Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense...
From: Rob Conklin (robconklin_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 06/26/04
- Next message: Frank: "Need Help PLEASE/"
- Previous message: WinGuy: "Re: Is MSIE dead as a browser - if Microsoft does not patch it then it is as far as I am concerned!"
- In reply to: cquirke (MVP Win9x): "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Next in thread: WinGuy: "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Reply: WinGuy: "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Reply: cquirke (MVP Win9x): "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 23:10:32 -0400
I had been given some pointers on trying to remove the MS Java VM, but in
attempting to make headway on doing so, encountered error messages
convincing me quickly that documented approaches would not work for my
installation of Windows XP (completely updated, but not the new beta).
I'd put out the sugestion that Microsoft provide a standardized tool, such
as an update patch that places an entry for the MS Java VM in the table of
"Installed Programs", so that it can be cleanly "uninstalled" using the
regular procedures. I can't see how this would violate the settlement with
Sun, since it merely a way of providing a way for users to uninstall a
security hole on their systems -- obviously, now that MS isn't patching or
working on its version of the Java VM, people should have only Sun's version
on their system.
In good faith,
RC
"cquirke (MVP Win9x)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in message
news:j56pd0pnni6033ribpoi4gk5j0bphahuk8@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 22:46:06 -0400, "Rob Conklin"
>
> >I posted earlier about the CWS.searchx
>
> Many of the CWS "products" <barf> exploit defects in MS's Java VM,
> which poses something of a problem for MS to fix (unless the recent
> reconcilliation with Sun has removed this problem).
>
> A result of the judgement in Sun vs. MS over Java was that MS may no
> longer distribute the Java VM. Providing a repaired Java VM (as a
> patch) could be seen as "distributing" it, and offering a fix that
> destrys the Java VM is liable to be poorly received also.
>
> New XP goes out with no Java VM, but if your PC has MS's Java VM
> installed, you may see this sort of mileage.
>
>
>
> >------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
> Our senses are our UI to reality
> >------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
- Next message: Frank: "Need Help PLEASE/"
- Previous message: WinGuy: "Re: Is MSIE dead as a browser - if Microsoft does not patch it then it is as far as I am concerned!"
- In reply to: cquirke (MVP Win9x): "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Next in thread: WinGuy: "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Reply: WinGuy: "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Reply: cquirke (MVP Win9x): "Re: Gigantic,catastrophic security flaw in Windows - no defense..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
