



New Windows Vulnerability in Help System 576
wesleyt writes "CERT announced today a significant Microsoft Windows vulnerability related to IE and its handling of the Windows help subsystem. There are currently no patches available and no virus definitions for the major scanners. As well, exploits have been reported in the wild. Because the vulnerability is in the help subsystem, even users who avoid Outlook and IE are vulnerable, since IE is the default handler for help files. It seems that this is going to be an ugly one."
MS (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MS (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MS (Score:4, Interesting)
try:
<img src=mailto:user@host?Subject=Something&Body=Fun>
on IE...
Re:MS (Score:4, Interesting)
It starts up mail! I can't believe it, it starts up mail! What an insecure piece of shit, I can't believe it! On firefox, when I view it
Oh wait, you wanted me to do it in IE? Oh yeah, that does it too.
Very curious... (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure which is more interesting - that Firefox allows it such a boneheaded thing or that Firefox allows it when Mozilla does not. Aren't both using the same version of Gecko (I'm assuming that this is a function that Gecko would handle)?
Re:MS (Score:3, Informative)
This sounds bad. I know we've convinced users to not open attachments such as .vbs files and the like. But now we have to somehow tell them not to open .htm(l) files as well?
Didn't MS get into trouble before when disclosing security holes? Now everyone who is interested knows exactly how to get in the door. No?
Whatever the reason really is, this is why I like my linux and Mac computers. I don't have to deal with this problem.
Re:MS (Score:5, Insightful)
On a side note, KDE does the same thing. I can open a "ms-its://" url to view
Re:MS (Score:5, Insightful)
If they unbundled IE, why the hell wouldn't the help files simply use the designated default browser??
Re:MS (Score:3, Insightful)
If they "unbundled" IE, they would still ship it with every boxed copy of Windows, and if you wanted Help out of the box, you'd need to install IE. The only way you'd be able to get a completely IE-fr
Re:MS (Score:4, Informative)
My point wasn't against the security of Linux or KDE, but against the hypocrisy of claiming that IE should be unbundled because integration == bad security. I'm not talking about the kernel or CLI or anything like that, I'm talking about the desktop environment. Windows provides one, and so does KDE. The fact that you could use Gnome or Xfce isn't relevant, because they don't have the same kind of integration.
If you don't install Konqueror/KHTML when you install KDE, your help system is screwed, as are any apps that embed a KHTML component. In that respect, IE/mshtml and Konq/khtml are comparable.
Not that big of deal (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not that big of deal (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Actually, mac users haven't had a virus yet (Score:5, Insightful)
http://www.sophos.com/virusinfo/analyses/index_
Description: Macintosh file virus
666, see Mac/Sevendust-A
ANTI-A, see Mac/ANTI-A
CDEF, see Mac/CDEF
CODE-1, see Mac/CODE-1
CODE-252, see Mac/CODE-252
CODE-9811, see Mac/CODE-9811
ERIC, see Mac/Scores
Garfield, see Mac/MDEF-A
Graphics Accelerator, see Mac/SevenD-Fam
INIT-1984, see Mac/INIT-1984
INIT-29, see Mac/INIT-29
INIT-9403, see Mac/INIT-9403
INIT-M, see Mac/INIT-M
Mac/ANTI-A
Mac/CDEF
Mac/CODE-1
Mac
Mac/CODE-9811
Mac/INIT-1984
Mac/INIT-
Mac/INIT-9403
Mac/INIT-M
Mac/MBDF-A
Mac/MBD
Mac/MDEF-A
Mac/nVIR-A
Mac/nVIR-B
Mac/nVIR-
Mac/Scores
Mac/SevenD-C
Mac/SevenD-D
Mac/S
Mac/Sevendust-A
Mac/Sevendust-B
Mac/S
Mac/T4
Mac/WDEF
Mac/ZUC-A
MBDF-A, see Mac/MBDF-A
MBDF-B, see Mac/MBDF-B
MDEF 666, see Mac/Sevendust-A
MDEF 9806, see Mac/Sevendust-A
MDEF-A, see Mac/MDEF-A
NASA VULT, see Mac/Scores
nVIR-A, see Mac/nVIR-A
nVIR-B, see Mac/nVIR-B
nVIR-Fam, see Mac/nVIR-Fam
San Jose Flu, see Mac/Scores
Scores, see Mac/Scores
SevenD-C, see Mac/SevenD-C
SevenD-D, see Mac/SevenD-D
SevenD-Fam, see Mac/SevenD-Fam
Sevendust-A, see Mac/Sevendust-A
Sevendust-B, see Mac/Sevendust-B
Sevendust-J, see Mac/Sevendust-J
SysX, see Mac/INIT-9403
T4, see Mac/T4
WDEF, see Mac/WDEF
ZUC-A, see Mac/ZUC-A
Re:Actually, mac users haven't had a virus yet (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember wiping some of these off of floppies... back when I even owned floppies.
