RSSIs Microsoft Re-updating Auto Update, and Does It Need Updating Again?
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published October 15, 2007, 11:39 AM
Just when it seemed Microsoft had averted a PR debacle after an update to its Automatic Updates service in Windows installed itself into users' computers even when they thought it was turned off, now it appears something is turning back on many users' Automatic Updates.
Late Friday night, Microsoft Update Program Manager Nate Clinton denied having discovered anything in his company's software that could be causing the problem. "We have received some logs from customers, and have so far been able to determine that their AU settings were not changed by any changes to the AU client itself and also not changed by any updates installed by AU."
But last weekend, multiple members of the AeroXperience Forum reported having their update service turned back on. Some noted the update forced their systems to reboot, which in the case of servers can cause outages for the services they provide.
Clinton said his team is still looking into whether another Microsoft application could be making this change without users' consent.
While BetaNews' Windows systems have not experienced this behavior even after applying a full set of patches manually, over the last five days, four of our systems did experience difficulty with Automatic Updates failing to download those patches - a problem which we'd experienced before, and were easily able to rectify by re-registering the Windows Update services. Easy for us, that is, but probably not for the everyday Windows user.
While forum users did not report what software patches did get installed, although without permission, at least two Vista users reported systems that were set for Automatic Updates failing to install last weekend's series of patches. But the problem is not yet an epidemic, as many Vista users (not testing the private beta of SP1) reported no problems.
Still, in the wake of last month's suspicious activity in which Microsoft Update behaved as designed, though not as expected, more scrutiny is being devoted to how this service operates and whether it minds its administrator.
As one AeroXperience forum member wrote, "I really hope the WU team doesn't come back saying something along the lines of 'Oh it's a bug we are going to be addressing,' because that would be pretty lame."
also turn off
Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS)
Score: 0
That is why you turn off the WU service
and then turn it on as needed
or better use
http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/
Score: 0
http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/
Hasn't functioned properly for me once.
Not to mention that it seems an awfully extravagant measure to take considering the triviality of the issue.
Score: 0
A constant feeling of provisionality, you are only sure that you are not sure. Is it so impossible to create something stable to rely on? Why Linux gives you security being a poor manufacture and you get from MS instead only update after update after update after update.........being sure that in five years nothing will be valid any more?. We are not talking about cars: you buy a new car and you really enjoy it. But an OS is an instrument to use many programs of your own which become invalid, and that creates you a lot of problems. In many cases you don't find new drivers to replace the old ones. Buy, and buy, and buy, and buy...and suffer, and suffer, and suffer, and suffer. A good business for soft and hardware producers, abusing of our patience and of their prevalent position.
Score: 0
Why Linux gives you security being a poor manufacture and you get from MS instead only update after update after update after update.........being sure that in five years nothing will be valid any more?
You are assuming Linux gives you more security through being more secure rather than simply being an unattractive target. This is not proven.
But an OS is an instrument to use many programs of your own which become invalid, and that creates you a lot of problems. In many cases you don't find new drivers to replace the old ones. Buy, and buy, and buy, and buy...and suffer, and suffer, and suffer, and suffer. A good business for soft and hardware producers, abusing of our patience and of their prevalent position.
So we should all switch to Linux and not allow any updates to the OS which would require a hardware update or revisions to software?
It's called progress. Hardware manufacturer's make new products, spend less on supporting the old ones so they can support the new ones.
By your statements above one would have to assume you'd like to be stuck with the first revision of every piece of hardware that ever came out. 1X CD-ROM, 300-baud modem, 4-bit processing, the Ford Model A...etc.
Score: 0
"you'd like to be stuck with the first revision of every piece of hardware that ever came out"
Of course not. I love effective improvements, but IMHO there are too many updates. Nobody but them knows what they really are doing. A scottish proverb says "Good for the hound, bad for the hare".
Score: 0
It would be difficult to argue which is more secure, however I think it would be very difficult for any type of malware to bypass SELinux or AppArmor and execute.
This is just a personal view on one aspect of "security," but I find it somewhat reassuring with open source software...since the code is open to anyone. It's not necessary to have blind faith in whether or not the application has been written to call anywhere in a stealth mode, or perform any other unknown function.
I suppose I see software much like I view government or pretty much anything else in life. Transparency offers the best security. Not that technical, perhaps, but just a personal belief, be it software or anything else.
Score: 0
It would be difficult to argue which is more secure, however I think it would be very difficult for any type of malware to bypass SELinux or AppArmor and execute.
Third party program or a distribution aimed at being secure... Gee, that would be like using a 3rd party program in Windows or disabling *all* unnecessary services and port in Windows, eh?
Transparency offers the best security.
There are two perspectives on this; On one hand, you have the ability of any decent coder to take a look. On the other, you have code wide open to any would-be hackers. So with whom does the greatest motivation lie? The guy doing it for free in his spare time, or the guy setting up a money-making bot-net?
