Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Refuses To Patch Rootkit-Compromised XP Machines
Barence writes "Microsoft has revealed that its latest round of patches won't install on XP machines if they're infected with a rootkit. In February, a security patch left some XP users complaining of endless reboots and Blue Screens of Death. An investigation followed and Microsoft discovered the problems occurred on machines infected with the Alureon rootkit, which interacted badly with patch KB977165 for the Windows kernel. Now Microsoft is blocking PCs with the rootkit from receiving its new patches. 'This security update includes package-detection logic that prevents the installation of the security update if certain abnormal conditions exist on 32-bit systems,' Microsoft cautions in the patch notes."
Microsoft has always held the moto, "If its broke... dont fix it."
Why would they change that now?
If the rootkit is still on your computer, maybe you should look into having it removed.
how shall thee pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine eye? Luke 6:42
Microsoft isn't really in the business of providing a virus scanner as one of their free updates. Oh wait...
*continues running Ubuntu*
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
You keep your original software. Time to wipe it and reinstall. Of perhaps boot Linux and get a faster computer.
Provided they[MS] provides doco on how to remove the rootkit, I don't take issue with this. This is similar to MS testing a 3rd-party developers product to make sure it works, when in the marketplace it's the job of the 3rd-party shop. Somehow I doubt the rootkit devs are going to get their kit validated by MS as a certified app......
Website Hosting
If Microsoft has a way of detecting the rootkit, they should make it available separately so that people can test their machines before they try to update them. Of course, this is Microsoft we're talking about, so you know they're not interested in what's right unless it's also profitable.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Let's see what do I want?
A) A working machine that has a rootkit installed.
B) A machine that nolonger works.
Can you expect MSFT to test their patches against machines that have been modified via rootkits? Or should the patches themselves remove the rootkits. You are assuming that MSFT can remove the rootkit in the first place.
What ever happened to backwards compatibility? Why, I remember the day when any virus, worm, or piece of malware, would run no matter what!
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I really don't have a problem with this. If the system is already rooted, the patch isn't going to actually help anything since their security is already compromised. And with all the bad press MS received last time over something that was not their fault at all, why should they risk it again? If your system has a serious issue like being rooted, then you have to take care of the issue before you can install the patch. Seems logical to me.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
Rightfully so. Security patching a rootkit-ed OS is mildly amusing and also a bit redundant. The only way to secure such an OS starts with reformatting the system partition.
The title is totally misleading. It gives the sense that Microsoft refuses to deliver some patch that fixes the rootkit infection. While in fact Microsoft avoids to deliver the patch to keep the machines in a working (albeit infected) condition.
I bet that the poster is a fanboi that found his opportunity to bash Microsoft... :-P
I think microsoft acted responsibly in this situation. They merely mitigated any future issues these patches might have, they didn't want the same thing to happen again. In this case it was prevention not intervention. Unfortunately, there are many ways to get a rootkit installed on a computer; however, most of the time it's usually the user that infected themselves. This is why there are measures that a user can take to prevent or minimize the occurrence. Microsoft did make a note to remove the infection and then install the patch. If they don't know how to remove the infection or don't know they can download if not purchase one of many anti-virus solutions or pay someone to do it, then maybe the user's should rethink their web browsing behaviors.
Of all the things I've lost; I miss my mind the most. - Mark Twain
So, does this detection result in a message like "Windows Update had an error. Code 0xB302392838271" or "YOU'VE BEEN HACKED!!! GET YOUR COMPUTER FIXED!!!!"?
Their Malicious Software Removal Tool (sent out on Patch Tuesday) can remove the rootkit.
But I won't stop the Slashdotters here from complaining about it.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I'd bet that Microsoft is just using the rootkit as leverage to force people to upgrade.
If anything this will make them EOL XP even faster.
As Microsoft has noted, while the solution prevents users from suffering the misery of Blue Screens of Death, it does leave them unprotected and the company has urged users to download its Malicious Software Removal Tool to clean up their machines and run the patch as soon as possible.
It isnt that they wont patch these systems, its that they wont automatically install the MSRT, which removes the rootkit, as part of the update.
..and to be perfectly honest, who wants the MSRT to be a mandatory component. Things like that are capable of unexpectedly altering the system, something typically frowned upon in enterprise.
"His name was James Damore."
First, you beat up Microsoft because their patch trashed machines that were *already* infected. Then you beat them up because they backed off on applying the patches to avoid trashing the machines. Get thee to SuperAntiSpyware and Anti-Malwarebytes and get your machine cleaned up before you complain.
