Re: controversial paper

From: Sam Simpson (sam_at_samsimpson.com)
Date: 09/29/03

  • Next message: sqrt\(i\): "factoring using geomerty?" 
    Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:27:58 +0000 (UTC)

    "George Ou" <533george_ou234@netzero234.com> wrote in message
    news:6i8cnvgbg5548gc77lobfl1li7lfn3grpl@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 22:47:35 +0000 (UTC), "Sam Simpson"
    > <sam@samsimpson.com> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >"George Ou" <533george_ou234@netzero234.com> wrote in message
    > >news:fstbnv83gkaktmb4e6bfvi0e6f9j09383n@4ax.com...
    > >> On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:12:37 -0400, "Douglas A. Gwyn"
    > >> <DAGwyn@null.net> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >George Ou wrote:
    > >> >> It's a blessing now because all the usual holes that most hackers
    take
    > >> >> advantage of are now locked down.
    > >> >
    > >> >You mean, *some* of the vulnerabilities that have left systems
    > >> >wide open to exploitation for a long time re now more widely
    > >> >patched than before. Yet there is currently a post-Blaster
    > >> >onslaught in the SMTP universe; obviously there are more
    > >> >Microsoft vulnerabilities causing trouble. This is inevitable
    > >> >since Microsoft emphasizes bells and whistles (active elements
    > >> >in mail and Web pages) over security, and their customer base
    > >> >is too naive to demand differently.
    > >>
    > >> No, I mean ALL critical vulnerabilities are patched in Windows.
    > >
    > >See
    >
    >http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/security
    /bulletin/MS03-010.asp
    > >
    > >A critical bug (e.g. can be used as a DoS) was found in NTv4 during the
    > >period in which it was still officially supported but was left unpatched
    > >"due to architectural limitations".
    > >
    > >
    > >You gotta love 'em......
    >
    > I don't give a rat's ass about NT4.

    You may not give a rat's ass but there are still huge numbers of users on
    NTv4. Even better, there are huge numbers of "secure" government customers
    that *have* to use NTv4 because Win2k isn't certified for use.

    > Microsoft isn't the only one that
    > abandons older software, it is common in the industry.

    Yeah, it's common and totally expected - but not when a product is
    explicitly within support for security patches.

    So there was a version of Windows within the support period with a known
    vulnerability that has never been patched. What was you point about all
    critical vulnerabilities being patched again? ;)

  • Next message: sqrt\(i\): "factoring using geomerty?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: suspend/hibernate to work on thinkpad x60s?
      ... The patches you need are to make the ahci disk interface resume ... # ACPI Support ... # Infrared-port device drivers ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: MPE Beta Testing
      ... In light of the extension of HP support for MPE, ... From the Beta Test page: "If you feel your systemcould benefit ... requests could be limited to email. ... HP benefits by moving the patches to GR and MPE ...
      (comp.sys.hp.mpe)
    • RE: [PATCHv5 3/3] vhost_net: a kernel-level virtio server
      ... I have collected your 3 patches in kernel side and 4 patches in queue side. ... structures can be moved around in memory at any time ... Userspace hypervisors are supported as well as kvm. ... In this version I only support raw socket as a backend, ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: solaris 10 patch cluster download
      ... If anyone can me help me out with the download, ... ISTR that access to patches ... other than security patches is part of the minimum support level. ... The "sun service" I'm used to will fix the computer if broken ...
      (comp.unix.solaris)
    • What will be in the x86-64/x86 2.6.21 merge
      ... I will post the existing patches in batches for closer review. ... Fix boot slowdown as VT guest ... More init section reference fixes from Vivek ... Support a trigger on machine check events on x86-64 ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Quantcast