Stealthy Windows Update Raises Serious Concerns

UniversalVM writes "What is the single biggest issue that bothers open source advocates about proprietary software? It is probably the ability of the vendor to pull stunts like Microsoft's recent stealth software update and subsequent downplaying of any concerns. Their weak explanation seems to be a great exercise in circular logic: 'Had we failed to update the service automatically, users would not have been able to successfully check for updates and, in turn, users would not have had updates installed automatically or received expected notifications.' News.com is reporting that all of the updated files on both XP and Vista appears to be in windows update itself. This is information that was independently uncovered by users and still not released by Microsoft."

Comments

Re:Sabotaging certified systems.

[Ant P.]

If you're using an internet-facing Windows XP to run mission-critical systems, let us know which ones - so I can make a mental note never to use your services.

What append if ...

[denisbergeron]

If I suppose this sentence true :

Had we failed to update the service automatically, users would not have been able to successfully check for updates and, in turn, users would not have had updates installed automatically or received expected notifications.

What append when someone install XP (OR Vista) from zero and get the OldAndBad Windows Update ? He will never be able to get update ?

Someone have feet in his mouth.

Re:So Windows Update Has Problems

[marcansoft]

Wine Is Not an Emulator.

The overhead of using Wine is very small. It is a thin layer on top of native Linux, and Windows itself isn't emulated. The difference between Linux and Windows is much more important with regard to performance. As it turns out, sometimes the Windows drivers are faster and sometimes the Linux drivers are faster. I've seen games run faster under Wine than under native Windows.

Re:So Windows Update Has Problems

[Phroggy]

I can't switch to Linux for several reasons. While my knowledge of Windows kernel is very little (actual code knowledge that is, I know nothing), I know even less about Linux. So while modern day Linux distros are all very GUI friendly and look similar to Windows, what if something went drastically wrong with it? I don't know nearly enough about Linux's command line system or anything. While I know a decent bit about DOS I've seen a small touch of Linux when I ran a Half Life 1 server on a Linux box for a mod. Using PuTTy into it was a pain cause all these strange Linux command line commands were no where near what I was used to. Linux has progressed a bit since then. Try Ubuntu 7.04; you can just boot from the CD and give it a try without touching your hard drive. For most things, you shouldn't have to touch a command line.

Now the real kicker reason why I can't switch; I have no guarantee for my PC being able to use it. Like I said, try the live CD. There's no risk.

While I'm sure I could find a distro that has decent drivers for my hardware, what am I to do about the PC games I play that do not have Linux ports? Now you've hit upon a potential issue.

I could use some Linux emulation software like Wine right? I mean that's the easiest solution. Emulate Windows to run those must-have Windows applications. Well my PC is rather old. You figure in running Linux, plus emulating Windows, plus running a Windows based MMORPG where I normally got 20 fps on a PC, I doubt I'd get anywhere a playable state. While I'm sure some Linux distros themselves run faster, use less memory etc than Windows XP, having to run that and emulate Windows + Game probably negates any resources I had freed up from running Linux itself, if not making the game run even worse. Ah, but you're forgetting: Wine Is Not an Emulator. It's a reverse-engineered clone of the Win32 APIs, running natively on Linux. When you run a Windows game on Wine, the game is actually running natively, on your hardware, using Win32 API calls, just like it runs on Windows... except it's not running on Windows. So, there should be no performance hit at all, and memory usage shouldn't be any higher.

(Disclaimer: I've never used Wine and have no idea what I'm talking about.)

For some people, upgrading or buying a new PC simply so they can use Linux instead of Windows isn't an option. If I was going to shell out that much money, I'd go get another copy of Windows XP that has the current SP2 streamlined into the install to greatly reduce install and patch time. If I didn't play PC games that needed Windows, I might consider running Linux cause pretty much everything else I use can be used on Linux (Firefox, IRC, mp3 player, VLC, etc). Actually, many people switch to Linux because they have older hardware, because Linux tends to run on older hardware better than Windows does. As for getting a copy of Windows XP with all the current patches slipstreamed in, you'll have to pirate that - as another poster complained, there are a ton of patches you have to install, even if you start with an SP2 CD. They're releasing SP3 next year, but who knows whether it will even be possible to buy an XP SP3 CD anywhere; remember that they'd rather you switched to Vista.

Anyway, not trying to argue; Linux probably isn't a good option for you right now. But try the Ubuntu live CD, and the next time you reinstall XP, consider repartitioning and setting up a Windows/Linux dual-boot. That way you can use Windows to get your work done and play your games, and fiddle with Linux in your spare time to see if you can get your games to run there. You said your main problem is that you don't know much about Linux; this would be a good way to do something about that.

Re:Not a big deal

[Kjella]

MS claims that the stealth update to the Windows Update system itself was required so that it could still check for new updates.

Even if that was true, that's not proper behavior. Under the circumstances, I might see a level 3 being upgraded to a level 2 (download), and after download it should simply prompt and notify that further update checks may fail and that additional patches may be available after this update. That's the whole point of those settings, to not having anything installed without permission. If you know that that upgrade *is* pending and that others *may* be pending, it should be sufficient for everyone and without secretly installing anything. That said, not exactly a big issue IMO.