how-to block ads
|
jfcjrus
Premium
join:2001-12-09
New England
| Are they serious about this, or not...
Several weeks (months) ago, there was a announcement by MS that 'security' was on the front burner. They seemed to acknowledge that some of their products had 'security' holes that they were going to fix, PRONTO!
I submit;
Saying they're going to do it is a whole lot different than ACTUALLY doing it.
Yea, we're getting snippit patches, but, are they addressing the total security issue?
I think that they're just doing enough to blunt the major issues (as they become evident), rather than make an effort to configure the product from a 'security' perspective.
(eg: take OUT all the add-on's that "make it internet friendly", but compromise security).
I really don't think they (MS), yet understands what us users are referring to when we talk about 'security'.
[Perhaps; we'll do the add-ons, if we desire - not you!]
Just a thought.
edit: spelling correction
[text was edited by author 2002-06-27 17:42:49] | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| I read ya. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the code to begin with. I'm not a developer or a systems administrator, but I have heard from a few of them that say many MS programs seem to be intentionally written to be easily exploitable. I'm not going to say that's part of some evil master plan of Bill Gates to take over our systems. It could just be the way MS keeps their software open for more features or whatever. Either way it's pretty obvious there is something not write with that way programming. I mean if a boat had to be patched this many times for holes nobody would even think about keeping the boat. MS needs to rethink Windows, IIS, Outlook, Office and just about every other piece of software they made.
--
Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com | |
MessianicJew
join:2002-05-06
Saint Louis, MO
| I don't know if this is true or not, but I had someone tell me once that most (all?) security holes in MS products were put there intentionally by the developers. I guess they don't get called to task on it.
I can understand leaving a hook into something for future features that might be added in with a service pack, though you'd be better off just adding that in initially and pushing the release date back. (Can't do that, though, can we?)
Sure, they've got whole hoards of people who work on any one application. Even if only half of them put in a small hole, that adds up fast (what's half of a hoard, anyways?). And if any of those holes compound each other, suddenly you've got a huge mess. Which, it seems, is exactly what we have. | |
|
