So, a baseless accusation of patches causing other problems (no examples given, of course). A complete ignorance of the fact that a filesystem-corrupting Linux kernel was once released.
People bitch if the hole is there, and people bitch even when Microsoft has released a patch and yet certain people don't install it. Sounds like you just have a chip on your shoulder.
Windows XP has been out since 2001. Patches come out incrementally, so it's not 200MB all at once, but a little bit over a period of two years. In addition, newer machines are sold with SP1 and updates already installed, so it's even less to download.
How can Microsoft be to blame for this attack when they released the patch over a month ago? My corporate network was left 100% untouched.
I remember when all the Windows, Mac, and FreeBSD users I know were grinning when the latest Linux kernel was corrupting filesystems and yet somehow got released officially.
Nothing's perfect, and this has had a patch out since March 26th.
People don't patch because, quite simply (not that it is true by any means), Windows is supposed to be perfect already, needing no further work. "Where do you want to go today" (besides offline)?
How can you say that, when Windows bugs you to turn on Automatic Updates? And when you go to Windows Update, all the critical updates are automatically selected, and you're given a link to immediately begin downloading them?
Everybody agrees the hole shouldn't have existed, but let's not pretend this is some sudden surprise that nobody could prevent. It was patched on March 26th, for crying out loud. I prevented it on my network long ago.
I don't get why anybody would need to test for this patch. It simply fixes a minute flaw in RPC. It's barely over a megabyte to download. For major patches, I certainly understand, but I didn't see a need to treat this one as something that needed regression testing because changes so little. I guess it's a judgement call.
When Windows has holes, it's in apps like Outlook, Office, and so forth, but they're counted as Windows holes by Slashbots.
Why is it different for Linux (which, by the way, released a kernel that corrupted filesystems...)?
All of this is moot. The patch was released last month. It was just an RPC fix. Just bite the bullet and admit people who didn't patch are to blame for getting hit. It was a very well-publicized exploit.
I mention Linux because it's a double standard here. The fact you use the word "jabbering" tells me I clearly struck a nerve.
Call me incompetent if you want. It's incompetent not to install "critical" updates from the company who made your freaking operating system. My network went 100% untouched. You're the one whining.
Congratulations on the stereotypical Slashdot posts. Dollar signs in Microsoft's name, unbased claims of patches breaking things, and sarcastic quips at the end. High scores all around! Of course, no mention of the kernel release that corrupted filesystems, or of how Linux had more holes reported last month (9) than Microsoft (2)...
You know, last month Microsoft had two holes revealed, while Linux had nine. But that won't get reported here, because facts aren't allowed!
At any rate, it sounds like you're making excuses for stupid people. Stupid people are not Microsoft's fault, either. And Microsoft already regression tests its patches for you.
Look, it was a simple 1.2MB patch that was out last month, and even got a Slashdot article, it was such a big deal. Those who didn't apply it know where the blame lies.
Because Windows bugs you to turn on Automatic Updates. You specifically have to tell it that you don't want it on. Had it been turned on, those ignorant people would still have been patched. Every action has a consequence, and this is one.
There was even a Slashdot article about the exploit. It was such a big deal because it was the first and only vulnerability for Windows Server 2003 so far.
All these people sarcastically saying to "patch with Linux" or "use the firewall" are missing the point that the smart people downloaded the 1.2MB patch last month and had no idea anything was going on until we read about the worm on Slashdot. My entire work network was unscathed, because they're all kept completely up to date. I can't think of any reason why someone shouldn't be doing the same to their Windows network, except for arcane Slashbot conspiracy theories or just plain needing to hate Microsoft for something, anything.
If this was a Linux worm, people would be telling everyone else that they should have patched to the latest versions of whatever. But, it's Windows, so it won't exactly happen that way...
You do realize everyone who had Automatic Updates on weren't affected by anything, and you people who didn't patch were, right? Sounds like you're being entirely pointless.
They are the worst thing to happen to the US economy.
They don't pay taxes. They get social programs from lefty policies, meaning we're paying for people who aren't even citizens here. They commit crimes (check crime statistics sometime). Worst of all, they take jobs away from LEGAL CITIZENS.
Okay, whether or not this was modded up as funny, it's getting too common to just randomly reference SCO in articles for mod points. You have to admit that.
Slashdot Mirror
So, a baseless accusation of patches causing other problems (no examples given, of course). A complete ignorance of the fact that a filesystem-corrupting Linux kernel was once released.
People bitch if the hole is there, and people bitch even when Microsoft has released a patch and yet certain people don't install it. Sounds like you just have a chip on your shoulder.
Okay, I'll bite.
Windows XP has been out since 2001. Patches come out incrementally, so it's not 200MB all at once, but a little bit over a period of two years. In addition, newer machines are sold with SP1 and updates already installed, so it's even less to download.
