The 800kb patch has been out since last month. If you didn't patch, you know who to blame. Not Bill Gates.
As a matter of fact, this has been the only vulnerability in Windows Server 2003 since its release, and it was a vulnerability that was inherent in the interprocess structure of the Win32 library itself and so affected all the products in the Windows line.
I doubt we'll see any other holes in Windows Server 2003 for the rest of the year, especially since they're already working on the service pack (their plan is to phase in Blackcomb features). Microsoft's reputation is riding on this, and you better believe they were checking their code like crazy.
The reason is that 99% of virus writers just aren't that smart. Seriously. They're script kiddies who exploit holes they saw reported on Slashdot and giggle with their IRC buddies in between battles of StarCraft and Counterstrike. The W32Blaster worm itself is very poorly programmed.
Screenshot 2 is a beta. The items are spaced way far apart, and the whole shot is in 800x600 anyway.
At any rate, I already described the menu. Recently used programs on the left, all those desktop icons are now clean icons on the right. All Programs is at the bottom. And look how nice and clean that desktop is.
2.) It doesn't duplicate, it moves things. It takes icons off the desktop for easier access.
3.) You're saying it's faster to click "Show Desktop," fish for My Computer among the desktop icons, and double-click it, when in XP all I have to do is click the Start button and it's right there?
By they way, you don't just load "critical" patches on production systems without testing do you?
Look, EVERYONE reported about this vulnerability, and the freaking government warned people TWICE to install it. Bite the bullet and install the tiny ~800kb patch that plugs the hole in RPC. For crying out loud!
On the new menu, you have to go to "All Programs."
How is your screen cluttered with crap? There is just a second column on the start menu, and you can turn it off. The Start button doesn't have to be a "huge cartoony blue thing that takes 1/4 of the whole screen" either. Just switch to Windows Classic.
I love the XP start menu. It creams the old one. When I need to get to the network browser or My Computer, instead of minimizing things or going to Show Desktop in some way so I can double-click the desktop icons, I just click the Start menu and it's all there, along with Control Panel and a few others.
Plus, it gets the icons off the desktop, so the only thing there is documents and a bin. I can honestly say I'm faster with the XP menu, and I don't get people who complain about it. Obviously, I don't expect everyone to agree with me.
See subject. It was the infamous "turkey" 2.4 kernel that corrupted filesystems. I remember the Slashdot discussion that day. People were stumped as to how that kernel was ever let loose in the first place.
Microsoft puts out a patch for a hole, but it's still their fault when people get compromised. Pointing out to people that they should have patched gets lots of dancing around the issue.
I bet people will blame admins for not patching in this instance, though. Because it's Linux.:P
Which has only been labled 'critical' very recently, and, as far as I can tell, isn't on the suggested list of patches when Windows Update runs. I spent a good part of last night putting together a web page for my friends telling them what was wrong and how to fix it.
That's 100% a lie. It was a critical update on 7/16. Has been ever since. Of course it's on the suggested list of updates. Nobody knows what you're smoking.
1. Companies may still be evaluating it before putting it on their production servers. So if their e-commerce site went down because of this patch would you also say "screw them for not testing properly?"
It was a tiny 800kb download that plugs a hole in RPC. It wouldn't have brought down an e-commerce site. It's your fault if you risked it by not applying.
2. "Road Warrior" laptop users who tech support hasn't had a chance to update yet.
Still not Microsoft's fault. They released the patch the day this exploit was announced and discovered.
3. Home users who dutifully update their virus scanners, pay Norton, and are careful not to open wacky attachment but have no idea about how remote exploits worked.
If they dutifully update their virus scanners and so forth, they will also have turned on Automatic Updates. Come on, you purposely ignored that feature.
4. Failed patches and false positives.
Name one.
5. New computers straight from dell or whomever that bundle and auto-setup everything except autoupdate. Hmmm, that sounds like a big problem to me.
Auto Update automatically bugs you when you first run Windows XP. It's only a problem if you decide to ignore it. Again, this is not Microsoft's fault.
6. "Early victims" who were infected well before the patch was available or before their computers could download it automatically.
The patch was released 7/16! The worm started hitting a couple of days ago.
7. The technical clueless that have no idea what a virus is or let alone a worm is.
It doesn't matter. XP lets them know Auto Update is the recommended option, to the point that it pops up a balloon in the system tray and won't go away until you respond to it. The patch would have been downloaded, or at least announced to the user. What does it matter if someone does or doesn't know what a virus or worm is? "Critical Updates" would still have been installed.
Who's job is it to teach them the ins and outs of security? Maybe MS could make a more secure product or at least put as much effort into alerting the user about security as it does trying to break competitors.
The patch was out that very day.
Crazy, I know./insert obrant about how Windows is a poor system in regards to security and how patches and virus scanners are post-attack fixes. Someone has to get infected first you know.//or insert obrant how how Bush's DOJ let MS off and now we are sowing the seeds of cronyism.