Re:Actually, mac users haven't had a virus yet (Score:5, Insightful)
How many Mac owners have AV software that is up to date?
Re:Actually, mac users haven't had a virus yet (Score:5, Insightful)
How many Mac owners have AV software that is up to date?
Almost none - reason being that all those viruses (virii) mentioned at Sophos (Sophie) are from the 80's (80uses). This is the first 'exploit' on OS X, and it was just mentioned yesterday. What would Anti-Virus for the Mac have mentioned in their definitions last week?
"Virus definitions:
"
Additionally, since all ports are closed by default, and it takes an Administrator password to open any, and it takes an Administrator password to install any applications, and users are not root, there's a limited amount that a virus could do.
-T
Re:Actually, mac users haven't had a virus yet (Score:5, Informative)
You cannot possibly know that for certain; also the Intego trojan has nothing to do with ID3 tags, but rather the fact that under OSX an application can masquerade as an MP3, gif, jpg or Quicktime file.
For all you know some blackhat right now has some malware that uses this exploit and is debating the best method to distribute it.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not the point (Score:5, Insightful)
As for MS statements about exploits, well... everyone knows that's just plain silly. Right now there is an Exchange vulnerability listed on CERT that contains no patch and several known exploits, has been that way since November.
This is yet another occasion to teach everyone how to run as a user in Windows and not as Administrator. Almost everything is negated or at least mitigated when they are just normal users. Sure it could wipe out their own documents, but it couldn't effect any others and certainly couldn't harm the operating system.I see this problem a lot on every platform, generally I think people like to feel in control all the time
disabling Help And Support service? (Score:4, Informative)
Is that all you have to do? I just stopped and disabled the "Help and Support" service in WinXP Home. But then when I try "Help and Support" from the Start menu, that service switches itself to Automatic and starts again! Of course I won't be opening H&S any time soon.. but if "disabled" doesn't mean much, will it stop a virus? Or just start itself back up again?
Re:disabling Help And Support service? (Score:5, Informative)
This method is more desirable [microsoft.com] If you disable it for real then as I understand it it would prevent a virus from doing anything.
Re:disabling Help And Support service? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yet the parent's post clearly shows that if you actually have to change anything fundamental, such as Services or Registry cleanups, it's a total fucking nightmare.
No wonder Windows admins get nervous, and sometimes run away screaming from changing Exchange configs, secure file sharing across networks, and nearly daily virus updates.
Am I forgetting anything?
Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
Not saying that your comment is wrong, just that for most people, convenience is more important than security.
Re:Privilege level (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, the default distribution of Windows is not setup this way, and is even discouraging it (especially in the Home version).
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is, not every Windows program out there is written to be aware of the fine-grained security model of Windows NT. In a 'perfect world' every Windows developer would code properly, with security in mind. As it stands, the complex NT security model is just ignored by a lot of people. It might work great in a locked-down corporate environment with a limited-set of software, i.e. where the user isn't allowed to install anything, and the software installed is a narrow well-tested set. It won't ever work in looser environments. Given the lax 'security culture' of Microsoft and it's user base, it's unworkable.
