's perfectly justified to criticize Microsoft for sending out a broken link. It means nobody even checked it before it went out! My company sends out links everyday, and it would cost us a lot of money to get them wrong. Somehow, we manage to make no mistakes, but checking a hyperlink must be too difficult for the #1 software developer in the world.

Par for the course

[amichalo]

This type of attention to detail is par for the course from MS.

Re:Par for the course

[ScentCone]

This type of attention to detail is par for the course from MS.

Right, because no one at, say, Apple, would ever miss something like a typo in a URL that has NOTHING to do with the actual performance of their products. No, they just ship out iPods with viruses pre-installed and blame someone else. Are you so pumped up about bashing MS that a bad URL in a conference invitation is really enough to make you rule out similar (and much worse) employee mistakes at every other software publisher in the business? Give it a rest.

Re:Par for the course

[stubear]

Funny you should bring this up. Apple does have a glaring typo in one of their dashboard wigets. The Dictionary/Thesaurus displays "dictionary thesauru" before it expands when you search for a word. The problem is 'thesauru" doesn't display an "s" at the end after expanding. Ummm...it's a dictionary widget, why not look the word up if you're having trouble spelling it?

Re:Par for the course

[amichalo]

Go Zune yourself. I was making a joke. Take your anti-Apple agenda somewhere else.

Microsoft sucks - the reality was that it wasn't just a typo, it was a system failure that "conveniently" prevented two MS-competitors from participating in the on-line discussion.

Re:Par for the course

[ScentCone]

Take your anti-Apple agenda somewhere else

What part of "every other publisher in the business" didn't you hear?

No, a Rocky Horror start

[Anonymous Coward]

Ballmer was dressed in drag.

There's a hope

[jackharrer]

...they will do it next few times. European Commision is already p*ssed with Microsoft and want to fine them once again for anti-trust practices. And, if you remember, Microsoft few weeks ago said that they want to postpone delivery of Vista to Europe. Because of this.
Good point of that (except no Vista fo Europe) is that it will create market for Open Source Software. Especially that Europe already started their fight with proprietary (actually paid for) software.

Yes, I know it's slightly off-topic...

We're all victims

[Gracenotes]

Yeah, well, it was a link to an IIS server.

Yet another innocent soul taken by the immoral horrors of RAS syndrome. We're drowning in acronoyms! Somebody get some SCUBA apparatus.

Re:We're all victims

[Gracenotes]

Oh, wait -- nevermind.

Re:We're all victims

[Anonymous Coward]

Would be funny if the S in IIS didn't stand for Services.

Re:FUCK VISTA! E17 IS ALMOST HERE!

[Anonymous Coward]

"We have worked closely with the energetic, determined E17 team to bring this advanced graphical user interface to a state of interface euphoria. It's not about eye candy and unnecessary special effects, it's about finding balance between a lean, uncluttered desktop and a personal environment that is both familiar and powerful. E17 is simply the most incredible thing I have ever used --with any operating system," states Cesar Delgado, System Administrator for Terra Soft.

The real question is....

[Admin_Jason]

Who thought of this? MS wants to keep kernel secret, then capitulates, and schedules conference with security vendors, then admits it screwed up and schedules another one for people to attend. A net meeting?!?! To discuss security of an OS?!?!?! Does this not set off flags in the minds of the security sector? I am sorry but if I want to discuss such sensitive things as OS kernel and API programming and how to avoid, detect and remove malicious apps from infecting the OS, I do this face-to-face with people that are screened, background checked, and sign NDA's specifying to whom they can talk to and consequences if they reveal anything proprietary to anyone w/out express written consent.

Perhaps I am anal that way, but come on, we're talking about an OS that will likely suceed the millions of Windows 98, 2000 and XP in the vast majority of homes and businesses across the planet!

Re:The real question is....

[Jtheletter]

we're talking about an OS that will likely suceed the millions of Windows 98, 2000 and XP in the vast majority of homes and businesses

Somehow I doubt the machines still running win98 and 2K are capable of running Vista w/o massive hardware upgrades. Not to mention those users have demonstrated they have little to no interest in upgrading their OS by now anyway if they're still running win98 - and that's speaking as someone who has a box still running win98. Just as a project pc mind you, not on the net, but it does what I need it to do and I have zero reason to spend rediculous sums of money just so MS can further bloat it.

Re:The real question is....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because restricting the dissemination of information to a small group of trusted people always succeeds in keeping it from virus/exploit writers! </sarcasm>

Re:The real question is....

