Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750
From: Robert Moir (bofh_at_mvps.org)
Date: 10/04/03
- Next message: Papa: "Re: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Previous message: Theresa: "Windows log on"
- In reply to: Me2: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Next in thread: Bill Sanderson: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Reply: Bill Sanderson: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Reply: Me2: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 13:59:19 +0100
Me2 wrote:
> Rob,
>
> I don't know about "attempts to use" when Trojan.Qhosts actually DOES
> use something. The infection is not nice...
"Attempts to use" was meant in the sense that it would fail once the patch
is applied. Nothing more. Apologies for any confusion or if you felt I
wasn't taking this seriously.
> Rhetorical questions: Why doesn't Microsoft post information about
> current Trojans/viruses/worms like Trojan.Qhosts??? Does it take
> hundreds of thousands or millions of infections to warrant a note???
> Is thousands (or tens of thousands) not merely enough??? The
> www.microsoft.com/security page "Technical Virus Alerts" lists a
> massive 26 entries from Nov 26 2001 (badtrans) through Sep 18 2003
> (swen). Does the Trojan.Qhosts warrant a fix (ms03-040) but not an
> entry on this list?
Good question. Even with the purchase of RAV, Microsoft obviously don't see
themselves currently as in the antivirus business. There are several viruses
and the like "discovered" daily.. yes every day, and even those companies
that are in the antivirus business don't make a big song and dance about any
except those they think are going to be a serious problem.
Leaving aside QHosts specifically for the moment, and asking a general
question of my own, if I may. If Microsoft and the antivirus companies made
as big a fuss about even the trivial stuff as they do about the serious
stuff, do you think that would heighten awareness? Or would it be more
likely to confuse people and cause them to "switch off" and not listen to
the warnings?
I suspect there isn't a single "right" answer to that question.
Regards,
-- -- Rob Microsoft MVP Windows Servers and Security http://www.robertmoir.co.uk
- Next message: Papa: "Re: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Previous message: Theresa: "Windows log on"
- In reply to: Me2: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Next in thread: Bill Sanderson: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Reply: Bill Sanderson: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Reply: Me2: "Re: A 6% fix from Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 - 828750"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|