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure there is some truth in that, but as more and more people don't respect other people's property, keylocks have become a necessity and have to be lived with, no matter the discomfort.
The same is now happening with software security.
Re:Privilege level (Score:3, Funny)
To extend the lock metaphor well beyond any rationality: i'll teach them to use keys instead of a "dance and sing" ritual... "you have to log in as root to do this and that" instead of "you have to right click and selct this, unless its september or a full moon when you have to double click here and then do this that and this other step; except for full moons during september when yo
Re:Privilege level (Score:3, Interesting)
Mod Parent UP! (Score:5, Interesting)
Look, this is absolutely true. There is still plenty of software out there that breaks under W2K/WXP when not run as a local administrator.
And forget 'looser' environments. I run a network at a private school. Care to take a guess how much educational software cares about following the rules properly? Grrr!!!
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Informative)
Works for me and you (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privilege level (Score:3, Informative)
Excellent point. Happens on both platforms, actually - Digidesign's audio editor "ProTools" insists on being run as an Administrator and will not let anyone non-Administrator run it. Their reasoning is that somehow ProTools has magic abilities to delete files that users don't have permissions for
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Informative)
That doesn't work. (Score:3, Interesting)
The new problem there is your WHOLE DESKTOP is now running as Administrator. Remember to kill it and restart it as yourself when you're done.
Re:That doesn't work. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privilege level (Score:3, Interesting)
Good for you. It doesn't work fine for a lot of other people. It would help if MS would implement some way to just let you type in a password without requiring two mouse clicks in the "Run as" dialog just to focus the password input box (which is grayed out by default).
Run as is usable for limited tasks, but I tried using WinXP as a non-administrator for
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
So basically, then, that makes it so that if the user gets infected by something, all it can do is destroy that user's personal files, and propogate over the network, as opposed to doing all that AND making the user have to reinstall Windows by mucking with system stuff?
That's nice for administratos--they can clean the machine just by wiping that user, but for the user that is not going to make much difference.
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
That's nice for administratos--they can clean the machine just by wiping that user, but for the user that is not going to make much difference.
Let's see, 1 hour of downtime while we reimage and reconfigure your machine vs. 1 minute to clear out your profile and let me work on pulling your data from a good known back up.
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Interesting)
Right click on the IE/browser shortcut, select run as different user e.g. www_joe.
Then give www_joe permissions to joe's browser directories, or point the browser files to different folders in the registry/config files.
Of course this doesn't protect against shatter attacks etc.
So run IE in a VMware virtual machine and rollback after each session (copy out the data you want before that). VMware Workstation is now USD189 prev was USD299 or some high price.
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Informative)
This is a much broader problem than merely stupid/lazy users.
Use the RUNAS service (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Use the RUNAS service (Score:3, Interesting)
It doesn't work as well as 'su -c xxx', I wish it did.
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Interesting)
In Linux-land... (Score:5, Funny)
Somewhere in Linux-land, a phone rings....
Hello? Oh, hi mom. Yeah, I can help you install a program on your computer. What do you want to install? Oh, cool. Have you downloaded it? Good job. OK, open up a terminal.... it's a command line interface, where you type commands. Much more powerful than a GUI. Where did you save the file? You don't remember? Hmm. Just type "cd". Now type "ls". Do you see the file name? Great! OK, type "tar -zxf "
It didn't work? What does it say? OK. What is the name of the file you downloaded? Oh, well, that is a bzip file, not a tar and gzipped file. So type the same thing as before, but use "bzip2" instead of "tar".
What? Why didn't it work? Oh, it doesn't have the same syntax. Crap. Go to the man page. Oh, man stands for manual. Type "man bzip2". What does it say?
(20 minutes later)
OK, now we have uncompressed the files you need. No, not yet. Type "./configure" No, it's OK, it is figuring out what kind of computer and software you have.
OK, now type "make" OK, call me back when it is done.
(15 minutes later)
OK, now type "make install" What? Why not? What does it say? No, not that. Oh, wait, you have to be root. It is an administrator user.
