Text 4934, 85 rader
Skriven 2010-02-12 19:59:57 av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
   Kommentar till text 4927 av TIM RICHARDSON (1:123/140)
Ärende: XP Update Problem
=========================
Hello TIM!

12 Feb 10 10:44, you wrote to me:

 RC>> If they are patching a vulnerability and you refuse to apply it,
 RC>> you only have yourself to blame.

 TR> Just how many `vulnerabilities can occur from day to day? With decent
 TR> firewall protection, and running a scan every now and then, a computer
 TR> should work just fine for many years.

Not if the vulnerability exists in a program that has firewall access.

Security Software does not grant you the right of invincibility, please liken
it to a dead bolt lock, you still have to latch it and be careful who/what you
let in.

Its not so much bad engineering on Microsofts fault, albeit I do grant that
could be debated, but there are far more people than M$ has programmers out
there poking and prodding at their products, creative bastards they are.

 TR> A computer thats going `on' the InterNet by itself, every time you
 TR> power it up, and seeking `updates' without you telling it to, and
 TR> installing them without your knowledge until it pops a message box up
 TR> saying; `New updates installed, re-writing Registry'......is a
 TR> computer that isn't being controlled by the user.

The update process can be attenuated, I have my boxes setup to download them
and tell me they are there, then I choose when to install them.

I have several non-microsoft utilities that update themselves, be that process
automatic or an annoying pop up.

Your mentioning of the registry is a misnomer, practically everything you do
writes something to the registry.

The update that is said to have caused the blue screens was patching a
vulnerability that was being used to install a rootkit. I read tonight that in
all probability the systems affected were already infected.

Since rootkits are designed to hide themselves, its quite likely it could have
escaped detection from security software, especially if the exploit entered the
system via a trusted program with permissions granted by installed security
software.

Lastly, if one uses a imaging program like True Image, they can easily undo
foobars.

 TR> Someone who lets their computer go on the Net and `seek
 TR> updates'....then `automatically install' those updates without knowing
 TR> the computer had even done so without their knowledge and consent,
 TR> until the computer `tells' them that updates were found, have been
 TR> installed, and their registry has been re- written, isn't a very smart
 TR> user.

Your understanding of the registry is flawed, its a repository of system
setting and other info pertinent to the system, pinning a icon to your start
menu, hiding the taskbar, toggling a toolbar writes data to the registry.
Installing Mozilla Firefox, guess what, you wrote something to the registry..
Your registry isnt getting _rewritten_, its getting written to, or in simpler
terms, updated.

 TR> I like to know what the computer is doing, what the updates `are',
 TR> `why they are needed, and what they are going to do to my machine, not
 TR> to mention what effect re-writing my registry will be to my computer's
 TR> overall performance.

Enough with the re-writing... Yes, you can set WU to notify you, then you can
manually look..

 TR> Just plain common sense, it seems to me. But then.....computer
 TR> `experts' may see it differently.

I have seen enough systems trashed using laymans common sense.

My computing knowledge isnt labelled on a piece of paper Tim, I learned by
doing.

==
Ross
Fidonet Feeds Or Fidonet In Your Newsreader: http://www.easternstar.info
E-mail: ross(at)cassell(dot)us | Other Places: http://links.cassell.us
... Real Critical Thinkers Never See the Inside Of A Jail Cell!
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20060121
 * Origin: The Eastern Star - Spartanburg, SC USA (1:123/456)