[Admin_Jason]

Fair point about lack of upgradability, but given the assumption of a 5 year life cycle for a computer, these are PC's that are at, near, or beyond their life cycle and will likely be replaced at or around the time Vista is released (eventually, any computer will just die from use or obsolescence). Thus, while the OS may not specifically be upgraded, the odds of these people (mostly non-technical types)jumping to a Mac or Linux are unlikely, so a Vista box will probably be their next PC, which brings us back to the point of the OP - that Vista will ultimately manifest itself across a very large portion of the planet.

Even in the event Linux and other OS's continue to increase in popularity, it is a safe and conservative estimate that Microsoft would still garner at least 50% of the market share. That in and of itself suggests that discussing security vulnerabilities should be addressed in the manner suggested in the OP as opposed to a net meeting.

Re:The real question is....

[drsmithy]

Somehow I doubt the machines still running win98 and 2K are capable of running Vista w/o massive hardware upgrades.

If you have a PC with a >=1Ghz CPU and >=1G RAM, it will run Vista about as well as it runs XP. The only upgrade you might have to splash out on is a US$50 video card to run Aero, if the one you've got won't already do it.

This is a first!

[giafly]

Your search - "totally our fault" site:microsoft.com - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

• Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
• Try different keywords.
• Try more general keywords.
• Try fewer keywords

Google

Re:This is a first!

[Res3000]

TBH, if you remove teh "totally" you get some results (mostly from there forums, tho)

At least they could...

[shirizaki]

Zune the security companies audio files of what they missed.

Re:FUCK VISTA! E17 IS ALMOST HERE!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've yet to see a GUI for Linux include true transparency. A truly use full special effect.

Sure

[Dunbal]

'We had a glitch where we sent out a messed up link. ... We're very sorry about that,

      A source has informed up that the "messed up link" was in fact a link to tubgirl. Disciplinary action has been taken against the employee responsible. The project manager for Symantec was quoted as saying the experience was "educational", and he is likely never to click on that link again...

Re:FUCK VISTA! E17 IS ALMOST HERE!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait until E17 is officially released. You will see something you have never seen with any operating system before.

No

[otacon]

Too bad E17 isn't an operating system.

Re:No

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad E17 isn't an operating system.

Hmm.. it actually is when Linux kernel is bundled with it. ;)

"Accidents" happen... all too frequently

[dpbsmith]

I certainly don't think this is a case of "accidentally-on-purpose." But I do think it is a symptom of a endemic problem in the PC industry, which is lack of attention to usability because computer people are intolerant of human fallibility. Even though they exhibit just as much human fallibility as anyone else, when they encounter a technical glitch they are reluctant to blame the design of the system.

Sure, "everyone has glitches from time to time," but when people at Microsoft can't get an important web meeting to work it suggests that there's something flawed about this "all-net-all-the-time" vision they've been touting for more than five years.

Computer technology reached a peak of usability in the early 1990s, when PC vendors still felt that they had to make things easy to use (and supply real support) in order to secure adoption. Once everyone was locked in--not so much to Microsoft, but to PC technology in general--usability was allowed to deteriorate.

The pretense that unreliable, hard-to-use unfinished technology is ready for release is so imbued into Microsoft's culture that Microsoft managers are evidently willing to use unreliable, hard-to-use, unfinished technology to conduct important Microsoft public business.

Stepto should _not_ blame "us" for the "glitch" and apologize. Instead, they should take a long hard look at what it was about the technology they were using that made it easy to "send out a messed-up link."

Re:"Accidents" happen... all too frequently

[Jellybob]

The most likely thing to have happened is someone putting a typo in the URL, if they had been running tests on it, then it would probably have been caught, but presumably it was seen as one of those small projects that doesn't really need a proper QA process.

Re:"Accidents" happen... all too frequently

[dpbsmith]

A participant (or non-participant, as it turned out), Alex Eckelberry, said "someone at Microsoft accidently sent out the LiveMeeting presentation invites as "presenter", which if you've ever used LiveMeeting, is an invitation to chaos. Realizing their error, the meeting was rescheduled for 30 minutes later, and that didn't all come together, because the meeting had been originally setup to end at 12:30, so we were promptly all kicked off."

So, the system design makes it easy to make a mistake that is an "invitation to chaos," and even though it was quickly caught, the system design either didn't have an easy way to change the end of the meeting, or made it easy to overlook the fact that everyone was going to get "promptly kicked off."

Even if it had been a typo in the URL, that would have said that something in the system design made it easier for a user to re-key a URL by hand than to copy it.

