Microsoft To Distribute Third-Party Patches 135
dhiren writes "Secunia on Wednesday announced that their authenticated internal vulnerability scanner, the Corporate Software Inspector (CSI) 4.0, has been integrated with Microsoft Windows Server Update Service (WSUS) and System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM). This will hopefully pave the way for other vendors to also make use of Windows' existing patching infrastructure and eliminate the need for the multitude of custom updater applications and services that clutter most systems today."
Misleading article (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Misleading article (Score:2, Interesting)
Wait, what's going on? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is this going to push updates via Windows Update to Windows 7 and other home versions as well, or just Win Server? Or is it even using Windows Update? Is that different from the "Windows Server Update Service?" I don't have anything to do with servers, so I'm honestly confused.
CNet used to have a similar service (Score:3, Interesting)
CNet used to have a similar service... only for the software that they themselves offered to users, of course. Then they discontinued it, re-launched as CatchUp, discontinued it again.. now it's some weird newsletter thing you can subscribe to.
Worked fairly well, though - was just a small utility that I guess checked for installed apps, checked the version info (from registry / files) for those it knew, and checked if there were any newer versions offered off of CNet.
Sucked when they discontinued it.. meant you had to check the pages / author sites manually all the time.. or subscribe to their RSS feeds (which only became popular later on), etc. In addition, half the apps I run now have their own update checking stuff.. some check on startup, some check every day, some check once a week... finding the settings for this (if the settings are even exposed) can be a to of fun too.. etc.
So hooray for Microsoft looking into this... looooong overdue. I do hope they allow -any- developer/application to take part, though.
The end for Internet Explorer (Score:2, Interesting)
Personal Software Inspector (Score:2, Interesting)
I use PSI (Personal Software Inspector) http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/ [secunia.com] \
Compare? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't do windows. Mac and Linux only.
Could someone compare and contrast with apt-get and security.debian.org, which I am very familiar with?
I'm not trying to ignite a flamewar, I'm just curious about the feature set. What one side would have to add to reach the other side's level, etc.
Re:Misleading article (Score:3, Interesting)
OSS Alternative (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Oh just call it (Score:3, Interesting)
I've been thinking for quite a long time that Apple and Microsoft to come up with package managers for their operating systems. It's ironic because after all the talk of it being hard to install things in Linux, it's much easier to keep a Linux system up to date. In most cases, you can upgrade every application on your computer with a single line in the command line.
Microsoft has "Microsoft Update" and Apple has "System Update", so they basically have the system in place already for their own software, but then 3rd party software all installs their own updaters or expect you to hunt down updates on the web. It seems to me their built-in updaters could be expanded for 3rd party updates through one of two methods:
Re:About time! (Score:1, Interesting)
About time..how long has Linux been doing this?
about the time the geek discovered that compiling from source can be a royal pain in the butt -
and that a solution had to be found for the non-technical end user.
there remains the problem of programs that aren't packaged for your distribution - and the fragmentation of Linux into 200 or so odd distros can make OSX and Windows seem like models of shining sanity.
Microsoft doesn't even do this internally! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:CNet used to have a similar service (Score:3, Interesting)
I think my favorites used to be the ones that checked when the app started up. Adobe Acrobat Reader was really bad about this. "Would you like to take 30 minutes out of your day to load an Adobe Downloader so you can load the latest version of Adobe Reader so you can reboot and then have to come back to this page so you can read this one-page document, or ignore this and I'll pester you the next time you try to open a document?"
You forgot the second half of that story.
(30 minutes later) "Oh, sorry, you have to be an administrator to install that." (Then after the next reboot) "Would you like to take 30 minutes out of your day to load an Adobe Downloader so you can load the latest version of Adobe Reader so you can reboot and then have to come back to this page so you can read this one-page document, or ignore this and I'll pester you the next time you try to open a document?"
Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh I'm fully aware of how awesome Synaptic/Yum/$PACKAGE_MANAGER is, but unfortunately I doubt that a full-blown software repo will ever happen on Windows, because ultimately, it will end up as one of two scenarios:
1.) Microsoft requires all software added to the repo to have a specific digital certificate, and/or additional repos themselves will have to be signed and secured. These certificates will cost $$$$. Some indi dev will want to get their software in the repo, won't be able to afford it, and Microsoft will find itself in court faster than a hooker running out of church. That, or some shady software dealer will find itself being unsigned 'cuz someone at MS doesn't trust them or they sue...the details may change, but the bottom line is that if Microsoft discriminates who gets in and who doesn't, regardless of whether they have a legit reason to do so, they'll end up in court.
2.) Microsoft allows any repo, signed or unsigned, to be added to the repo/update tree. Malware attacks shift from "click here to remove the 638 trojans our fake virus scanner found" to "click here to add our repo and install our fake virus scanner". Status quo remains unchanged, and the point of adding repos in the first place gets mitigated.
I love the entire concept of package managers and would LOVE to see Synaptic on Windows. The problem is, the Windows platform is just too entrenched to make a package manager work there.
Re:Compare? (Score:3, Interesting)
Someone has to be amazingly closeminded and fundamentalist, and go out of their to avoid the most prevalent consumer OS for the last 10 years.
It is fundamentalist and closed minded to not buy a product because you do not like it?
Coca-cola is the most popular soft drink, if someone said that they had not drunk it for a few years because they never liked it, but they could not remember exactly what it tasted like, would that be "fundamentalist and closed minded"?
go out of their to avoid the most prevalent consumer OS for the last 10 years.
I have hardly touched Windows in the last six years. I have not gone out of my way: I would have to go out of my way to use Windows more. I have a laptop and a dektop, both with Linux installed. Dual boot would be a hassle, virtualisation uses too much memory, and I have no pressing reason to do either. I rarely use other people's machines, so it would take a definite effort to use Windows.