Because not just everyone can install programs, for security reasons. Look, just change to the admin user by typing "su". OK, now enter the root password. I DON'T KNOW! You mean you don't know your root password?
(10 minutes later)
Mom, you should NOT use the dog's name as the password. Because it is insecure! Nevermind. Just type "make install". There. Now it is installed.
No, there is no icon, you have to type the name of program to run it. Type it. What? I don't know, what was the name of the binary after you compiled it? A binary file is a program you run. You compiled it when you typed "make". Hmm, let's look in the Makefile. Type "vi Makefile". What do you mean it is blank? Oh, wait. Use capital M. Type ":r Makefile" with a capital M.
OK, now you are in vi, the most powerful editor ever. WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU PREFER EMACS!!!!
Meanwhile, in Mandrake-land (Score:3, Funny)
Phone rings.
Hi mom. You want to install a program? Ok, what's it called?
Great! Now open a terminal window. It's a command line interface and it's much more powerful than a gui. Got it open? Great. Now you have to become the superuser, so type 'su' and then put in the password.
You don't know your root password? Ask dad.
Ok, great, so now you're root. Now type "urpmi", a space, and the name of the program you wish to install.
It's asking for the CD that contains the program. Put that CD in and fo
Re:In Linux-land... (Score:3, Interesting)
Hello? Oh, hi mom. Yeah, I can help you install a program on your computer. What do you want to install? Oh, cool. Have you downloaded it? Good job. OK, open up a terminal...."
Very funny, and very true.
I learned my lesson the hard way. I GAVE someone an older machine fully configured and ready to go with Debian installed. I did this after they constantly complained to me how their two Windows systems were messed up. I suggested that they use Linux to at le
Re:In Linux-land... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hello? Oh, hi mom. Yeah, I can help you install a program on your computer. What do you want to install? Oh, cool. Have you downloaded it?
Okay, hang on for a moment.
$ ssh moms.computer.net
It'll be done in just a sec, Mom!
Re:Privilege level (Score:4, Insightful)
Typicall stupid techie answer.
Restricted users have write or modify permission on the critical business files and databases. Which are 8 thousands times more important to the business than your average winnt directory.
Get out of your mom basement.
Re:Privilege level (Score:5, Insightful)
Even a user without admin privileges can turn the box into a spam relay (or a DDoS agent), so reducing privileges is only a very partial solution.
Joe Sixpack won't use a PC with "Access Denied" (Score:3, Insightful)
The simple Control Panel even hides the management interface to make granular security possible.
The truth is, in order for NT to work in consumer homes, it had to behave just like DOS versions of Windows did.
Joe Sixpack may be computer illiterate, but his dollar is what ultimately fills Microsoft's coffers.
Re:Privilege level (Score:3, Informative)
This advice works well. And, I wish I could follow it universally on client machines. Unfortunately, any user that needs to syncronize their Palm Pilot with Outlook can't, unless they're an administrator. So every "executive" must have adminstrator privilages for their machine, even though they're also the least likely to understand the security implications of this.
Also, some virus scanners can't update their signature fil
Windows XP SP2 (Score:5, Informative)
Mitigation? (Score:3, Interesting)
Horrible (Score:5, Funny)
Jesus, even my ScanJet is vulnerable?
Re:Horrible (Score:3, Funny)
Prevent virii, sterilize you scanners before use.
Does that matter if we don't have IE's exe file? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Does that matter if we don't have IE's exe file (Score:5, Interesting)
How else could it be so small?
To really get rid of IE you need to remove the DLL files that it uses, and you will break many other programs in the process. Because they all closely link to eachother.
Today? (Score:5, Informative)
Jelmer's PoC is good: link [planet.nl]
(That page is the info page, you won't get hit by clicking on the link directly)
Re:Today? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd imagine lots of the IT bods that are stil working will have had major work scheduled for this weekend for weeks. Just as well there isn't a patch to be deployed!
start the stopwatch... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:start the stopwatch... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:start the stopwatch... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:start the stopwatch... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's too bad, really. I'm not at all impressed with what little MS has done with the format (it still strikes me as afterthought), but compiled HTML can be a blessing. Anyone with tens of thousands of HTML docs on their drive (a handful of O'Reilly books?), can appreciate the simplicity of a single file.
