Slashdot Mirror
Windows 10 Update Broke DHCP, Knocked Users Off the Internet (arstechnica.com)
Microsoft has quietly fixed a software update it released last week, which effectively prevented Windows 10 users from connecting to the Internet or joining a local network. From a report on ArsTechnica: It's unclear exactly which automatic update caused the problem or exactly when it was released -- current (unconfirmed) signs point to KB3201845 released on December 9 -- but whatever it was appeared to break DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol), preventing Windows 10 from automatically acquiring an IP address from the network. There's also little detail on how many people were affected or why, but multiple cases have been confirmed across Europe by many ISPs. A Microsoft spokesperson has meanwhile confirmed that "some customers" had been experiencing "difficulties" getting online, but that's about it for public statements at present. However, a moderator on the company's forums has said the fix was included in a patch released on Tuesday called KB3206632.
Having fun in Satnav's involuntary public beta testing program?
But I couldn't get online.
Always on updates................ How do people get the update fixing the update when you've broken their fucking network you dumbasses?
Is there anyone out there that is not yet aware that this is basically one giant beta test?
Yes, me. A beta test means that there is a plan to release a finished product. I see no such plan.
Yeah, I had my Windows 10 machines go down a few weeks ago for bad WiFi driver updates. Rolling back solved it, and this one I fixed by rolling back also. Sadly, Windows gets network problems more often than ever few decades.
If you meant something else, hey, throw it against the wall.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
OpenSSL has a serious vulnerability for 2 years and nobody bats an eye.
I assume you are referring to HeartBleed.
Let's start with the obvious: OpenSSL had a vulnerability which no one knew about for 2 years. As soon as it was discovered, a fix was issued 6 days after the bug was discovered.
Now let's talk about the details: Heartbleed was a vulnerability which would allow someone to undermine security of OpenSSL. It didn't stop computers from functioning outright.
Lastly, EVERYONE treated Heartbleed as serious. Your assertion that "nobody bats an eye." is an outright lie.
Microsoft has a network issue for a week and the Linux fags line up to crucify people. What a community of hypocritical fuckwits.
Way to downplay the problem which is not entirely accurate: MS released an update which borks their customer's internet connection.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Dude, 1996 called and wants its joke back, but you missed the call because you were on the modem.
Uninstall patch, then update?
Proving (yet again) that the claim made by open source advocates of "many eyes make bugs shallow" is bullshit. The reason that the bug went unnoticed for 2 years is that nobody was looking at the source code. Not even the people who wrote it.
Except someone did find it, even if it took awhile. How does that work with a closed-source product like Windows? How many critical vulnerabilities are lurking in there, perhaps bugs or perhaps intentionally introduced at the behest of governments, and simply cannot be discovered because the source isn't available?
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
There are a lot of states where damaging someone's property is a crime and makes you both criminally and civilly liable. Unfortunately all the normal ambulance chasers who would quite rightly file class action lawsuits are scared of the MS legal team and deep pockets. We badly need a software consumers bill of rights to cover all for profit software. In this day and age computers are a mature field where people spend much of their lives. It is about time that the government enact some legislation recognizing this and protecting the citizens from predatory and/or fraudulent software companies. Among those rights:
- Convert all software to be covered by copyright instead of patent law.
- Limit software copyright to 20 years or 5 years after it is no longer for sale or the day and date when it is no longer supported, whichever is first.
- Any software purchased by a consumer is covered by a standard set of rights that parallel ownership of a physical item where applicable or are spelled out in the bill of rights. EULAs are all illegal except between business entities.
- Right of resale is retained by consumer for the physical copy or license key of the purchased software.
- Consumer purchases allow unlimited installs by consumer on equipment they own or use. (Software must be removed from hardware prior to sale/donation).
- Software must function offline unless that functionality requires an online connection.
- Make it illegal for companies to remove functionality previously contained in software/hardware via update, except as a temporary security measure.
- Developers are legally required to provide security and functionality patches to fix bugs and security holes discovered either internally or by security researchers for 5 years minimum after date of final sale without any strings attached. (Failure to do so implies that they intended to defraud the consumer by selling a broken/unfinished/dangerous product and could require refunding all customers and criminal fraud liability.)
- Software updates should not be mandatory unless there is a clear, urgent reason for them to be. If a mandatory update causes the software to become unusable, the company must pay affected users $150/h spent dealing with the problem, cover cost of repairs, pay $60,000/year of lost documents (i.e. if it was 4 weeks since my last backup and all data since that backup is lost, developer is on the hook for $5000), and/or replace affected hardware, the combination of which is based on what it takes to get the system completely restored in a timely fashion.
- Online software licenses/keys/virtual goods and the like have value to the customers who hold them and can be traded/bought/sold/transferred/inherited etc. If a consumer pays actual money either directly or indirectly for a virtual commodity, it can be handled in this way.
- Source code for any and all software and back end servers for sale in the US must be provided to the library of congress in order to enjoy copyright protection. 5 years after that software is no longer for sale or the day that it is no longer supported, LOC should publish source code and the software becomes open domain.
Note this only affects consumer software. Businesses can still do all the licensing and other more flexible arrangements.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like