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."
Oh just call it (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, just call it a package manager and get over it. Your fancy words don't make it better.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Aww but then those guys in marketing would be all bored with nothing to do...
Re:Oh just call it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
It should be Microsoft Twilight because now it Sparkles. [andymatuschak.org]
Re:Oh just call it (Score:4, Funny)
FUN FACT:
Quickly pronouncing ASUTTRRUGPHM SE PM three times in a row is the last trial of Microsoft Professional certification, and the one that counts for 90% of the total score.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If you turn off the lights in the bathroom at night and say that into a mirror three times backwards, Steve Jobs appears behind you and pulls a black turtleneck over your head.
A turtleneck... that you can NEVER REMOVE!
*thunderclap*
Re: (Score:2)
One (or two) of those words is not like the other words.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Oh just call it (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You really can't call it a package manager because it doesn't do dependency and it doesn't do upgrades. It just does patches - which is why it is not called a package manager.
Actually, WSUS does do dependences, even if it does them badly. I do agree that calling it a package manager is an overstatement though.
Re:Oh just call it (Score:4, Funny)
But see, a "package manager" is the result of careful research and experience by a bunch of long-haired university-bound communist hippies, so it could never have any usefulness in the real world. Plus it's not a register-able trademark, so customers might realize that there are other better package managers out there. And once they get hooked on apt-get, they'll turn immediately into a clone of RMS and start helping the FSF.
Re:Oh just call it (Score:4, Funny)
That happened to my sister. Apparently she's getting way more dates now. Even with the open-source beard.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus it's not a register-able trademark
You must excel at your access to exchange in an office with windows. Word.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Except you cannot install or remove programs from this. So its not a package manager.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
These features have existed for years, the news is that Secunia is participating in the program and may package patches for third party programs that have not opted in to participate with Microsoft's solution.
I can deploy, for example, Dell patches and drivers specific to Dell machines using System Center / WSUS. I think the only news here is that now I can keep Java or Adobe Reader or whatever up to date too.
Re: (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, b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All in all, it's not bad. On the other hand, it means every application pops up with its own update notifications. If I haven't used a system for a while or I reinstall from an image, I ge
Re: (Score:2)
MacUpdate Desktop [macupdate.com] sounds like what you're looking for.
It would be nice if it was free, but $20 annually for up to five computers shouldn't break the bank.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. That seems like it's not bad. Still, it's not free, it requires you to have an account.
Also it gets some things wrong. For example, it tells me there are updates to my Adobe applications because I'm running CS3 and CS4 is available. It'd be nice if there were a common infrastructure where Adobe you support their own application and decide what updates were sensible instead of relying on someone else to guess.
I'd maintain it's still something that should be done by the OS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"you can upgrade every application on your computer with a single line in the command line."
Even better:
aptitude safe-upgrade
Because, sometimes, upgrading EVERYTHING breaks obscure dependencies. ;^)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Misreading (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, a new attack vector (Score:1, Insightful)
Now we just have to break into one of the machines allowed to submit updates to be pushed, and we can rule the world!
Misleading article (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What WSUS are you using? And what the hell are you replacing it with for patch management across a few hundred windows PCs? It takes me only a matter of a half hour a week to handle and check up on patches and updates.
WSUS is a free application for deploying and controlling patches that would normally be handled via automatic updates. Automatic updates still downloads and installs but it pulls from WSUS instead of directly from MS. You can deny patches when there are issues or conflicts and you can see w
Really? (Score:2, Insightful)
Or just go to Linux, where most distributions have had something like this for over a decade now. The worst part is, I'm sure I will star hearing from Windows people how fantastic the new "innovation" is...
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it is a great step forward. And making a system like this work for software that isn't freely redistributable is quite a bit trickier than for open source software. I hope more vendors get with the programme. Even though I don't maintain any Windows systems, I still welcome any development that makes their maintenance less of a burden.
Re: (Score:2)
``Why is it more difficult for proprietary systems?