Afraid (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Afraid (Score:3, Funny)
If you stop using windows, the terrorists have already won!!
Workaround (Score:5, Informative)
From the CERT article:
Currently, there is no complete solution for this vulnerability. Until a patch is available, consider the workarounds listed below.
Disable ITS protocol handlers
Disabling ITS protocol handlers appears to prevent exploitation of this vulnerability. Delete or rename the following registry keys:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\PROTOCOLS\H
Disabling these protocol handlers will significantly reduce the functionality of the Windows Help system and may have other unintended consequences. Plan to undo these changes after patches have been tested and installed.
Follow good Internet security practices
These recommended security practices will help to reduce exposure to attacks and mitigate the impact of cross-domain vulnerabilities.
Disable Active scripting and ActiveX controls
NOTE: Disabling Active scripting and ActiveX controls will not prevent the exploitation of this vulnerability.
Disabling Active scripting and ActiveX controls in the Internet and Local Machine Zones may stop certain types of attacks and will prevent exploitation of different cross-domain vulnerabilities. Disable Active scripting and ActiveX controls in any zones used to read HTML email.
Disabling Active scripting and ActiveX controls in the Local Machine Zone will prevent malicious code that requires Active scripting and ActiveX controls from running. Changing these settings may reduce the functionality of scripts, applets, Windows components, or other applications. See Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 833633 for detailed information about security settings for the Local Machine Zone. Note that Service Pack 2 for Windows XP includes these changes.
Do not follow unsolicited links
Do not click on unsolicited URLs received in email, instant messages, web forums, or Internet relay chat (IRC) channels.
Maintain updated anti-virus software
Anti-virus software with updated virus definitions may identify and prevent some exploit attempts. Variations of exploits or attack vectors may not be detected. Do not rely solely on anti-virus software to defend against this vulnerability. More information about viruses and anti-virus vendors is available on the US-CERT Computer Virus Resources page.
Ha! You Linux zealot! (Score:5, Funny)
How would Joe Average, Jose Sixpack, Aunt Tillie, your Mom, my Mom, Granma, Grandpa, the children, would react if faced with such arcane, incomprehensible instructions.
In Windows everything is easy, In Windows everything is one click away.
You Linux zealots are the sux0r.
CERT Solution (Score:5, Informative)
This is point in fact... (Score:5, Insightful)
well (Score:5, Funny)
a pop up box announced "no topics found"
so what is everyone talking about? this doesn't seem to be a problem
mean trick (Score:4, Funny)
hey, where did my files go?
Administrators: quick fix (Score:5, Informative)
Save it as chm-disable.reg
Put a line like this in your logon script:
regedit
Use the same trick to restore the values when a patch is available (that means that you must save the HANDLER keys first).
Note: If you're still using batch files: KiXtart is your friend!
Re:Administrators: quick fix (Score:4, Informative)
Launch Regedit (Start, Run..., regedit)
In Regedit, to to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE > SOFTWARE > Classes > PROTOCOLS > Handler.
Click on Registry, Export Registry File...
Enter the file name (chm-restore.reg) and select Win9x/NT4 Registration Files (REGEDIT4) in the Type list (this is to save in ASCII, otherwise it's in Unicode).
I wonder... (Score:3, Funny)
sig(h)
WAIT!!! (Score:3, Funny)
ie rants (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides, I really despise the "AppletTransition Sensor" that ESPN and other sites use. Screw `em. Just give me the dang HTML and, please, IE, just render it for me. No code, no scripts, no popups, no crap.
Websites that require JavaScript piss me off. The stupid Washington Post can't even render a page without JavaScript. What a terd.
Now, if only I could get IE to stop displaying the "Your browser doesn't allow ActiveX controls" message that pops up on pages where the designer used some crap control. I've made ActiveX controls and I *know* they can do anything they want on my system. Arg.
And wtf is with "install desktop items"? This is a *web* *browser*, not the control panel, for crying out loud.
