Don't read Krebs articles... or he'll doxx you. Like he did to some researchers on Twitter who disagreed with his dumb opinion.
Care to elaborate?
Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
41–50 of 85 posts
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#42Its especially unfortunate since KB4474419, the sha2 update for Windows Seven, defacto disabled updates for quite a few people with dualboot or encrypted system partitions in mid March.
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#43Don't read Krebs articles... or he'll doxx you. Like he did to some researchers on Twitter who disagreed with his dumb opinion.
But where does the second x come from?
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Users of Windows Vista can download the updates (Monthly Rollup or Security Online) of Windows Server 2008 from the Update Catalog and install them manually." https://borncity.com/win/2019/05/15/critical-update-for-wind... But this is definitely confusing. MS explicitly offers patches for Win 7, Server 2008, Server 2003, and XP, but there's no "Vista" link visible. https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-gu…
It makes sense not to mention Vista in a headline consider the very low usage rates. If anyone should not expect security update news via popular news outlets its Window's Vista users. There are plenty of niche channels for niche product releases.
On a side note, I think that Vista wasn't necessarily unpopular, it just had a good upgrade path/incentive for users (unlike XP to Vista).
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are reasons there is no budget. A budget doesn't magically appear. Take health care, education, or police services for example. Do you really want to take away resources from providing the stuff that's actually needed just for some artificial easily preventable crisis? The entire situation is ridiculous really. So what that XP is "ancient"? For many purposes it works just fine. The only reason this situation ex…
Is it really Microsoft's responsibility to keep patching XP forever?
By law, I suppose not. Morally, it depends on whom you ask.
If it were open source, other people could pick it up (gratis or for a fee). Right now, nobody can (except for Microsoft), because it is proprietary software. Microsoft brought it upon themselves to release the software as such.
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#46Its especially unfortunate since KB4474419, the sha2 update for Windows Seven, defacto disabled updates for quite a few people with dualboot or encrypted system partitions in mid March.
Disables updates? How?
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#47Its especially unfortunate since KB4474419, the sha2 update for Windows Seven, defacto disabled updates for quite a few people with dualboot or encrypted system partitions in mid March.
Disables updates? How?
The update fails and gets automatically reverted. I dont think you can get the monthly security updates without it, at least that was the case with the April rollout. Since its not immediately clear why the update fails, you can even now find quite a few people looking for help to diagnose the error online.
edit:
Here some context
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/kb4474...
its an easy fix for for dualboot if you can just replace grub with mbr again, but people with disc encryption are rather screwed it seems.
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes sense not to mention Vista in a headline consider the very low usage rates. If anyone should not expect security update news via popular news outlets its Window's Vista users. There are plenty of niche channels for niche product releases.
On a side note, I think that Vista wasn't necessarily unpopular, it just had a good upgrade path/incentive for users (unlike XP to Vista).
It was one of the least popular versions of Windows, no? Certainly its market share never exceeded XP's.
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes sense not to mention Vista in a headline consider the very low usage rates. If anyone should not expect security update news via popular news outlets its Window's Vista users. There are plenty of niche channels for niche product releases.
On a side note, I think that Vista wasn't necessarily unpopular, it just had a good upgrade path/incentive for users (unlike XP to Vista).
My perception for a long time has been that Vista, from a technical perspective, was leaps and bounds above XP, but the end user experience was sometimes lacking; 7 didn't provide drastic technical improvements so much as offering a much-polished Vista.
Re: Microsoft Patches ‘Wormable’ Flaw in Windows XP, 7 and Windows 2003
#50Not even a wormable flaw could convince them to patch Vista, apparently (assuming it's not somehow magically invulnerable when the versions before and after it weren't).
"Users of Windows Vista can download the updates (Monthly Rollup or Security Online) of Windows Server 2008 from the Update Catalog and install them manually." https://borncity.com/win/2019/05/15/critical-update-for-wind... But this is definitely confusing. MS explicitly offers patches for Win 7, Server 2008, Server 2003, and XP, but there's no "Vista" link visible. https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-gu…
Not surprised the 2008 patch is intended to work on Vista, I was more bemused that they had an otherwise exhaustive list of versions and how to patch them, and just...left it off, not only in the headlines, but in a number of the enumerations.