* MSI based installer
+ if installing from DC based on group policy, don't do anything, or
+ else, allow to install SSL cert + XML service URL for querying of updates. Update check interval is specified and is set 1-14 days.''
I don't know what all that means, but the problems with automatic updates for proprietary software aren't technical, but legal.
The same
Re: (Score:1)
Of course they will! It was their idea!(copyright 2009 Microsoft Corp.)
Re: (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 Microso
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is news if it is new in context, however uninteresting. In this case, something was added to Windows that was not there - that's news. Windows is here and unfortunately some of us have to maintain it. The package management (or whatever it is) is new to windows and will hopefully be good news to the admins here!
I'm inclined to think that computers = headaches in general anyway, whatever the system.
Small Piece of a 1,000 piece puzzle. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not like this is a new concept, get with the times; it is for the security of your OS for christ sakes. Maybe cut down on why OSX or whichever OTHER OS anyone can name has such a virus advantage on you, if even slightly.
Oh and Yes I understand what Secunia entails, but it's still small.
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.
Re:Wait, what's going on? (Score:4, Informative)
WSUS is what server admins use to push patches to machines connected to a particular server.
Most machines that are part of a domain or network that utilizes WSUS has Windows Update disabled. The server admin goes through the patches and selects the ones he/she wants to push out to each of the computers.
It's quick and simple...but has nothing to do with the end user.
Re: (Score:2)
WSUS is what server admins use to push patches to machines connected to a particular server.
Most machines that are part of a domain or network that utilizes WSUS has Windows Update disabled.
Ah, okay. I get it. I knew at work we were pointed to an internal update server so that we'd only get patches after they were approved as stable, but I never knew the name of the tool, or the process behind it. thank you muchly!
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.
CNet TechTracker (Score:3, Informative)
reply to self - go figure.. I tried to dig up some more information on the old service.. and somewhere buried among the google hits:
http://www.cnet.com/techtracker/ [cnet.com]
Which sounds like it does what the old app did... except you now need a CNet account to see the results? *sigh*
Some posts in the forum for it ( http://forums.cnet.com/techtracker-forum/ [cnet.com] ) seem to indicate some possible issues as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember a program about the same time as CatchUp called OilChange that worked in a similar fashion - scanned the registry and hard drive for known files from common applications, determined the current version, and allowed you to at least tell what of your software was out of date. A few programs could be updated from right in the tool, most just sent you to the vendor's home page so you could download the updates.
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.
I think my favorites used to be the ones that checked when the app started up. Adobe Acro
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Cool - thanks for pointing that one out as well, I'll have to give it a run and see what it (and that TechTracker thing) come up with on the other machine. I know all the software I use regularly on it is up-to-date, but it's seen so many crap installs that it'll be fun to see what they find :)
Re: (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: (Score:2)
Assuming you were (a) smart enough to be running your Windows user as non-admin, and (b) inattentive enough to be unaware that you needed those rights you set yourself up not to have in order to install software. :)
mintUpdate just ROCKS.
orly? (Score:1)
What could possibly go wrong!
Comprehensiveness? (Score:1)
The end for Internet Explorer (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Just as soon as Firefox comes with support for configuration & control via GPO (Frankly, even if I have to write the templates myself, just *something* would be nice).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Mystified how this ends up modded troll.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Because when someone says they "don't do windows" it says a lot about that person.
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.
Re: (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
Re: (Score:2)
Recently there was a time (about a year) when I could do that too. Only Linux then and it was wonderful!
Now times change, new place and stuff, Windows shop. So I give it a chance again. Here was the timeline how I did:
Day 1: Well, can't be so bad. Worst that can happen is, that I get to know my foe better.
Day 2: Install gVim for windows. Getting more familiar with the environment. Something is still not quite right..
