Friday, February 13, 2004 - Posts

Why Windowsupdate/automatic update sucks (part 2)

1) only 3 configurations
2) not aggressive enough for exploited patches
3) far too easy for users to switch off
4) not integrated into IE/OE for user to see it
5) not disabling network access for unpatched PCs(although W2K03 SP1 will do quarantines)
6) badly categorized: emergency level(above critical) missing for wormed and remote exploitable bugs

More I will add later ....

 

links:

http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/stefandemetz/archive/2004/05/07/13102.aspx
http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/stefandemetz/archive/2004/05/11/13358.aspx

http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma/archive/2004/05/07/127742.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/ptorr/archive/2004/04/13/112495.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/mroselius/archive/2003/03/10/3616.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/dburke/archive/2003/09/14/27543.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/jezell/archive/2003/08/13/23865.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/rudi_larno/archive/2004/04/06/108424.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/rich_crane/archive/2004/04/05/107516.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/PAndrew/archive/2004/02/18/75225.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/wallen/archive/2003/03/04/3396.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/pscott/archive/2003/02/06/681.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/lbarbieri/archive/2004/02/26/80097.aspx
http://weblogs.asp.net/tmarman/archive/2003/02/12/2295.aspx

posted Friday, February 13, 2004 10:27 PM by stefandemetz with 13 Comments

Why Windows patching sucks (part 1)

1) no easy way to detect missing patches
2) no API to detect missing patches
3) no webservice with patching config info (well, hfnetchk has the xml file)
4) tools(like MBSA or URLSCAN) not bundled into popular downloads like IE, WMP, IM
5) no download manager to allow easy downloading

Other posts I about windows configuration/patching

http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/stefandemetz/archive/2004/05/07/13102.aspx
http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/stefandemetz/archive/2004/02/10/6974.aspx
http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/stefandemetz/archive/2004/02/09/6877.aspx

posted Friday, February 13, 2004 10:26 PM by stefandemetz with 12 Comments

windows code post-leak opinion

The website www.microsoft-watch.com posted some suggestions of what MS shall do.
It suggests that MS realease ALL the NT4/W2K code as open source so that windows compatible programs would run on any *ix based OS, creating even more demand.
What a hogwash.
What would make sense for a market follower does not make sense for a market leader with 90+ % of a market. For the extra 10 % they would give away 90%? OK, if anyone gives me 90 bucks, I' ll return 10. Any takers?

One Thing although would be nice: if MS could give all the "good" guys out there the (semi)automatic legal permission to hold copies of the leaked code. That way any academic,public institutions, partners and security firms could help with fixing things very fast without getting embroiled in the legal wrangle.

posted Friday, February 13, 2004 9:13 PM by stefandemetz with 0 Comments