Lame anti-Microsoft anti-corporate spiel. Face it, the patch was out LAST MONTH! It's been on Windows Update since 7/16. It's less than a megabyte to download. All it does is plug the hole in RPC. This is not rocket science here. This worm simply exposed all those people who have learned the hard way that you actually have to apply critical updates to the operating system you use when its maker releases them.
If this was a Linux worm, your tune would be 100% the opposite. You'd be bitching at people who didn't "patch to the latest versions." But, it's Windows, so you need something to criticize Microsoft for, when this wasn't their fault. People who patched went untouched. I didn't even know there was a worm going around until I read about it on Slashdot, because I--horror of horrors!--keep my network updated.
It was widely reported, including on Slashdot. EVERYONE knew about it on 7/16. You should have patched. It was a tiny 800kb downloaded that merely fixes a hole in RPC. It doesn't even require testing on non-production machines (which Microsoft does anyway). That very day, it went up on Windows Update, top of the list in the Critical Updates section.
Last month, Windows had two reported holes, while Linux had nine. And remember that filesystem-corrupting kernel release? Just another fact you never see around here. And, of course, people will make excuses for it.
The patch was released a month ago. "This type of crap" wouldn't have happened if systems were patched. My network was 100% unscathed. There's a reason Microsoft puts out patches listed as "Critical Updates," y'know...
Here's the part where the Microsoft conspiracist or the EULA-hater chimes in.
Why is it Microsoft's fault when THE PATCH WAS RELEASED A MONTH AGO? A simple ~800kb patch. The exploit even made a Slashdot headline, so it was well-reported.
The fault lies in those people who don't patch the operating system with the critical updates put out by its maker.
Even if people are paranoid and don't have auto-installing on, they should still have notification on, so they at least are aware of critical updates. Nobody here can pretend that they weren't caught with their pants down on this. Slashdot even had an article on this exploit when it was announced a month or so ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Give Linux that "significant proportion of all desktop machines" and we'll see how many holes are discovered as well.
It's true for any OS.
The 800kb patch has been out since last month. If you didn't patch, you know who to blame. Not Bill Gates.
As a matter of fact, this has been the only vulnerability in Windows Server 2003 since its release, and it was a vulnerability that was inherent in the interprocess structure of the Win32 library itself and so affected all the products in the Windows line.
I doubt we'll see any other holes in Windows Server 2003 for the rest of the year, especially since they're already working on the service pack (their plan is to phase in Blackcomb features). Microsoft's reputation is riding on this, and you better believe they were checking their code like crazy.
The reason is that 99% of virus writers just aren't that smart. Seriously. They're script kiddies who exploit holes they saw reported on Slashdot and giggle with their IRC buddies in between battles of StarCraft and Counterstrike. The W32Blaster worm itself is very poorly programmed.
Obligatory punchline.
Screenshot 2 is a beta. The items are spaced way far apart, and the whole shot is in 800x600 anyway.
At any rate, I already described the menu. Recently used programs on the left, all those desktop icons are now clean icons on the right. All Programs is at the bottom. And look how nice and clean that desktop is.
Look at it this way, it's one less trivial, commonplace GUI feature that every other graphical operating system had that Linux didn't.
I often switch from 32-bit to 16-bit and back again in Windows, for various reasons. Now doing so in Linux won't be a hassle.
1.) Larger is better. Ask usability engineers.
2.) It doesn't duplicate, it moves things. It takes icons off the desktop for easier access.
3.) You're saying it's faster to click "Show Desktop," fish for My Computer among the desktop icons, and double-click it, when in XP all I have to do is click the Start button and it's right there?
By they way, you don't just load "critical" patches on production systems without testing do you?
Look, EVERYONE reported about this vulnerability, and the freaking government warned people TWICE to install it. Bite the bullet and install the tiny ~800kb patch that plugs the hole in RPC. For crying out loud!
How is it extra clicks away?
On the old menu, you had to go to "Programs."
On the new menu, you have to go to "All Programs."
How is your screen cluttered with crap? There is just a second column on the start menu, and you can turn it off. The Start button doesn't have to be a "huge cartoony blue thing that takes 1/4 of the whole screen" either. Just switch to Windows Classic.
Sounds like another non-issue.
Why did they change the start menu.
I love the XP start menu. It creams the old one. When I need to get to the network browser or My Computer, instead of minimizing things or going to Show Desktop in some way so I can double-click the desktop icons, I just click the Start menu and it's all there, along with Control Panel and a few others.
Plus, it gets the icons off the desktop, so the only thing there is documents and a bin. I can honestly say I'm faster with the XP menu, and I don't get people who complain about it. Obviously, I don't expect everyone to agree with me.
Logic and reasoning in a Slashdot discussion? How dare thee!
See subject. It was the infamous "turkey" 2.4 kernel that corrupted filesystems. I remember the Slashdot discussion that day. People were stumped as to how that kernel was ever let loose in the first place.
Microsoft puts out a patch for a hole, but it's still their fault when people get compromised. Pointing out to people that they should have patched gets lots of dancing around the issue.
