Slashdot Log In
No Fix for Word Next 'Patch Tuesday'
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:32 AM
from the that's-cool-nobody-uses-word-anyway dept.
from the that's-cool-nobody-uses-word-anyway dept.
Sktea writes "A spokesman for Microsoft has said that they will issue no patches on the next 'Patch Tuesday' for versions of Word vulnerable to the recent zero-day threat. There is no mention whatsoever of the omission in the latest advance notification at the company's security site." From the article: "The software maker is working on a security update, but apparently needs more time. The company did not specify how many flaws Tuesday's updates will address or in which components of Windows the holes lie. The Visual Studio update could offer a patch for a zero-day vulnerability in the developer tools that was made public last month. "
Related Stories
[+]
Microsoft Issues Zero-Day Attack Alert For Word 483 comments
0xbl00d writes "Eweek.com is reporting a new Microsoft Word zero-day attack underway. Microsoft issued a security advisory to acknowledge the unpatched flaw, which affects Microsoft Word 2000, Microsoft Word 2002, Microsoft Office Word 2003, Microsoft Word Viewer 2003, Microsoft Word 2004 for Mac and Microsoft Word 2004 v. X for Mac. The Microsoft Works 2004, 2005 and 2006 suites are also affected because they include Microsoft Word. Simply opening a word document will launch the exploit. There are no pre-patch workarounds or anti-virus signatures available. Microsoft suggests that users 'not open or save Word files,' even from trusted sources."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Does this mean a new catch phrase? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Does this mean a new catch phrase? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Does this mean a new catch phrase? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Believe it or not, there exists a non-trivial percentage of end users who seek out and pay for software upgrades that provide new features. I, for one, eagerly await Adobe Photoshop CS3. Some of us are not so cheap and actually have specific needs and desires for improved productivity and functionality.
Then, of course, there's also corporate IT. That'
They don't have time to patch (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Tom
Re:They don't have time to patch (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. Who cares about existing users in markets they already control, who are addicted to you and will stay with you forever? After all, when you have to spend all of this time throwing chairs about, f**king killing Google, figuring out ways to steal Apple's successful online music business out from under them, and scheming to keep those Linux guys from getting anywhere, you can't be focused on such silly things as customer support. No siree! Win, win, win! That's what I always say!
Parent
But... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't. Here's the text. Read it carefully. It's very complicated:
Do not open or save Word files [the part you conveniently left out]that you receive from un-trusted or that are received unexpected from trusted sources.
Got it? I hope so. This suggestion is ALWAYS true, regardless of whatever known bugs there may be in existence at the time.
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Expected" is the tricky word there. Most people who receive Word docs in the course of work expect their normal, trusted sources to send them documents that are themselves somewhat new, newsworthy, you know, containing information that's worth sending. A doc that's totally expected probably didn't need to be sent.
Let's say you're the editor of a newsletter or magazine. You expect docs from a few score people who occassionally submit stuff. You expect them to show up with e-mails that say, "Hi George, Here it is!" The bad guys can easily fake that stuff - and often do - but you're a normal editor, not a security expert, so you give the normal English reading to "receive unexpected," and this stuff all looks like stuff you expected, so you open it....
What Microsoft should say is, "Don't open any attached docs without phoning the source first and specifically confirming the file." As it is, they're saying just enough to cover their ass ("We warned you!"), without saying enough to enable the typical user to really practice safe Word use.
Parent
(-1) Did not actually read advisory (Score:2)
Before talking about the solution, why not go read the advisory [microsoft.com] first?
From TFAdvistory:
Do not open or save Word files that you receive from un-trusted sources or that you receive unexpectedly from trusted sources.
Let me translate for you: Do not open random word documents downloaded from unknown sources because they could be infected. If somebody sends you an email with a document you weren't expecting or without any context (ie su
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Popeye (Score:3, Funny)
Ok, bad guys, you heard 'em: they need more time!! (Score:3, Funny)
So be nice and give 'em a few extra days to come up with some patches (it's the sporting thing to do!!) After all, all that innovation makes it tough to respond quickly to threats to their legacy apps!!
Open Office...Star Office (Score:2)
I personally am glad that I don't use Microsoft for my Office needs.
Word 2007 (Score:2)
Heh heh heh. Did I just imply a conspiracy? No really. That would be totally stupid, unethical, immoral...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Word 2007 (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Shucks (Score:3, Funny)
And why should they? The devs are still trying to finish Twilight Princess on the Wii, goshdarnit. Leave them be! The users can last without opening any attachments from anybody for a little while longer, right?
I'm not at all surprised or unhappy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Typed: ", the world isn't perfect."
Corrected ", Word isn't perfect."
Why would they? (Score:4, Interesting)
My first thought leads me to ask, why would there be any mention of bug fixes that are not included in a patch cluster's content notification? Why would any company specifically call out features that are not being provided in a particular software distribution, in circumstances other than the discovery of a clear and consistent workaround (aside from the standard "temporarily avoid use of [software x]")?
The situation of miscellaneous zero-day exploits must be embarrassing enough already; I couldn't imagine them calling even more attention to it. "Hey, guess what we're not fixing next week. Check it out!"
Here's how we get it fixed. (Score:4, Funny)
To:
There, much better. I guarantee Microsoft will release a patch *immediately*.
Re:uninsightful (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
The point implied was that since everyone in fact does use Word, the it is not cool. You see the play on words there? You see what he did? He said the opposite of what he meant. That is called sarcasm. But I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that.