This just proves that it's a great time for people who have been sticking with XP to take the plunge and upgrade to Windows 2000 Professional.
If they have the ability to detect these things, why in the world doesn't a little popup appear in the systray or security center saying "Your system appears to have a form of Malicious Software installed. Windows Updates are currently disabled. Please see your Network Administrator."
Seriously, the rogue spyware apps do this all the time, why can't Windows itself do it?
You expect consistency when it comes to bashing Microsoft? You must be new here.
"Microsoft discovered the problems occurred on machines infected with the Alureon rootkit"
There are many reasons to hate Microsoft, and their QA failure when it comes to security is certainnly one of them. However, the spread of rootkits, viruses and other malware is primarily caused by user stupidity, something that is not Microsoft's fault. In the early days of personal computers I took the time to learn how things worked. If you're having the problem described in this article then you can wipe your hard drive and re-install Windows. If you don't know how to do this, then maybe it's time you learned. If you're not willing to learn, then do the rest of the world a favor and throw your computer out the nearest window.
I mean, they already have the malicious software removal tool, so they could blow the roots away if they wanted to. but what is really needed here is to block the rooting mechanism altogether.
or go back to the saner architecture of nt 3.0/3.1/3.5, where only the kernel and its designated MS helpers ran at level 0 to start with. the world started to go to hell when they allowed the video driver into level 0.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Couldnt them had included a program to detect and clean that rootkit, then proceed to install the patch instead of just refusing?
Anyway, having a rootkit active means being walking over thin ice. You could clean it, but it could be used to install something that gives a more direct access, and the rootkit could not be required anymore to do what they want with your machine. Backup data and reinstall should be the recommended way of acting unless you are capable to detect the other changes.
microsoft doesn't refuse to patch rootkitted systems, microsoft is UNABLE to patch rootkitted system. NO ONE can patch a rootkitted system, of ANY OS. you need to wipe the system and reinstall
it is ok to be against microsoft, but you have to base your opinion on genuine problems. when you base your opinion on mindless propaganda, you are just another useless partisan in this world: loud, dumb, useless
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
With them providing a free solution to cleaning the system with MSE I can't be offended by this, but hopefully it explains to the user why it's not installing. (/me did not rtfa)
See:
http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Threat/Encyclopedia/Entry.aspx?Name=Virus:Win32/Alureon.A
I've have reasonably good experiences with MSE so far with my Windows users. Anybody else want to weigh in here?
and hence advertising revenue.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
I did no such thing! I was happy with the trashed machine and now they go and do this!
Yes. Because when patching, you want the process to be as simple as possible for the END USER.
The more steps the end user has to follow, the more likely that the end user will make a mistake somewhere.
If it can be done in one step at the end user's level, then it should be done in one step at the end user's level. No delays.
A) A working machine that has a rootkit installed.
And is sending all key presses and bank account details to criminals.
Deleted
That was the sarcasm train, clearly passing you by.
I'm strangely ok with this. If they update the computer and the rootkit conflicts with the new patch and makes the computer unusable, they'll just get blasted for breaking people's computers. But if they don't update the computer, then the person is still able to use it. If they're warned that they can't update because they have a rootkit on their system and they do nothing about it, I feel no sympathy for them. At least Microsoft didn't make their system less operational. They should get rid of the rootkit and then update. If Microsoft let people update while knowing that it would make the computers unusable if they had this rootkit. People would still call foul on Microsoft. This way they're at least giving people a warning and chance to fix their problem, not making the problem worse.
Seeing the summary and many of the posts here, it's so sad to see how the internet gave every idiot a podium. It's always going to be catch-22 for Microsoft, even if they donated 40 billion dollars for every open source foundation/cancer research facility in the world. It's sad to see CS graduates, sysadmins and programmers with the mentalities of 4channers. Huh
Microsoft let the crap get on the machine in the first place.
They're ultimately responsible any way you try to spin this situation.
I will say that again s-l-o-w-l-y: It's Microsoft's OS. They are responsible for it. You even paid money for it.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
More like Obsoletes regularly. Wait a year to update and you can be SOL.
If MS won't support a 10 year old system anymore, I don't stand much of a chance getting my first gen root-kitted iPhone patched then.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It never ceases to amaze me how the company that SHOULD produce some of the best code in the world (given revenue and longevity) instead seems to almost invariable produce code based on the "quickest and cheapest" principle.