:P
I bet people will blame admins for not patching in this instance, though. Because it's Linux.
Just pointing out the obvious double standard.
There is no advantage to either. Remember the filesystem-corrupting Linux kernel release? That was a pretty big blunder...
Yeah, a variation of this joke gets posted to EVERY SINGLE SCO ARTICLE and it never stops being so inventive, funny, and clever.
They're referring to comment delimiters and preprocesser statements! LOL!!!11
Disregard, if I'm being overly critical.
Which has only been labled 'critical' very recently, and, as far as I can tell, isn't on the suggested list of patches when Windows Update runs. I spent a good part of last night putting together a web page for my friends telling them what was wrong and how to fix it.
That's 100% a lie. It was a critical update on 7/16. Has been ever since. Of course it's on the suggested list of updates. Nobody knows what you're smoking.
Next.
1. Companies may still be evaluating it before putting it on their production servers. So if their e-commerce site went down because of this patch would you also say "screw them for not testing properly?"
/insert obrant about how Windows is a poor system in regards to security and how patches and virus scanners are post-attack fixes. Someone has to get infected first you know. //or insert obrant how how Bush's DOJ let MS off and now we are sowing the seeds of cronyism.
It was a tiny 800kb download that plugs a hole in RPC. It wouldn't have brought down an e-commerce site. It's your fault if you risked it by not applying.
2. "Road Warrior" laptop users who tech support hasn't had a chance to update yet.
Still not Microsoft's fault. They released the patch the day this exploit was announced and discovered.
3. Home users who dutifully update their virus scanners, pay Norton, and are careful not to open wacky attachment but have no idea about how remote exploits worked.
If they dutifully update their virus scanners and so forth, they will also have turned on Automatic Updates. Come on, you purposely ignored that feature.
4. Failed patches and false positives.
Name one.
5. New computers straight from dell or whomever that bundle and auto-setup everything except autoupdate. Hmmm, that sounds like a big problem to me.
Auto Update automatically bugs you when you first run Windows XP. It's only a problem if you decide to ignore it. Again, this is not Microsoft's fault.
6. "Early victims" who were infected well before the patch was available or before their computers could download it automatically.
The patch was released 7/16! The worm started hitting a couple of days ago.
7. The technical clueless that have no idea what a virus is or let alone a worm is.
It doesn't matter. XP lets them know Auto Update is the recommended option, to the point that it pops up a balloon in the system tray and won't go away until you respond to it. The patch would have been downloaded, or at least announced to the user. What does it matter if someone does or doesn't know what a virus or worm is? "Critical Updates" would still have been installed.
Who's job is it to teach them the ins and outs of security? Maybe MS could make a more secure product or at least put as much effort into alerting the user about security as it does trying to break competitors.
The patch was out that very day.
Crazy, I know.
Lame anti-Microsoft anti-corporate spiel. Face it, the patch was out LAST MONTH! It's been on Windows Update since 7/16. It's less than a megabyte to download. All it does is plug the hole in RPC. This is not rocket science here. This worm simply exposed all those people who have learned the hard way that you actually have to apply critical updates to the operating system you use when its maker releases them.
If this was a Linux worm, your tune would be 100% the opposite. You'd be bitching at people who didn't "patch to the latest versions." But, it's Windows, so you need something to criticize Microsoft for, when this wasn't their fault. People who patched went untouched. I didn't even know there was a worm going around until I read about it on Slashdot, because I--horror of horrors!--keep my network updated.
It was widely reported, including on Slashdot. EVERYONE knew about it on 7/16. You should have patched. It was a tiny 800kb downloaded that merely fixes a hole in RPC. It doesn't even require testing on non-production machines (which Microsoft does anyway). That very day, it went up on Windows Update, top of the list in the Critical Updates section.
Last month, Windows had two reported holes, while Linux had nine. And remember that filesystem-corrupting kernel release? Just another fact you never see around here. And, of course, people will make excuses for it.
The patch was released a month ago. "This type of crap" wouldn't have happened if systems were patched. My network was 100% unscathed. There's a reason Microsoft puts out patches listed as "Critical Updates," y'know...
Here's the part where the Microsoft conspiracist or the EULA-hater chimes in.
Why is it Microsoft's fault when THE PATCH WAS RELEASED A MONTH AGO? A simple ~800kb patch. The exploit even made a Slashdot headline, so it was well-reported.
The fault lies in those people who don't patch the operating system with the critical updates put out by its maker.
Right. Blame Microsoft for the fact you haven't kept up with majorly critical updates like service packs. Go use a Mac.
*shrug*
Dialup -- those patches are big
The patch is only ~800kb.
Look, NT4 is old. Upgrade.
That's like using Red Hat 5 and then complaining about something.
The anti-terrorism laws thing was a nice troll.
Even if people are paranoid and don't have auto-installing on, they should still have notification on, so they at least are aware of critical updates. Nobody here can pretend that they weren't caught with their pants down on this. Slashdot even had an article on this exploit when it was announced a month or so ago.