Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system
From: Bill Unruh (unruh@physics.ubc.ca)Date: 02/21/02
- Next message: Brad C.: "Re: Software Watermarking"
- Previous message: Steve Sprague: "Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system"
- In reply to: Steve Sprague: "Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system"
- Next in thread: Alun Jones: "Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: unruh@physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh) Date: 21 Feb 2002 00:06:16 GMT
In <a51c93$3tvh8$1@ID-92636.news.dfncis.de> "Steve Sprague" <eaegis@yahoo.com> writes:
]"Valdis Kletnieks" <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote in message
]news:94eljguink.fsf@foo-bar-baz.cc.vt.edu...
]> "Steve Sprague" <eaegis@yahoo.com> writes:
]>
]> > "Mark Biggar" <mark.a.biggar@attbi.com> wrote in message
]> > news:3C70544D.80E7B93C@attbi.com...
]>
]> > Their latest take
]> > > on security is to say "trust us, we know what we are doing" and
]> > > install a trojan horse on every computer so that they can automatically
]> > > change system software and configuration remotely any time they want to.
]> >
]> > Ok, I think you are leaving reality here. Which company and product are
]you
]> > referring to? Do you have a link for this information?
]>
]> Did you actually *READ* the newest Microsoft MediaPlayer licensing
]> info? It says that by installing it, you're granting Microsoft the
]> right to download "security fixes" and install them *without warning
]> or confirmation*, and that said fixes may disable 3rd party software.
]>
]> In other words, "You install this, and we can legally download stuff
]> that turns off Netscape, or any other 3rd party software, because we
]> called it a security fix".
]Actually, no I havent read it as I dont use that product. I see your concern,
]but Im also looking at reality. For them to do what you are suggesting, they
]would have to come up with a real, verifiable "security fix" that would
]actually affect those other products. IOW, I think you are reaching a bit.
]They can say all day that its a security fix, but you know and I know that
]there would be independent evaluation of the so called fixes and the truth
]would be known. Not even MS is this stupid as to commit commercial suicide.
They would not change those other programs. They would change the system dlls so as to make
those programs inoperative. Those fixes would be called security fixes. Since we have no
source code, it would be extremely difficult to determine whether those fixes which broke that
dll for competitors products really were because of security or for some other reason--
decompileing a few MB of dll is not anyone's idea of fun.
And if after a few hundreds of thousands of dollars of time, it was determined that might have
been a better way of fixing that security hole which did not disable the third party, well
their programmer made a mistake.
- Next message: Brad C.: "Re: Software Watermarking"
- Previous message: Steve Sprague: "Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system"
- In reply to: Steve Sprague: "Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system"
- Next in thread: Alun Jones: "Re: checking for all known viruses vs. fixing the system"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