The best customer service in this case would be: "What does this malicious third-party code do that causes our software to crash, and how can we fix that bug permanently." Instead, as usual, they go with, "Oh, malicious third party code makes our software crash? No cake for you, then."
I wish I could say that decisions like this will lead to MS becoming marginalized, but history doesn't seem to bear that idea out either. Pity.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If they patch system can detect the rootkit and not install, why doesn't it remove it and then install? At least give the user the option of doing it, instead of just leaving the user to deal with yet more work.
A: Sell new 2010 automobile
B: Release new 2011 version of same automobile (with LED widgets!)
C: Inform everyone who purchased the 2010 model that parts for their model will no longer be available after 2012.
D: Inform car dealers that they will not be allowed to sell used 2010 models.
E: Inform gas stations that they must use new nozzles at their pumps that only fit the 2011 models.
F: Sit back an wonder why people take cheap shots at your company and begin purchasing motorcycles.
G: File lawsuits against the motorcycle companies for restraint of trade and IP infringement.
I don't rag on Microsoft because they make a substandard product. I rag on Microsoft because they *force* their new products on their customers, and then treat those customers like thieves until proven otherwise. If I don't want to upgrade from Ubuntu 6, I can still download it and use it if I so choose, and I won't be accused of software piracy if I blow a system board and swap the drive into a new system.
Microsoft let the crap get on the machine in the first place.
How so? Did Microsoft hold a gun to their held and forced them to install the rootkit?
They're ultimately responsible any way you try to spin this situation.
That's funny because no one was holding the Linux kernel devs or the Ubuntu devs reponsible for users installing those malware-infected debian packages on their system.
I will say that again s-l-o-w-l-y: It's Microsoft's OS. They are responsible for it. You even paid money for it.
That's funny because the only way for Microsoft to stop people from installing this malware on their systems is to do the exact same thing that Apple is maligned on the iPhone and iPad: Only allow approved apps to be installed. If Microsoft were to do this you would be howling over them taking control away from the users to do "whatever they want" with their systems. So basically you're being a fucking hypocrite.
I happen to run DeepFreeze on one of my PCs. Earlier this week I noticed that the MS patches failed during the update process. I didn't think much about it, thinking I would mess with it when I had more time. Then I saw this article today. I will need to do some more research but my understanding is that DeepFreeze functions much like a rootkit to provide its functionality. I run an older copy so perhaps it’s not an issue on newer versions...if this is indeed the problem. I can only wonder how many other legit software packages are out there might be affected by this....once again, if it is the true cause. If anyone out there can already either confirm or refute my suspicions, I would certainly appreciate feedback.
Microsoft let the crap get on the machine in the first place.
They're ultimately responsible any way you try to spin this situation.
I will say that again s-l-o-w-l-y: It's Microsoft's OS. They are responsible for it. You even paid money for it.
I wasn't aware that Microsoft was to blame when a user went against safe operating practices, such as clicking on pop-ups and opening virus-filled emails. I suppose I was wrong.
I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc512587.aspx
>You can't clean a compromised system by patching it.
>You can't clean a compromised system by removing the back doors.
>You can't clean a compromised system by using some "vulnerability remover."
>You can't clean a compromised system by using a virus scanner.
>You can't clean a compromised system by reinstalling the operating system over the existing installation.
>You can't trust any data copied from a compromised system.
>You can't trust the event logs on a compromised system.
>You may not be able to trust your latest backup.
>>>>>The only way to clean a compromised system is to flatten and rebuild.
Jesper M. Johansson, Ph.D. [YES, HE'S A DOCTOR], CISSP, MCSE, MCP+I
Security Program Manager
Microsoft Corporation
http://xkcd.com/123/
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
theoretically impossible and practically impossible
you wipe the system: you are now guaranteed a clean system and you spent orders of magnitude less time and effort than the scenario you propose (which doesn't guarantee anything)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Meh. I'm just glad they're still patching Windows XP.
It is exactly for the reason that I am not an expert in it that I don't do plumbing nor farming. And, the world will be a safer place if plumbers don't do any heavy IT work either.
There's a clear distinction between (end) users and admins. Apple, for one, tries hard to blur it, but the distinction is there.
Since when cluelessness is not a excuse? The internets ain't your city park where all dogs wear muzzles and a purse accidentally dropped on the ground will be brought to you by the discreet police no later than in five minutes. If anyone in charge of a computer goes carefree to the point that his computer becomes a zombie, this becomes *my* problem, not just theirs.
Mod parent poster emphatically up.