Re:"Accidents" happen... all too frequently

[BlueCodeWarrior]

I'd agree, this is a potential huge problem. The reason that I say potential is this: I'm not sure that I'm qualified to judge this. I find the command line to be the most usable, reliable way to do things with my computer. I'm the kinda guy who types 'firefox &' into an xterm, downloads something, then types 'mv ~/Desktop/whatever ~/Documents/whatever'. Yakuake is amazing. But that's the problem. I personally consider Mac OS X to be quite usable. I've been using Macs since the Plus, and I've used a ][ before. I conisder Windows to be reasonably useable, but I've been using it since 3.1.1. I find Linux to be extremely usable, but I've been using that for years, as well. So how can I judge what is correct? I'm tainted from what is truely usable by all of the learning I've been doing. And that's the root of the problem. My generation (I'm almost 21, to give you frame of reference) has grown up with all of this stuff, and even if it's not truely usable, we're used to it. We can use it anyway. So we keep making more bad interfaces from the shitty ones we're used to. How do we get around this? Once all of the GUI designers have grown up using computers, and don't know what it's like to not use one, how do we get that perspective? I'm sure there are some people who will rarely use computers in the future, but they won't get jobs as GUI designers. I'm not sure what the answer is to this problem.

incompetence is rampant in coporate america

[Anonymous Coward]

As an ex-office worker, I can personally attest to the fact that many incompetent people hold down critically important positions solely due to cronyism, nepotism and patronism.

The cost of thier greed is overwhelming us all.

No...

[akincisor]

Thats their business model.

Re:No...

[DRUNK_BEAR]

and they've patented it.

And in other shock news...

[Arimus]

Office worker makes typo and orders 500,000 tongue depressers instead of 50,000

WTF does this have to do with anything, sure someone messed up. The mistake? A typo.

Show me someone who uses a computer day in day out and HAS never once sent an email with a typo, typed a letter containing a typo etc etc etc.

I'm all for a bit of MS bashing where it is due but it is not due here.

Nothing to see here, move along now...

Re:FUCK VISTA! E17 IS ALMOST HERE!

[h2g2bob]

Gah, create an account! It's easy:
  1. Click "Create Account"
  2. ...
  3. Profit!

tired of pr & media

[sulfur_lad]

File this under 'off-topic rant'.

you know, I think a lot of companies in the world could do a lot better without their pr arms sometimes, and we'd do a whole lot better without reporters. MS is apologizing for a technical glitch here, but why the need for the public apology? I'm sure PR told them to do it and even wrote it. Whoever wanted to be in the meeting should just get a "uh yeah, sorry about that; we'll reschedule the sucker if we can't figure it out in a few minutes." Guess what, it happens! Then you'll get some idiot reporter who'll come around and open an article with "In an embarassing turn of events, no one could attend a seminal meeting about security in the upcoming Vista software release. Microsoft has apologized, but is it enough for the beleaguered software giant? Experts are thumbing there noses at the meager response, saying that it's an excuse to stall. MacAffee and Norton representatives (who spoke on condition of anonymity) were insensed. 'This is just another trick by MS to curtail our efforts to protect their customers. If this kind of stall tactic persists, we will have no choise but to pursue legal recourse.' MS representatives could not be reached for comment..." You get the point, it's not news, it's fabricated spin based on a technical glitch. I'm not gonna send out a press release when my phone's got no signal!

MS doesn't need to apologize for this, and it has nothing to do with Vista security (which I am not stating an opinion on, so don't call me out hehe). Apple doesn't need to blame MS for a Virus landing on the iPod. Sony doesn't need to continually baffle us with ridiculous statements about PS3 vs XBOX vs Wii. I swear, PR teams and patent lawyers suing and countersuing every day are just completely pointless, and the tech and business media is not reporting on any of it: it's a collection of "here's my opinion what's happening and of how this reflects poorly on the company involved" opinion editorials, there are no articles at all.

MS sent a bad link. It's not news, it's just unfortunate. The guy that did it will get a "nice one, dumbass" from his/her coworkers, just I like I would here if I did the same thing. I dunno. Hopefully you all see my point here.

[/end rant]

messed up link ..

[rs232]

Doesn't sound like a messed up link. According to this dozens of users were kicked off the system. How does a messed up link cause them to login as 'presenters'?

Microsoft finally called an online briefing .. Fifteen minutes into the much-anticipated briefing, dozens of the security companies were kicked off line and could not connect again

"There were problems with the audio and video. We could not get back on."