How can Microsoft be to blame for this attack when they released the patch over a month ago? My corporate network was left 100% untouched.
Come on, don't be juvenile.
I remember when all the Windows, Mac, and FreeBSD users I know were grinning when the latest Linux kernel was corrupting filesystems and yet somehow got released officially.
Nothing's perfect, and this has had a patch out since March 26th.
People don't patch because, quite simply (not that it is true by any means), Windows is supposed to be perfect already, needing no further work. "Where do you want to go today" (besides offline)?
How can you say that, when Windows bugs you to turn on Automatic Updates? And when you go to Windows Update, all the critical updates are automatically selected, and you're given a link to immediately begin downloading them?
Everybody agrees the hole shouldn't have existed, but let's not pretend this is some sudden surprise that nobody could prevent. It was patched on March 26th, for crying out loud. I prevented it on my network long ago.
I don't get why anybody would need to test for this patch. It simply fixes a minute flaw in RPC. It's barely over a megabyte to download. For major patches, I certainly understand, but I didn't see a need to treat this one as something that needed regression testing because changes so little. I guess it's a judgement call.
That's a moot conspiracy theory, because this vulnerability affects up to Windows Server 2003. Microsoft released the patch a month ago.
I've never seen a company like the one you're describing. Might I suggest stop working at idiotic places? :P
When Windows has holes, it's in apps like Outlook, Office, and so forth, but they're counted as Windows holes by Slashbots.
Why is it different for Linux (which, by the way, released a kernel that corrupted filesystems...)?
All of this is moot. The patch was released last month. It was just an RPC fix. Just bite the bullet and admit people who didn't patch are to blame for getting hit. It was a very well-publicized exploit.
They DID fix the old. Last month.
I patched. It was merely an RPC fix. Anyone who didn't patch knows who to blame.
I mention Linux because it's a double standard here. The fact you use the word "jabbering" tells me I clearly struck a nerve.
Call me incompetent if you want. It's incompetent not to install "critical" updates from the company who made your freaking operating system. My network went 100% untouched. You're the one whining.
Congratulations on the stereotypical Slashdot posts. Dollar signs in Microsoft's name, unbased claims of patches breaking things, and sarcastic quips at the end. High scores all around! Of course, no mention of the kernel release that corrupted filesystems, or of how Linux had more holes reported last month (9) than Microsoft (2)...
95% of Windows holes ARE Exchange, Outlook, IIS, IE, and so forth. But people still count them as Windows holes. What's your point?
Yes, I did. What's the difference with Linux software? It's the same thing; there's still no liability.
Remember the kernel release that corrupted filesystems? Even Microsoft hasn't been that bad.
You know, last month Microsoft had two holes revealed, while Linux had nine. But that won't get reported here, because facts aren't allowed!
At any rate, it sounds like you're making excuses for stupid people. Stupid people are not Microsoft's fault, either. And Microsoft already regression tests its patches for you.
Look, it was a simple 1.2MB patch that was out last month, and even got a Slashdot article, it was such a big deal. Those who didn't apply it know where the blame lies.
Because Windows bugs you to turn on Automatic Updates. You specifically have to tell it that you don't want it on. Had it been turned on, those ignorant people would still have been patched. Every action has a consequence, and this is one.
There was even a Slashdot article about the exploit. It was such a big deal because it was the first and only vulnerability for Windows Server 2003 so far.
All these people sarcastically saying to "patch with Linux" or "use the firewall" are missing the point that the smart people downloaded the 1.2MB patch last month and had no idea anything was going on until we read about the worm on Slashdot. My entire work network was unscathed, because they're all kept completely up to date. I can't think of any reason why someone shouldn't be doing the same to their Windows network, except for arcane Slashbot conspiracy theories or just plain needing to hate Microsoft for something, anything.
If this was a Linux worm, people would be telling everyone else that they should have patched to the latest versions of whatever. But, it's Windows, so it won't exactly happen that way...
Please. I still remember when my system got hosed by a sendmail hole.
It's called patching, the day it was announced. Slashdot even had an article on the thing.
You do realize everyone who had Automatic Updates on weren't affected by anything, and you people who didn't patch were, right? Sounds like you're being entirely pointless.
Who's "he?"
They are the worst thing to happen to the US economy.
They don't pay taxes. They get social programs from lefty policies, meaning we're paying for people who aren't even citizens here. They commit crimes (check crime statistics sometime). Worst of all, they take jobs away from LEGAL CITIZENS.
The husband looks frighteningly like spoon-bender Uri Geller.
A Linux site calling a study unfavorable to Linux "flawed?" No way!
Okay, whether or not this was modded up as funny, it's getting too common to just randomly reference SCO in articles for mod points. You have to admit that.
Isn't it hilarious that you are instructed to "check your links" when you submit a story? Now we know why--the editors never bother to do it.