Jack Bates wrote:
I fully expect malicious code and even users to disable the handshake.
That's fine. If a user happens to become infected, then they can be
suspended or transfered to *must* perform handshake.
Not everyone uses antivirus software. Not everyone will patch the
security holes in
Petri Helenius wrote:
How long until the next worm/virus/trojan would first disable this
handshake and then attach
to the network? Or you expect to terminate customers within the 24 hours
new patches
are out if they don´t patch? or 72 hours?
I fully expect malicious code and even users to disabl
Jack Bates wrote:
At some point, patching and maintaining security needs to be handled
at the connection. If the protocol is written, the ISP supports it,
then those with connection software supporting the protocol will
maintain security while those circumventing it with other connection
metho
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Failing that, why can't they bundle up just the updates onto a CD that is
released every few months and shipped out to all of their regular
customers along with permission to copy and redistribute. That way more
OEM's would ship out fully updated machines.
Because M
>>> And getting the lead time down to 4-6 weeks would be a challenge -
>>> remember you have to *ship* the re-mastered patch CD to every retailer
>>> and get it on the shelves. That's going to hit your bottom line.
>> Ever heard of Windows 98?
>> How about Windows 98 SE (Second Edition)?
>Win
Sean Donelan wrote:
If infected users have an offline method for obtaining patches, then we
don't need to figure out a way to keep their buggy, infected computers
connected to the network long enough to download the patches.
And wouldn't it be nice if someone developed a good protocol that
allowed
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 01:40:01PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Ray Wong wrote:
> > I seem to be repeating myself a lot: The problem is not technical; hence the
> > solution is not technical either.
> >
> > Now, other than being a poor attempt to pass the buck, how does this
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Ray Wong wrote:
> I seem to be repeating myself a lot: The problem is not technical; hence the
> solution is not technical either.
>
> Now, other than being a poor attempt to pass the buck, how does this help
> us as network operators (and similar IT professionals) in fixing th
I wrote before:
>> Windows 98SE was only available to OEMs and wasn't on shelves in stores.
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Wong) [Mon 08 Sep 2003, 19:33 CEST]:
> Oh, this topic hasn't died yet?
Well, maybe because 98SE apparently was in stores as I've been told in
private mail, and 95OSR2 was the vers
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Niels Bakker wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Mon 08 Sep 2003, 18:03 CEST]:
> > Ever heard of Windows 98?
> > How about Windows 98 SE (Second Edition)?
>
> Windows 98SE was only available to OEMs and wasn't on shelves in stores.
> As Valdis also notes, it's an entirely different s
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 06:59:25PM +0200, Niels Bakker wrote:
>
> >> And getting the lead time down to 4-6 weeks would be a challenge -
> >> remember you have to *ship* the re-mastered patch CD to every retailer
> >> and get it on the shelves. That's going to hit your bottom line.
>
> * [EMAI
>> And getting the lead time down to 4-6 weeks would be a challenge -
>> remember you have to *ship* the re-mastered patch CD to every retailer
>> and get it on the shelves. That's going to hit your bottom line.
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Mon 08 Sep 2003, 18:03 CEST]:
> Ever heard of Windows 98?
> H
On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:01:51 BST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
> > And getting the lead time down to 4-6 weeks would be a challenge -
> remember you
> > have to *ship* the re-mastered patch CD to every retailer and get it on
> the
> > shelves. That's going to hit your bottom line.
>
> Ever hear
> And getting the lead time down to 4-6 weeks would be a challenge -
remember you
> have to *ship* the re-mastered patch CD to every retailer and get it on
the
> shelves. That's going to hit your bottom line.
Ever heard of Windows 98?
How about Windows 98 SE (Second Edition)?
