Actually, in this case, it would have been much
better to send the data encrypted over the Internet.
They could trickle the data in batches over time.
You are not talking about massive amount of bytes per customer (maybe around 2000 bytes). The data
was limited according to Citigroup reports.
Probably. But they also are likely just lying.
Why would IE7 *require* XP-SP2 in the first place? Are they actually attempting to say that IE7 won't run on plain XP?
More likely, anything pre XP-SP2 does not and can not fully
support the latest spyware functionality.
So, why would you want to ever, ever install XP-SP2
in the first place?
They have just admitted that XP-SP2 has reached
the level of control that they (MS) can trust.
There may be no violence (yet), but via legal force
they are attempting to coerce U.S. society
into a fascist theocracy.
If you believe that the current fight over judicial
appointments is much ado about nothing, you are
either brainwashed or on drugs.
The real threat to the U.S. and the U.S. Constitution is not from Bin Laden, but
from the Darksiders that already have infiltrated
the U.S. government.
Their goal is to take away your freedom. Plain and simple. If it takes 20 years, that is fine
with them. That is why the judicial appointment
issue is so important an issue.
The real terrorists will coerce the U.S. society
via the legal system. Once they control the
SCOTUS, you are screwed.
He said Microsoft was alerted to the first vulnerability March 16.
That bug was found in default installations of IE and Outlook and could allow malicious code to be executed, contingent upon minimal user interaction, he explained.
Default install problem. Minimal user interaction.
According to security alert aggregator Secunia, more than 30 percent of the security holes found in IE remain unpatched.
...more than 30 percent of the security holes found in IE remain unpatched. Last I saw,
that was 13 known holes (not necessarily
rated critical).
As of today, Secunia reports that there are still 19 unpatched security flaws in IE, the most severe of which is rated "highly critical." Firefox has only 4 unpatched flaws, all of which are rated "less critical" or "not critical," the lowest severity rating. Opera has none.
Oh. It's 19 now.
Sorry. You're right. Nothing for *you* to see here.
BS. It's certainly not a surprise, but it
should be a constant reminder to everyone
that Windows is not secure if the user runs
IE and/or Outlook. And that reminder is
what is needed in light of the recent
Firefox bugs that the media flouted.
But to say there is nothing to discuss in
quite disengenous. What needs to be discussed
is why these holes continue to exist in MS products.
If their market-think really believes that HTML email is so much better than text, they should
consider just an e-mail of two URLs to their website and let the reader decide which (if either)
they want to read. That would save them bandwidth also.
But, that likely would be dismissed (because it makes sense). In market-think, they want the
spotaneous impression. They really believe that
colorful flashing crap helps sales. And since
there are enough 'Ooh, pretty!' types out there,
they have themselves convinced that it really works. When it comes to marketing, you can
convince yourself by twisting the numbers
and the interpretations so that any plan
you want to come up with can be justified.
We have no intentions of encouraging or hosting an ongoing meaningless and pointless debate at our Web site, which does not go anywhere or accomplish anything and which, frankly, most of our everyday readers don't care for.
Slashdot Mirror
At best it will slow things down so as to be uncomfortable to use.
They could trickle the data in batches over time. You are not talking about massive amount of bytes per customer (maybe around 2000 bytes). The data was limited according to Citigroup reports.
But, banks are slow to change.
Since they are already operating way past expected lifetime, they could actually make it for years.
Even odds that a Rover is still functional when Longhorn comes out.
This may have much more to do with control of patents that anything else.
More likely, anything pre XP-SP2 does not and can not fully support the latest spyware functionality.
So, why would you want to ever, ever install XP-SP2 in the first place? They have just admitted that XP-SP2 has reached the level of control that they (MS) can trust.
There may be no violence (yet), but via legal force they are attempting to coerce U.S. society into a fascist theocracy.
If you believe that the current fight over judicial appointments is much ado about nothing, you are either brainwashed or on drugs.
The real threat to the U.S. and the U.S. Constitution is not from Bin Laden, but from the Darksiders that already have infiltrated the U.S. government.
Their goal is to take away your freedom. Plain and simple. If it takes 20 years, that is fine with them. That is why the judicial appointment issue is so important an issue.
The real terrorists will coerce the U.S. society via the legal system. Once they control the SCOTUS, you are screwed.
There is no evidence of that whatsoever. None.
The oldSCO (Santa Cruz Operation) became Tarantella, but the newSCO which is really the SCO Group was formed much later after the asset sale.
The SCO Group could have been called anything, but in IP ligitigation, anything to confuse a jury is considered good in the SCO machinations.
I'm wondering how grounded in reality you are. NOT.
Unless you count five (5) lines from the http log to be 'evidence'.
And as I pointed out on Groklaw, the logs can be forged. There is no way to prove that a DoS attack occurred.
He said Microsoft was alerted to the first vulnerability March 16.
That bug was found in default installations of IE and Outlook and could allow malicious code to be executed, contingent upon minimal user interaction, he explained.
Default install problem. Minimal user interaction.
According to security alert aggregator Secunia, more than 30 percent of the security holes found in IE remain unpatched.
http://windowssecrets.com/comp/050512/#story1
As of today, Secunia reports that there are still 19 unpatched security flaws in IE, the most severe of which is rated "highly critical." Firefox has only 4 unpatched flaws, all of which are rated "less critical" or "not critical," the lowest severity rating. Opera has none.
Oh. It's 19 now.
Sorry. You're right. Nothing for *you* to see here.
But to say there is nothing to discuss in quite disengenous. What needs to be discussed is why these holes continue to exist in MS products.
Look at the attack on Firefox of late.
But, that likely would be dismissed (because it makes sense). In market-think, they want the spotaneous impression. They really believe that colorful flashing crap helps sales. And since there are enough 'Ooh, pretty!' types out there, they have themselves convinced that it really works. When it comes to marketing, you can convince yourself by twisting the numbers and the interpretations so that any plan you want to come up with can be justified.
See Iraq.
We have no intentions of encouraging or hosting an ongoing meaningless and pointless debate at our Web site, which does not go anywhere or accomplish anything and which, frankly, most of our everyday readers don't care for.
Shouldn't be a problem without any readers.
You won't be able to in the future if this gets implemented.
That should be simple to implement. Just call the Power-off routine.