Day 3: Not very productive so far, but new place and all.. Anyway, let's get something done.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Broadly speaking they're very similar. With Windows Update it's normally limited to stuff which MS publish, in much the same way as (say) apt-get on Ubuntu is limited to things in the Ubuntu repos by default. Obviously that's a lot more software there as it's freely distributable, but you still get packages sometimes which aren't included in the distro's repos and you have to add another source to your packages list (or even worse, download a tarball and maintain it manually). This change is to allow third
Re: (Score:2)
This change is to allow third party code to come down through Windows Update, in essence adding more package sources.
So in essence, they did what I can do with vi /etc/apt/sources.list? Or they replaced a hardcoded "deb http://http.microsoft.com/windows/ [microsoft.com] valuable_vista main contrib non-free" with the same information but now in C:\windows\etc\apt\sources.list, and now I (and my programs) can edit it?
It's not new or unique
True, that :)
Re: (Score:2)
No, because to start a flamewar here you'd have to say "I don't do Apple because it is teh gay" or "I don't do Linux because I'm not a hippy communist."
Misleading summary? (Score:3, Insightful)
Does anyone have any link that would confirm that Microsoft actually did anything besides allowing a third party to use an API? The summary tries to make it sound like Microsoft uses (integrates) some Secunia stuff now.
The article certainly does read like a Secunia ad.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft didn't do anything. This is a Secunia product, using a documented MS API.
It's still quite an exciting product for those of us who do have lots of Windows PCs to patch, except that (in my case) we probably won't be able to afford it.
OSS Alternative (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Good stuff, will be taking a look at this.
Re: (Score:2)
That looks like it's great -if- and only if you only have your own intranet to worry about?
I.e. a system administrator for a local network suggesting that users should install Update X for Application Y, and having that served up to -those- machines through windows updates.
It doesn't do anything for a software publisher wanting their clients to know about updates. For that, you'd still need your own update checker?
Maybe I'm mis-reading that mechanism, though.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Anyone with more info? (Score:2)
Reading the Secunia website, it seems like this is just a new feature in their 4.0 product, which has been in beta up until today. If the way I read things is correct, it's not like WSUS will be shipping with CSI technology built in; rather, if you purchase CSI 4.0, you'll have the ability to (hopefully, presumably) roll up 3rd party patches so that WSUS will recognize them, and spit them out to clients.
Which is great, not "Wow I just pissed my pants" great like I originally thought, but still. Can anyone c
Re: (Score:1)
Agreed. The press release [secunia.com] states that Secuina "...announced that their renowned authenticated internal vulnerability scanner ... has been integrated with ... WSUS..."
Is this third party patch management or just a vulnerability scanner built in to WSUS?
Scanning is neat, but it would be one hell of a lot nicer if I could make sure Flash & Java are updated as easily as the latest Windows updates.
Re: (Score:2)
I was part of the beta test. CSI 3.0 is a vulnerability scanner similar to their PSI software for home users. The difference being it remotely scans hosts over the network. It compares applications it finds on the pcs to a database, and lets you know if anyone of them have security updates available, existing unpatched security flaws, or are end of lifed/discontinued. The results include links to download the appropriate patches when available. The 4.0 version adds integration with WSUS A little used
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the info. Price would be the big thing for us; this definitely falls under the "yeah it's nice but why don't we just use Altiris" as you imply. And yet we just heard the other day that Adobe has overtaken Windows/IE/whatever it was as the most vulnerable app. If they're reasonable on price you could perhaps justify it to the boss, but $30 a station seems a bit steep.
yes (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a good thing, if done properly.
It's also part of why people generally smile when they use their phones and frown when they use their computers.
*Yawn* (Score:1)
This is nothing new. MS has a tool called System Center Custom Update Pubpluser (or SCUP). Dell, Citrix, and Adobe Flash all have had catalogs to publish into WSUS/SCCM since 2007. Shavik put out a custom catalog last week.
Microsoft doesn't even do this internally! (Score:2, Interesting)
Seems like a misleading headline... (Score:1)
Re:About time! (Score:4, Insightful)
The Wikpedia says that dpkg came out in 1993.
