Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows XP SP3 Causing Router Crashes

Posted by timothy on from the insecurity-through-non-obscurity dept.

KrispyBytes writes "Windows XP SP3 has been named as the culprit causing home routers to go into a crash and reboot cycle. One router maker has released firmware updates to fix the problem, but has not yet revealed what is actually different about XP SP3's networking stack or UPnP behaviour that causes the problem. Router maker Billion Managing Director Raaj Menon said "as Microsoft plans to make Windows XP SP3 an automatic upgrade this month, the number of affected routers may increase significantly.""

7 of 337 comments (clear)

  1. Before anyone goes on a MS rant by Gregb05 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A computer on the network should not be able to crash the router. This is a problem with the manufacturing of the routers, not anything in particular with SP3. This problem could have arisen in any OS. The fact that it appeared with SP3 is irrelevant. I return you to your MS bashing.

    --
    --
    1. Re:Before anyone goes on a MS rant by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > It is the manufactures fault that thier crashing, but this bug wouldnt be seen if xp was
      > behaving correctly.

      Nonsense. Any router that can be crashed by anything that a computer connected to it does has a critical bug and should be recalled immediately.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  2. Blaming the wrong programmers by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shouldn't the title of this post be "Shitty router programming causing router crashes"? It should matter what type of garbage come off the wire, the router must be able to handle it all without error.

  3. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lets not jump to blame this on Windows. It could be that Windows isn't doing anything wrong, just something the router should be able to handle, but can't. We can point fingers when we know what the actual issue causing the router problems is.

  4. Not MS to blame by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As much as I hate defending the Redmond Computer Virus (tm), that's the router's fault.

    Now, if SP3 created nonstandard packets that most routers still swallow but a router drops because they don't work to spec, blame MS. If the router replied with a bogus message to said nonstandard packet that locked up XP, blame MS. But a router HAS TO be able to accept a bogus packet. It may drop it, report it or if it feels like it send it on a roundtrip in hope that some machine can figure out what it's about, but it may NEVER crash due to it.

    I hope I don't have to mention the security implications of this.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. NAPT != Firewall by Luke-Jr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    uPNP configures port forwarding for a NAPT (aka NAT) router. NAPT/NAT is *not* a firewall, and should not be treated like one. Its sole purpose is to translate addresses and ports (Network Address and Port Translating) between the internal and external networks. It is not meant to protect computers on either end from each other. uPNP facilitates the NAPT job by giving applications an easy way to automate the needed port forwarding for the WAN->LAN direction. If you want a firewall, get a real firewall.

    --
    Luke-Jr
  6. apples to oranges by spazdor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did the hardware manufacturers all just write flawless Linux drivers and buggy Windows ones?

    Or did Linux developers just go a step further than Windows did, and take it upon themselves to make sure that hardware works properly on their OS?

    --
    DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!