I hate to say it, but it's more like this:
A: Release New OS
B: No One Adopts New OS
C: Release Another New OS
D: Support Expires for Old OS
E: "SOMEONE" Develops a rootkit\virus\malware that targets old OS.
F: Anti-Virus keeps the old OS limping along
G: Anti-Virus vendors keep releasing updates to prevent new viruses\rootkits\etc.
H: Over time thousands, if not millions of Old OS systems get infected by root kits that the large population isn't aware of.
I: Create a new patch that specifically, when coupled with the largely ignored\unnoticed rootkit\virus\malware, makes Old OS unuseable.
J: Choice: switch to Linux or upgrade to New OS.
K: Laugh histerically as at least 50% upgrade to New OS and you bath in $20 bills soaked in Champaign.
L: Profit.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Read the bulletin: http://www.microsoft.com/security/updates/015/
This detection is enabled on all 32 bit version of windows, Windows 7 included. I guess getting on the Microsoft-hates-XP bandwagon gets more hits... /new here
It doesn't matter what they do or don't do. In fact, we should stop specific stories on Microsoft and just randomly put up "Microsoft: Fuck You" stories every few hours. Then all the MS haters can reply with how much MS sucks. Rinse. Repeat.
> Now they're doing the right thing and we get news how they refuse to patch the systems which .dll files have been damaged? Welcome to slashdot.
Just so you know, I complained last time, but I think they're doing it right this time.
They need something for systems that have been screwed up by their own users. Perhaps a patch that prevents administrator users from connecting to websites that use bad javascript?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I'm fine with msft bricking them. Might finally get some action. Gb
Got a problem? Get Ubuntu. DONE! ...unless you are one of those girly types who insist that microsoft hasn't abandoned you and are still holding out some kind of hope that no, they didn't just kick you to the curb, the gutter pee now dripping down your face isn't really from the post free-clinic hooker dropping butt ash and standing above you. No microsoft wouldn't leave you there, abandoned, without a dime to your name in the bad side of town, naked and exposed and a cell-mate toy for all the world (or at least everything sober in a 3 block radius) to have their way with. After all the money you paid them, all their promises, after all the license hoops you jumped through, the "Gold version" disks you installed, the license agreements, the secret decoder ring license codes, they wouldn't just throw you under a bus and leave you there in the cold rain, having taken your data, and passed it not just to the government but to any travelling side show act that offered them something (anything shiny). After all, if you reread your license, the license, they offer full warranty, you, you have ...have someone to choke. You have a 1-800 number, and this one isn't for the Tiajuana phone-sex hotline like their other disks, they actually want to hear from you and, and give you some support or something. The credit card number is just, just so that they can identify that its really you. You are their loyal customer! You supported them! They wouldn't do this to you! You defended them! When others said that their system was crap, it crashed all the time, and you lied and said "NO, MINE IS STABLE!", you bit your tongue, crossed your fingers and defended them! When MS research said that the Linux kernel could do a context switch in 1/10 as much code and 10 times as fast, you said that, that the next major patch would beat the other guys. When, when the others said that theirs was secure, and MS had security holes big enough to drive a bus through, you said NO, microsoft has for a really super-low fee a virus scanner and system protector better than anything in the industry! They wouldn't abandon you, not you! You were their friend, their customer. You were their biggest fan! What the hell happened? Where did it all go?
The fuckheads who think one can "clean" a rootkitted machine with some clicketiclick-magic are mislead or fucking stupid. Well, they use Windows, so it's the second option. Once a machine gets owned it's gone. Total wipe, reinstall from good backup. No matter what OS or even WIndows it is.
I installed this patch called "Linux" here. No malware problems, I tell you!
well, now we have windows 7. 13 quadgillion tons of crap heaped onto DOS. yes i said it. dos,dos,dos,dos. x86 requires dos. new operating system regards, mike
If the video driver isn't running at level 0, how will they be certain you're not copying their movies?
Stands for one of two things:
Malicious Software Removal Tool
Microsoft Removal Tool
Wonder which works better?
--
Toro
(There's a reason Microsoft named the file MRT.exe)
Can you imagine if the auto industry adopted the same strategies used by Microsoft:
A: Sell new 2010 automobile
B: Release new 2011 version of same automobile (with LED widgets!)
C: Inform everyone who purchased the 2010 model that parts for their model will no longer be available after 2012.
D: Inform car dealers that they will not be allowed to sell used 2010 models.
E: Inform gas stations that they must use new nozzles at their pumps that only fit the 2011 models.