And, last but not least, when I disable all this crap and then hit apply, it gives me a confirm warning message, but when I (because I need to use JavaScript on some crappy page) restore the default "cheap-whore-mode" settings, it doesn't say a word! Nice emphasis, Microsoft.
Yeah, I know, use a different browser (or OS), but we all know Windows is *designed* to not interoperate well with those things, right? Sometimes, it wastes time to try to fight inertia.
Anyhow, my feeling is that the desktop situation on Linux and BSD won't be solved until X is ditched completely. Just give me the dang screen buffer(s) and some basic routines and I'll draw my own shtuff. X is a 25-year-old terd, designed for machines with, like, 4k of memory (warning: hyperbole). Just give me font, line, point, ellipse, bitblt and friggin window data structures -- straight to the video card. And access to the video card reg's would be nice too.
End of Rant, enjoy your day.
Peace & Blessings,
bmac
Re:ie rants (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds like the lynx browser (or links, w3m, etc) is right up your alley. Lots of other people who share your distaste for browser bloat do. Microsoft doesn't really care too much about those people who say "Ugh, Microsoft IE sucks! Oh, yeah, I still use it though". It's only until people say "IE sucks, that's why I use [whatever] instead" that they'll pay attention.
Funnel your enthusiasm into trying some different browsers that fit your needs. Donate some time or money, maybe, to an open source browser you do like.
At this point, though, a "IE is lame" post doesn't really contribute much to the discussion. Or have I been trolled?
Re:ie rants (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, *every* window manager / windowing toolkit gives that functionality, but X's underlying layer is network-based, so getting the Display and Screen handles is a level of abstraction better done away with, IMO.
Peace & Blessings,
bmac
But but but... (Score:5, Informative)
Again? This is the last straw. (Score:3, Funny)
"The more I use Windows, the more I love my Commodore 64"
Dear Microsoft.. (Score:5, Insightful)
As to browser/plug-in vulnerabilities, it may never be possible to eliminate them all, there are just too many niches for a virus to gain foothold.
MS Fanboys.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Thanks to MS decision to embed IE into everything in WIndows makes Windows a breeding ground fro vulnerabilities.
Quick tests on some Windows XP systems (Score:5, Informative)
---------
Windows XP Professional Service Pack 1
Mozilla Firebird 0.8 run as limited user: no apparent effect
Mozilla Firebird 0.8 run as administrator: no apparent effect
Internet Explorer 6 run as limited user causes an Internet Explorer Script Error:
Line 47, Char: 5, Error: Write to file failed, Code: 0
URL: ms-its:mhtml:file://C:\foo.mht!http://ip3e83566f.
Internet Explorer 6 run as administrator: demo exploit runs as expected
A software restriction policy is in place on this machine, forbidding the execution of any executable files (including
------------
Windows XP Professional Service Pack 2 RC 1
Internet Explorer 6 run as administrator: no apparent effect
Fixed in SP2?
---------------
One thing that concerns me about using this particular sample code as a test, is that it seems to rely on having write permission to \Program Files, thus requiring administrator privileges (usually) and thus making limited user accounts appear to be invuelnerable -- but are they? Can a version of this exploit be written that runs even if the user does not have write privileges to the program files and system directories? (Thus giving access to all of the limited user's files.) In such a case, would software restriction policies prevent the execution of the exploit exe even if not stopping the script itself?
Workaround...? (Score:5, Insightful)
Big threat? Not really (Score:5, Funny)
Spams are using this (Score:3, Insightful)
The other day my boss called me over to check out a suspicious looking email that had made it's way past SpamAssassin. It rendered blank, but looking at the raw message code revealed it was using just this kind of exploit (with a <FORM> to obfuscate what was really happening).
My boss' account has Restricted User privileges, with Eudora as the MUA and Mozilla as the browser, so no panic, but the fact that spammers are already using this is scary.
Mozilla not vulnerable (Score:5, Informative)
There are two kinds of protocol handlers in Windows: system-wide and IE-specific. Mozilla supports the system-wide protocols but not the IE-specific protocols. ms-its is an IE-specific protocol.
