M$ has surrendered to the Blaster worm

Well, what exactly would YOU have done, if you knew in advance that a few thousand computers were going to attack your server(s)? Exactly, you'd have let the worm run into a void, just as MS has done. What MS had done is only to step aside while the danger is present. Windows Update will be restored after that.
 
That doesn't change the fact that they screwed up badly with this one. They still programmed the security hole into Windows, intentionally or not, and now they have to deal with having to fix it across millions of computers.
 
And Microsoft's answer to their users is: "Reinstall Windows." That's the solution for cleaning up an infected computer, reinstall everything. Buggers. I have a few PCs at home and if they get infected it won't be Windows going on there after I fdisk it.
 
Well, this is not the case. The security hole has been issued. A patch is available. The actual problem is threefold...

1.) Microsoft _is_ a security problem. There are far too many holes in all Windows versions to be found. This shouldn't be like that, but it is.

2.) Microsoft is usually a bit slow in preparing patches. And when they're fast, they screw up big time (happened a few times, patches that opened new holes...).

3.) Microsoft has a trust problem. IT staff doesn't like to install patches just when they come out, because they're afraid to break a working system. That might not be such a big problem for a home user, but if a patch screws up a server (or a dozen) or a multitude of client computers, it's the admin's problem, isn't it.

The solution? Microsoft should become faster in testing patches across more (and different) setups. The goal would be to persuade IT staff to let servers and client machines be automatically updated by Microsoft. This way, you (as an admin) could even stay at home if something like this worm crops up. The patch would be automatically installed and your system would be safe (again).

But this doesn't happen soon.
 
The solution ?

Make the system more ortogonal. It may have less "automatic" features, less integration, but it will be much easier to mange and to update.

If Office does not depend on the version of Windows it is using, if Word does not depend on the version of Explorer that is "integrated" inside Windows, if the firewall does not depend on the version of Windows, if.... then you can upgrade one without killing the other !

And do you do that ?
You define interfaces, documents these and PUBLISH these. And respect your own software design rules.
 
Well I don't know about windows update very much, but amid all this w32 blaster stuff my dad updated his windows xp system around wensday and so far hasn't been hit with any viruses. But today I was testing out a web site in IE 6 PC, and a little dialog in the bottom corner popped up saying that windows update had a new update to install...
Maybe it's nothing, I can't really tell with windows, but If the newest patches are installed two days before the server is supposedly taken off-line, and then the morning after it is supposed to be attacked by a huge virus it suddenly tries to get me to update my system - that just made me wonder. Thank god I can use my mac with it's standards compliant browsers and os X ;^)
 
Good point Mr K.

I had the same instructions on my son's PC... and I updated. And then I ran the antivirus and I had to clean up. But I don't know if the virus came from this install as he is doing what all kids do with PCs: download and installing tons of stupid stuff that he doesn't even have time to use.
 
This whole thread, and the entire issue it is based on just proves that all those wintel users saying "your mac is sh!t my pc is so much better" really have no idea what they're talking about, doesn't it??
 
Nope, it just addresses the virus preoblem.

Your statement * wintel users saying "your mac is sh!t my pc is so much better" really have no idea what they're talking about, doesn't it?? * may be correct, but that's another question.
 
A friend of mine just got the bug yesterday. He was asking for help. *came to the Mac guy.:rolleyes:) I told him I seen it on the news and Microsoft had some kind of patch on their DL section. He went there and was given this huge 3-4 hour 4 step process in getting rid of the thing. He wasn't a bit happy seeing that since his PC was shutting down randomly. He was just looking for a patch and got that. Luckily a member of another forum posted a real patch to get rid of the thing and he DLed that. Still as I was helping his look through Microsoft's DL section, I couldn't help but think not all that upgrading is for just one virus.
 
Originally posted by fryke
1.) Microsoft _is_ a security problem. There are far too many holes in all Windows versions to be found. This shouldn't be like that, but it is.
Now, what I find weird is that you say there are far too many holes in all Windows versions to be found, yet these virus programmers seem to find and exploit these very holes. Do they know the Windows code better than Windows' creators? Could it be an idea for MS to hire a virus creator or a dozen to look over the Windows code before the release of Longhorn? Just to avoid this...
 
My friend of mine got the virus and said it took him 5 min to disable it, but i'm pretty sure he lied. He was like, "Hey did you get the virus ....oh that's right you use a Mac."

I had a little talk with him, and he's actually considering a Mac for his next computer
 
Not to stir the pot or anything, but I got the worm. I fixed it by, between the random reboot's, going to Windows Update, selecting the apporiate patch, letting it install, rebooting the machine. I then downloaded the little cleaner that Symantic put out, it found the problem and removed it. It took all of 3-4 minutes.

Although, in that 3-4 minutes my Mac was doing it's business free and clear, probably laughing at the XP machine.
 
Voice: The problem is that Microsoft doesn't train their programmers very effectively in security issues, and they have a reactive security system, not a preventive one. They don't program Windows with the intention of letting bugs through, but they don't check it well enough to keep security holes from popping up, not to mention all the other problems Windows versions have.

Microsoft itself is a virus, for which Apple is a (not extremely effective) antibiotic.

If anyone tells you that Macs suck, drill them and ask why. If they don't give you a credible answer, then say that doesn't prove anything. But if they do give you at least factual-seeming reasons, rebut with something the Mac can do. If you went around saying PC's suck to everyone, they'd be pretty peeved and start ragging on you. But we Mac users are a higher class than that.
 
The biggest point I see in the action M$ is taking is that by shutting down its servers, it is admitting (allowing) a hacker/virus producer to achieve his/her goal; disrution of normal computer/network function. A shutdown like this says to other hackers/virus makers that if you find a hole in M$ software and properly exploit it, you can force big bad M$ to its knees (i.e. force a server shutdown). This is bad PR on M$'s part... Hints that even the creators of the OS can't find a solution that would prevent such a shut-down...
 
There was no significant disruption of the Microsoft service.

The only problem is that Windows should include an efficient virus fighting architecture, and not suppose that it is the customer's problem to buy an anti-virus from another company (same thing applies for Apple BTW).
 
Back
Top