F: Sit back an wonder why people take cheap shots at your company and begin purchasing motorcycles.
G: File lawsuits against the motorcycle companies for restraint of trade and IP infringement.
I don't rag on Microsoft because they make a substandard product. I rag on Microsoft because they *force* their new products on their customers, and then treat those customers like thieves until proven otherwise. If I don't want to upgrade from Ubuntu 6, I can still download it and use it if I so choose, and I won't be accused of software piracy if I blow a system board and swap the drive into a new system.
Wow, just wow. I'm not sure where to begin with whats wrong with this post. Lets see, model 2010, 1 year later releases a newer model? Considering WIndows XP was released in August of 2001 and they are only officially stopping support for it on July 13, 2010 completely invalidate that comparison since 2001-2010 isn't 1 year. Vista wasn't even released until 2006, 5 years later... For C. you wrore that the 2010 model that they won't be able to use parts after 2012 again files in the face of everything since Office 2007 (the newest one) runs on Windows XP and was released 6 years later. This doesn't even consider that the new Office 2010 is also going to run on Windows XP... 'Inform dealers not to sell 2010 models'. You were able to buy Windows XP for years after Vista, and for quite some time without paying extra license... ' Inform gas stations they must use new nozzles, ect, again is wrong since Vista and Windows 7 allows backwards compatibilities and newly made software is still made to run on Windows XP (note the Office 2010 again)... If your going to try to make a comparison at least put a pinch of effort into it.
Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
Support for XP SP2 only ends July 13, 2010
Extended support for XP (mode it's in now, essentially just security fixes) for SP3 ends April 8 2014.
Windows 2000 Extended support ends July 13 2010. Christ Almighty they still patch IE 5.01 for Windows2000
.
Thank fuck for Linux.
.
Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.
.
And it's through many of their unscrupulopus business practices in the face of limited alternatives for consumers - that is how they made their billions
.
Their customer service is appalling - especially if you are poor...With the endless drill down menus, the buck passing and stone walling?
.
Not interested in their crap....
.
So why should our hearts be bleeding for them? - The management of that company are only too happy to rip off the consumer - remember the recent pricing scam by Microsoft for Windoze 7 - the USA has one price and everywhere else in the world pays TWICE that price; and they block online sales from the USA by IP and shipping address?
.
You mean that they want to treat consumers like stupid shit? Of course they are going to get lots of flack from people - especially those with long memeories.
.
Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.
Am I right in my assessment, that they first leave your door wide open. And once a burglar entered and set off the burglar-detection, they refuse to install a lock in your door?
Yeah, okay, the analogy sucked. I was half asleep at my desk when I wrote it. I still stand by the basic argument that Microsoft's tactics of forcing customers to upgrade, combined with their draconian verification protocols, would not be tolerated in other industries.
un-f#cking-believable.
a 10 year old OS and still not safe?
of course a OS is a complex piece of code (*),
but jeezus if i just imagine the time i spent online
with XP and the enormous amount of websites visited,
it's like having imagined wearing clothes for ten years only
to find out that i was walking around naked all the freaking time!
and i paid for that sieve of a operating system.
is there even one file that hasn't changed from the orig. XP
to a fully patched (sic) XP today?
now even worse, dropping support for XP and la-la-la-ing
people into spending more money for the latest greatest
secure sieve ver. 7. OMG!
(*)profit idea, less complex fancy-pansy and more secure OS?! anyone?
I couldn't find an answer to this in the article posted but does this patch notify the end user as to why the patch was not installed? After reading it it looked like the patches just simply wouldn't install and it was left to the end user to manually go back and verify that the patches wouldn't install. Rather than an informative message prompting on the screen.
I'm running a network right now that has several users with their own computer systems. Each individual is a separate entity and therefore we can't really impose standards on their systems as though they were running under a domain architecture. In other words, I have about 110 people with their own computer systems that they are allowed to have WHATEVER they want on them, and there's no easy way to manage them or what they do with them.
Several months ago one of them was hit by the BSOD because of the Alureon rootkit and the related patch from Microsoft.
Now it's all find and good to say "Deliver the patch, BSOD the idiots, and get them off the net so that they're not a danger to the rest of the world", but realistically they need to have the systems running again. Since they all manage the computer systems themselves, it's very difficult to catch a rootkit on a system that you haven't looked at in literally months. The BSOD was the only way of knowing they even had the rootkit because it was the only thing that forced them to call me in to look at it. In THIS case, the blue screen was actually crucial in discovering the problem. That said, is preventing this from happening necessarily a good thing?