We should probably take a second look at the system-wide protocols, though. Currently we blacklist some and let the rest through.
Re:Mozilla not vulnerable (Score:3, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not a problem... (Score:5, Funny)
Tell me, do you also happen to use gimp?
Its not (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I know, I know.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Errors in server-side applications are rapidly fixed by serious system administrators and at the worst they provide attackers a way into unprotected systems. How many computers around the world are currently infected or zombied thanks to holes in any of the programs you cited? Almost zero.
Security holes in client-side applications (MSIE, Outlook, primarily) are a totally different story. These programs are mainly used by people who don't have the capacity to protect their systems. And the results are clear: millions of PCs infected by everything from viruses to worms and spywares, used as platforms to launch DDoS attacks, to send spam, to steal information...
There is a real security problem on the Internet, one that is making a joke of the "information highway", and it's almost entirely caused by vulnerabilities like the one reported here.
Until the market leader realizes that its users need serious protection from the malicious forces who roam the Internet, no amount of criticism is too much. And, if you really want to support and defend Microsoft, you should be adding your voice, because it is this issue - its failure to provide its users with a safe platform - which will be its downfall.
"Microsoft = insecure" is an association that should be sending shivers down the backs of those marketing managers trying to bomb the web with billions of Microsoft adverts.
Re:What browser to use? (Score:5, Informative)
In IE, it copied itself over wmplayer.exe, SFP copied the original back, but that was enough for me. Firefox 0.8, OTOH, didn't budge and nothing happened to wmplayer.exe. Same thing with Netscape 7.1 and Opera 7.23.
At least in this case, IE seems to be the only one.
Re:What browser to use? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Windows has problemss... (Score:4, Funny)
I was hoping linux would keep its marketshare above 1% anyway.
Re:Windows has problemss... (Score:3, Insightful)
How do you get [whatever] to work on Windows.
Step 1: Insert the cd and let autorun take over and do everything for you.
If that does not work or you run into problems during game play, follow this 20 step procedure (if one is even available) and hope you eventually get it to work, if you can not get it to work, too fucking bad.
As an owner of a few EA Games, I've been down that road many times.
Re:Windows has problems... (Score:5, Interesting)
Linux is *not* user friendly, and until it is linux will stay with >1% marketshare.
Take installation. Linux zealots are now saying "oh installing is so easy, just do apt-get install package or emerge package": Yes, because typing in "apt-get" or "emerge" makes so much more sense to new users than double-clicking an icon that says "setup".
I hate to break it to you, but anyone with the attitude you display is the problem, not a lack of user friendliness.
I have used linux since
I just did a fedora core 1 install. What a joke! Less questions, less knowledge required than a Windows install.
Even once you get it up and running it is smooth and easy to find what you want, vs. a standard kde install on another distro leaving you 40 choices for each type of functionality you'd like to use.
Here's the problem - any installation is somewhat of a barrier because most people do not install windows themselves - it comes on their computers. The steps being taken by Sun, Lindo(w)s, SuSe, Xandros, and others to get their distros defaulted on budget machines will get the familiarity and ease-of-use out there to the masses.
Linux zealots are far too forgiving when judging the difficultly of Linux configuration issues and far too harsh when judging the difficulty of Windows configuration issues. Example comments:
You're right. A friend is helping me bootstrap debian on a running machine I have nothing but net access to. Obviously a little tricky, but once you understand the basics, it's really reasonably easy. However, most Linux "power-users" would expect everyone to be able to do it.
Your examples with Quake show just why we need a common push for progress in this area, and the individual camps are making great strides, but there's needs to be a more unified effort to get better traction.
Re:Windows has problemss... (Score:3, Interesting)
If Linux can't run a particular game out of the box, it doesn't hurt anyone. If Windows has a massive security hole, it costs businesses millions of dollars, clogs up the Internet with traffic, creates opportunities for spammers to make spam zombies, and exposes sensitive private data.
I just don't see how you can compare those two types of problems.