Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Vista Security Discussions Get a Rocky Start

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the get-it-together dept.

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.'"

21 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. What a relief! by justinbach · · Score: 5, Funny
    '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!
    --
    I left my wallet in El Sigundo!
    1. Re:What a relief! by zoobsolar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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".

  2. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

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

  3. Security experts biggest question... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    '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...

  4. Huh... by tygerstripes · · Score: 4, Funny

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

    --
    Meta will eat itself
    1. Re:Huh... by tygerstripes · · Score: 4, Funny

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

      --
      Meta will eat itself
  5. A Rocky Start For Vista? by Analein · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

    1. Re:A Rocky Start For Vista? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

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

  6. Extra! Extra! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Extra! Extra! by PreacherTom · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

    2. Re:Extra! Extra! by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

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

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

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  7. Symantec was one of the vendors shut out by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Interesting
    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).

    --
    My blog
    1. Re:Symantec was one of the vendors shut out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
      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.

  8. More eyes is a good thing by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:More eyes is a good thing by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      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
  9. "...we sent out a messed up link..." by Browzer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like it never happened to anybody!

    This is beyond bashing, this is being anal.

  10. The real question is.... by Admin_Jason · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!

    --
    Just another nameless binary in a crowd of 1's and 0's
  11. This is a first! by giafly · · Score: 5, Funny
    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
    --
    Reduce, reuse, cycle
  12. Sure by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

    '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...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  13. No... by akincisor · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thats their business model.

  14. messed up link .. by rs232 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com