So Microsoft is only catching up after 17 years.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
[Since the trollerators usually don’t care to read the whole comment before making false assumptions, I will point out, that I use Linux as my main system, love it, but as an expert on the area of UI design, am competent to state the facts how they are. If you don’t like it, don’t kill the messenger.]
Just wait. In 5-10 years, KDE and Gnome might create their own clone of it as a frontend for your package manager. It will look very similar, and act very similar too. Down to every little ext
Re: (Score:2)
This is late, but:
OK. It had some annoyances, but all in all it was usable. But now there is the abomination called Dolphin.
Dolphin, out of the box, is ugly. I guess so that it shows you nearly all of its features and panels. You fold these up and put them away and leave yourself with a nice clean interface. Then you drag out the features you need when you need them. Dolphin *really* can get out of your way if you tell it to.
Only people who have never used Dolphin say "omgwtfbbq" when presented with the
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:About time! (Score:4, Insightful)
200 distros? Really? Confining ourselves to Linux - I think there are a half dozen root distros, with dozens of derivatives from each.
There are three main package managers, one of which will work with almost any distro you choose.
I know - half the people in the world can't decide what color socks to wear today, so they only buy black socks, or white socks. Some of the rest of us buy both black and white, and mix and match according to mood. Some daring individuals actually buy COLORFUL socks, and manage to keep up with the pairs.
The point is, not everyone is retarded.
Re: (Score:2)
There are three main package managers, one of which will work with almost any distro you choose.
I know - half the people in the world can't decide what color socks to wear today, so they only buy black socks, or white socks. Some of the rest of us buy both black and white, and mix and match according to mood. Some daring individuals actually buy COLORFUL socks, and manage to keep up with the pairs.
The point is, not everyone is retarded.
Will every package manager have every app - and will every app be insta
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Every app is available for download. If the user is savvy enough to understand the differences between versions, then he will be savvy enough to use Google to ask for help installing that particular version.
Attractive and fully functional GUI? Yeah, I guess so. Depending on what you mean by "attractive", and "fully functional". If, by "attractive" you mean, "it looks and works like Microsoft", then you're out of luck. If by "attractive" you mean "it has working buttons to open and close, with a title b
Re: (Score:2)
That's "Mr. Asshole" to you, son. I haven't spent the past half century becoming the perfect asshole, just to be disrespected by some snot nosed kid who hasn't learned to wash behind his ears. "Mr. Asshole", and get the hell off my lawn!
Re: (Score:2)
There is very little that is not packaged for Debian and derivatives. The other major distros have everything that is commonly used packaged, and a lot of the more minor stuff. There are occasionally things missing but they are usually minor,
Re: (Score:2)
Linux doesn't have to worry about licensing problems with distributing 3rd party application patches and users coming to them for support if said patches cause issues with their machines. Not to mention the ludicrous number of different installation and patching mechanisms used by each vendor. Oh, and all those retarded apps that force you to manually uninstall the existing version before you can "upgrade" to the latest one.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
It's not about copying, it's about sandbagging.
Microsoft as a monopoly gets to drag it's feet for years and years while it's end users suffer.
Some of us are still holding a grudge over that 10 year wait for 32bit and proper GUIs.
They dragged their feet on proper multi-tasking too but then again so did just about everyone else...
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and we whine even louder when they do it WRONG!!!
Administering an operating system without a package manager in this day and age is just fucking WRONG!!
Admit that, then we can move on to arguing the merits of the various package managers available to real operating systems.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
In case you haven't heard, the entire history of computer technology has been copying and adding to someone else's idea.
Yeah, but most companies do it in a timely manner, not decades after the fact. This is akin to a cell phone company 20 years from now releasing their first touchscreen phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but most companies do it in a timely manner, not decades after the fact. This is akin to a cell phone company 20 years from now releasing their first touchscreen phone.
You mean kinda like how the iPhone was released 15 years after the first touch screen mobile phone? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You showed him!