They've done it
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JC Dill
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Later I learned that this "critical update" package was mostly for installing
>IE6, and that there are a lot of people who have had this same problem trying to
>install IE6 on ME
I've been installing Windows for about 15 years
At 04:03 PM 8/25/2003, Andy Walden wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Henry Linneweh wrote:
> Microsoft has a task scheduler that people should learn to use to remind
> them to check update to make sure their patches are current, it is
> located in the control panel and labled Scheduled Tasks and has an
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 06:03:15PM -0500, Andy Walden wrote:
> I don't trust Microsoft to get the patch right, not arbitrarily delete my
> data, or change my machine in some unexpected fashion that I will not
> approve of. Granted, I, nor are most people on this list, the average Joe
> PC user, bu
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Henry Linneweh wrote:
> Microsoft has a task scheduler that people should learn to use to remind
> them to check update to make sure their patches are current, it is
> located in the control panel and labled Scheduled Tasks and has an
> Add Scheduled Tasks icon to add update
At 05:02 PM 8/25/2003, Jack Bates wrote:
Henry Linneweh wrote:
Microsoft has a task scheduler that people should learn to use to remind
them to check update to make sure their patches are current, it is
located in the control panel and labled Scheduled Tasks and has an
Add Scheduled Tasks icon to
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:57:44 PDT, Henry Linneweh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Microsoft has a task scheduler that people should learn to use to remind
> them to check update to make sure their patches are current, it is
> located in the control panel and labled Scheduled Tasks and has an
> Add Sch
Henry Linneweh wrote:
Microsoft has a task scheduler that people should learn to use to remind
them to check update to make sure their patches are current, it is
located in the control panel and labled Scheduled Tasks and has an
Add Scheduled Tasks icon to add update, FYI
And that helps a fresh
Microsoft has a task scheduler that people should learn to use to remind
them to check update to make sure their patches are current, it is
located in the control panel and labled Scheduled Tasks and has an
Add Scheduled Tasks icon to add update, FYI
-HenryJack Bates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 03:15:06PM -0400, Robbie Foust wrote:
>
> >Also, perhaps Microsoft put that
> >high per-call rate into play to SLOW DOWN the amount of calls they
> >were getting, not because "Bill Gates is greedy".
This was a theory, not an interpretation.
> Microsoft isn't charging for
Also, perhaps Microsoft put that
high per-call rate into play to SLOW DOWN the amount of calls they
were getting, not because "Bill Gates is greedy".
Microsoft isn't charging for support calls regarding the worm & patching
problems. Its free to anybody who calls.
- Robbie
--
Robbie Foust, IT
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 11:50:10AM -0400, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul A.
> Bradford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >Hmm,
> > and how would you protect the remote controlled MS firewall software
> >from:
> >
> >1. Vulnerabilities itself since MS is building it?
> >2
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephen
J. Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>my perception of the past couple of weeks is that they are the busiest that i've
>ever seen for abuse activity (including filtering our own traffic and getting
>customers to fix their broken machines). and yet i'm seei
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jack Bates
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Automatic cutoff until update check every 7 days?
That's the sort of thing, although I'd make different rules for
different types of connection. From broadband users who can do it daily,
to those connected by mobile phone (who
> Are there any "XP activation" exploits yet?
who knows, i'm losing track of all the different exploits, worms, viruses etc
floating around at the moment.. whats up, did all the script kiddies find
themselves with too much time on their hands over summer breaks?
my perception of the past couple
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul A.
Bradford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Hmm,
> and how would you protect the remote controlled MS firewall software
>from:
>
>1. Vulnerabilities itself since MS is building it?
>2. the "remote control" being hijacked by someone besides MS?
> 2a. Hey I'd love
Paul A. Bradford wrote:
2. the "remote control" being hijacked by someone besides MS?
2a. Hey I'd love to be able to shut folks that were killing my network
off until they update, but is it my right?
Automatic cutoff until update check every 7 days?
-Jack
Hmm,
and how would you protect the remote controlled MS firewall software
from:
1. Vulnerabilities itself since MS is building it?
2. the "remote control" being hijacked by someone besides MS?
2a. Hey I'd love to be able to shut folks that were killing my network
off until they update, but is
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jack Bates
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Which is why Microsoft should issue a software equivelant of a recall. Systems
>shouldn't be sold vulnerable without at least a patch CD.
Perhaps Windows could be delivered complete with a package whose
function was to firewa
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:35:43 CDT, Jack Bates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Which is why Microsoft should issue a software equivelant of a recall.
> Systems shouldn't be sold vulnerable without at least a patch CD.
The problem is that you need to look at the sum of (lead time) + (time patch CD
spe
Sean Donelan wrote:
As some of you know, the standard Microsoft OS distribution sold
in stores on CD is a year or so old, and doesn't include any recent
patches. You needed to download recent patches from Microsoft's
web site. Unfortunately, with the latest round of worms, Windows
doesn't surviv
As some of you know, the standard Microsoft OS distribution sold
in stores on CD is a year or so old, and doesn't include any recent
patches. You needed to download recent patches from Microsoft's
web site. Unfortunately, with the latest round of worms, Windows
doesn't survive on the net long en
35 matches
Mail list logo