A Microsoft spokesman explained the crash was due to "technical problems" and an extra briefing would be set for Monday

'Alex Eckelberry .. said .. participants signed on as presenters. "Which, if you've ever used Live Meeting, is an invitation to chaos".'

Did the users actually sign on as 'presenters' and how would this crash Live Meeting?

Re:messed up link ..

[Alexeck]

Did the users actually sign on as 'presenters' and how would this crash Live Meeting?

No, it meant that everyone had control of the meeting, so the slides kept flipping back and forth as anyone was able to control the meeting.

Alex Eckelberry

Re:messed up link ..

[rs232]

it meant that everyone had control of the meeting, Alex Eckelberry

"Live Meeting enables multiple presenters to work together in a meeting with one presenter assigned as the Active Presenter"

Re:FUCK VISTA! E17 IS ALMOST HERE!

[Anonymous Coward]

E17 is simply the most incredible thing I have ever used

Yeap, jaws will start droppin' once this baby is out. 578BABY! E17 is ART! E17 is functionality! E17 is personality! E17 is speed!

Redirect bad link to correct URL?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why did they have to scramble? Why didn't they just redirect the known "bad link" to the correct URL?

Re:messed up link .. explained

[A_Non_Moose]

"There were problems with the audio and video. We could not get back on."

Non-signed, certified codecs, eh? BAD DEV! No intraweb for YOU!

A Microsoft spokesman explained the crash was due to "technical problems" and an extra briefing would be set for Monday

Vista on an Xbox 360 using Xbox Live for Net Meetings is not recommended, apparently.

'Alex Eckelberry .. said .. participants signed on as presenters. "Which, if you've ever used Live Meeting, is an invitation to chaos".'

Did the users actually sign on as 'presenters' and how would this crash Live Meeting?

How, I'd imagine some sort of buffer overflow or fatal exception because if you have many 'presenters' and one 'attendee', that is either an attack, ambush or intervention.

(dons tinfoil hat: Maybe everyone's WGA check failed and disconnected all baaaaad sheeple!)

A Rocky start...

[Anonymous Coward]

... As in "Rocky M M M C C C X X X L L L V V V I"

(Sorry for the number formatting: Slashdot lameness filter does not allow so many caps in a row !)

Vista "Security" Already Compromised

[mpapet]

As reported by the researcher on the blog, Microsoft's kernel protection scheme is wide open for some classes of malware.

http://theinvisiblethings.blogspot.com/2006/10/vis ta-rc2-vs-pagefile-attack-and-some.html

Here's the faulty link.

[Anonymous Coward]

dearaunt.doublethekillerdelete.com

God changes human not to be susceptible to disease

[dascandy]

News headline: God has changed the human being structure to not be susceptible to disease anymore. Antibiotic firms complain, consider it unfair competition.

(the point: if you're a parasite company that's living off anothers companies flaws, bugs and holes, don't complain about the cure)

A BSOD?

[rajafarian]

A Microsoft spokesman explained the crash was due to "technical problems"...

LOL

World without reporters

[Valacosa]

"...we'd do a whole lot better without reporters."

You're right. I'd be a lot better off if I didn't know anything about the war in Iraq, or about congressman hitting on pages.

Re:World without reporters

[sulfur_lad]

You're taking me a bit literally and out of context, let me clarify. A world without the 'reporters' that I'm talking about would be good. We definitely need journalists, or people who legitimately report on world affairs in an unbiased neutral "here's what happened" form. We don't need tabloid media. Reading CNN's RSS vs CBC's is incredible (and the CBC is not the least biased medium out there either).

As for the congressman and pages, that thread follows my argument completely: A lot of the 'reports' you see about it are nothing but hearsay and spin (just what I expect from Fox News and / or CNN). A 'report' would be that the congressman in fact did this, the page is safe and sound, and that the republican party disapproves and are investigating while suspending the congressman's membership (hypothetical example). A 'report' is not speculation on what this will do to the Republican party's chances in terms of votes or what Dohickey McGregor thinks about the mother of the page putting him in harm's way or whatever other useless experts and theorists they dig up. That is a spin on the real story. Jon Stewart provides better impartial views and more honest analysis than the spinners do, and he is a self-professed gag-media outlet. "fake news."

The Iraq war falls into the same category: the media has us so confused with a constant barrage of "here's the real story," that nobody knows what to think. I don't even know if they know what they're saying in the first place! It's pretty much "if we say Bush is under fire and Iraq is difficult, we'll sell more ads."

This MS thing was not even news, that is my point about reporters and PR.