What Microsoft could do is deny the downloading of patches, BUT upon detecting the rootkit, inform the user or remove it for the user. My point is that if Microsoft has the ability to detect the rootkit before the patch is installed, why not go the extra step and remove the thing so that they aren't just blacklisted from the patch?
The problem:
There are some really clueless computer users out there. They will download crap whether you defend against it or not. They always find a way to do so... Part of the reason is that their computers don't contain the latest patches and security fixes.
The solution:
Give those patches and security fixes to the users! If a rootkit or virus is causing problems when a patch is installed, then first detect and remove it BEFORE installing the patch, rather than blocking them out from all patches entirely.
The thing is... Blocking them from downloading updates to their computer whether it's specific updates or all updates doesn't fix the issue and in fact possibly prevents the issue from being fixed.
I guess Microsoft's reasoning is that they would have the rootkit, wouldn't have the updates, but at least their buggy virus-laden computer would be semi-functional rather than a useless BSOD machine.
...having someone on the highway who doesn't know about cars and is mechanically incompetent. And as a result of said incompetence the car is utterly unmaintained, so it belches whitish-blue smoke (because both oil and coolant are being burned) and holds-up traffic because it can barely maintain speed. It's going to break-down often because critical problems simply aren't addressed until various failures render the vehicle inoperable, and then it's only patched-up enough to get it limping-along again.
So why aren't all cars which are owned by people who have no mechanical aptitude clunkers of the sort I described above? It's because you don't have to be a master mechanic or have any mechanical aptitude to take your car TO a mechanic for an inspection if you think something might be wrong or to change the oil. You pay the professional to have knowledge and skill in an area you lack those things in. Said mechanic can also answer questions and offer helpful advice to help you get the most life out of your car and keep it running well.
Cars are machines, computers are machines. Is it really too much to ask that people who don't know much about computers take them in for a tech to look at if they start behaving strangely or running slowly? Or that they run and update anti-malware preventative-maintenance products? So, someone gets BSODed by an update. Such failures doesn't make people idiots because they don't know how to avoid or correct malware problems themselves. They are idiots because they not only couldn't do it themselves, but they also didn't bother to hire a professional to help them out.
So nope, no sympathy from me either. BSOD them and get 'em off the 'net, just like a ruined clunker alongside the road. At least with computers, there's no real physical damage, the "clunker" can almost certainly be restored to as-good-as-new functionality with an OS install disc and a couple hours of time.
"But the 3.6.2 update was ALREADY released WELL BEFORE the story was posted (Tuesday March 23, @02:51AM Eastern): https://developer.mozilla.org/devnews/index.php/2010/03/22/firefox-3-6-2-update-now-available-as-free-download/ Firefox 3.6.2 update now available as free download Version 3.6.2 was released THE DAY BEFORE this story even posted! Once again you are caught in your BOLD-FACED LIES, LOL! - by clone53421 (1310749) on Monday April 05, @01:36PM (#31736454) Journal
Funny how YOU backed up clone53421 above, here on your part in the URL below, regarding firefox though (lol, when clone's information was STALE & OUT OF DATE already too no less):
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31755996
AND YET? LMAO:
FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG & right when you shot your big mouth off in that url above on 04/05/2010 above, which had stale out of date information regarding FireFox security issues, & proof of that's taken from here:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31755996
That's where you quote above is from, and, Where Germany advised its peoples to stay away from FireFox 3.6, as they had for IE before that (but, never for Opera).
(Thus, yet another security bug surfaced in FireFox 3.6.2 in that time frame, yet again, 2x that week it appears (LOL!)).
sopssa - How stupid do you feel after your backing up that moron clone, sopssa, when he was quoted in error in that rant of his above that opens this posting of mine in reply, and the URL above that shows you backing his stale & out of date information?
Why?? Because YET ANOTHER SECURITY VULNERABILITY SURFACED THAT DAY OR THE NEXT DAY in FIREFOX, YET AGAIN, lmao...
"too, Too, TOO EASY!"
Obviously sopssa, you lost yet again, and backed the wrong poster in clone53421, in such a stupid mistake on hiis part above.
Obviously, You're too stupid to exist sopssa and it's no small wonder that all you do is post on slashdot all day, as you don't have enough skills or degrees necessary to your name in computing to actually have or hold a job in the sciences of computing.
Well the updates applied successfully, so I guess I'm rootkit free.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!