Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- From: "Michael Davis \(Comcast.Net\)" <netguru@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:52:57 -0400
There is a bigger picture here and its not personal data protection. The
simple fact is that there are millions of unpatched computers that are
serving as breeding grounds for malware of all kinds as well as being used
by hackers as bots.
Simply indicating that users can back up their data doesnt address the
impact the unpatched computer has when used as a weapon (bot launching pad)
nor the cost in labor incurred by us collectively when we respond to the
issues botnets cause.
I dont understand the TV analogy.
"Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:etegvWmkGHA.1936@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Michael Davis (Comcast.Net) wrote:
It seems to me that its a bad idea to deny owners of illegal copies
of windows the ability to patch their computers. Windows is running
on hundereds of millions of computers and hundreds of millions of
computers are not being patched. Here are the issues which lead to
the perfect storm we are in right now.
1. Computer programming languages like C that do not check for
buffer overflow (require that the programmer code for buffer
overflow checking within the application itself)
2. monolithic adoption of a singular operating system for servers
and client computing.
3. stolen code for NT 4.0, Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
4. majority of Microsoft code run in pacific rim and former USSR is
not legit
Microsoft Policy requiring validation to patch operating systems.
5. windows available from WAREZ and other download sites, hacked,
infected etc.
6. rapid adoption of new code practices without consideration of the
security consequences
7. botnets composed of compromised systems
8. adware, spyware, malware, virus (to me, if I didnt install it,
its a virus)
9. The Internet and nature of TCP/IP
To fight this perfect storm Billions of dollars are being spent to
simply stay current. Meaning that the legit systems are constantly
being assaulted by botnets comprised of hacked unpatched computers
and networks have to respond to new emerging threats arising from
the sea of unpatched computers.
It is simply prudent to realize the nature of the situation and
allow all windows systems to be patched or at the very least
someone should offer 3rd party alternative patches to bootleg since
we know they will not buy Windows and they are being exploited.
Alternatives to patches already exist.
Firewalls and common sense. That covers the majority of the trouble one
can get into.
And in the same vein, common sense tells one that if their data is
important, they will have backups and make it so they can get full support
for the data they deem so important - including (but not limited to) the
purchase of whatever software (if purchase is needed) helps protect said
data. Especially if the data in question provides the fundage for the
equipment already being used and the living of those who are protecting
it.
If you steal my television, don't expect to come to me and ask for help
connecting it to your entertainment system. =)
--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- From: imhotep
- Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- From: Shenan Stanley
- Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- References:
- Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- From: Michael Davis \(Comcast.Net\)
- Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- From: Shenan Stanley
- Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- Prev by Date: Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- Next by Date: Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- Previous by thread: Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- Next by thread: Re: Why not patch all windows and not just legal copies
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