Score: 0
Well, at least this time you specified, "IMHO".
I don't mind that. Really.
You're welcome to it. I disagree. As stated above, there are conflicting motivations, and even when the code is closed, money, the biggest motivating factor, usually wins.
Score: 0
Maybe each one of us sees a part of the truth. You are right at saying that money usually wins. Four eyes see more than two, and this not a fight but a friendly talk. Your opinion is always welcome.
Score: 0
About anything I've installed has an encryption key associated with it, verifying the source. I'm happier with that than merely installing some application from a website where I know nothing about the origin, really.
Several government agencies around the world have been looking at alternatives to MS, since they realize there are no guarantees as to what lurks in closed source software, either.
As for AppArmor or SELinux, one or the other are generally included with Linux distros. At least you aren't having to buy a third party application to protect an operating system you already purchased. I see that as a plus.
About all I can say from experience with both is that Linux is a lot cheaper than buying five copies of an MS operating system, just for my house...along with umpteen expensive applications to go with each. Somehow, without those, one is stuck with being unable to do much. Likewise, the only reinstall I do is when a new version is released...and I don't worry about anything calling home or unexpectedly rebooting my system. As such, whichever is best, I'm real happy with what I have and the stability of it.
Score: 0
Dude...
As for AppArmor or SELinux, one or the other are generally included with Linux distros
SELinux *is* a linux distro.
Using Linux is fine. But claiming it's best for everyone, or even implying it is as uninformed as calling SELinux a bundled application...
Score: 0
"But the problem is not yet an epidemic, as many Vista users (not testing the private beta of SP1) reported no problems."
I think you mean SP3?
Score: 0
SP3 is for XP and SP1 is for Vista.
Score: 0
no, actually SP1 is correct.
SP3 is for Windows XP whereas SP1 is for Vista, which the statement was about.
Score: 0
They forced my computer to restart the last time, during the night. I woke up to find all the stuff I had been working on and my download that had been going lost.
Score: 0
"all the stuff I had been working on and my download that had been going lost".
IMO in the name of the constitutional right to privacy nobody should be allowed to browse your hard drive without your allowance, not even soft/hardware providers. You never signed a contract allowing them to do that, I suppose.
Score: 0
xp windows op systems still call home even when you turn off auto update, I do not doubt that micro$oft would make changes without users consent.what i belive it to boil down to is Micro$soft wants to be paid for every computer with a windows OP system installed on it. thats seem to me to be fair .... IF they would charge a fair price without all this sneaky B.S that comes out with the latest OP System ...........
Score: 0
IF they would charge a fair price without all this sneaky B.S that comes out with the latest OP System
...such as?
//This should be amusing...
Score: 0
no thanks .... im not trolling
nuff said on my part.
Score: 0
So making accusations and not being willing to actually provide anything with which to back those up is not trolling?
My understanding of the concept of trolling must be out of date...
Score: 0
You're losing it, man.
What, no motivation?
You used to be able to parody the entire comment, now you're not even trying.
/The puppy can't keep up anymore.
//Of course, they've already put him down, what, twice now?
///I know cats have 9 lives, what's the limit for trolls?
Score: 0
Anytime in the past people make the same accusations, and then provide examples you quickly dismiss them and claim they are not relevant... The point is they are relevant to us. Not you. If you do not care that MS can and does do things without your permission on your machine to secure their strangle hold on the OS monopoly, then more power to you.. Not everyone or every company will like the idea of wasting money on an OS that will not even run up to the same speed as the previous one on the same equipment. Hardly qualifying it as an upgrade in such cases.
Others are not happy with DRM issues that SHOULD not and does not have to be there at all, except they are, simply so MS and the MPAA can control what you do and what you can program for your equipment to do. These limits are not wanted by consumers, and if we dare remove them so we can do what we want with our equipment we get a crippled OS for no other reason that big bothers says NO NO NO you can't do that...
Now on to Big brother. Its been proven that MS does things without your knowledge without regard to your security or policy settings. Auto Update silent updates is but one example.
And what makes all this possible? consistent process checks and calling home. At one point it was as often as 24 times a day; once an hour. Now its down to about twice a day. But its still there. Again if such call homes are blocked in some way Vista conveniently slows to a crawl and eventually cripples itself because it can no longer call home to verify files and processes anymore.
Finally the cost. Vista is simply a rip off. It should NEVER have been offered as an upgrade as in the majority of cases no existing piece of equipment that didnt come with it already installed is not cut out for it anyway. And seeing as the HIGH cost of the OS, the highest it has ever being before, it hardly adds anything of quality Over that of Windows XP pro.
Indeed in many cases, "UPGRADING" to vista from XP will result in a lesser OS in capabilities. Something MS will NEVER admit too, but it is no less then fact. Especially in regards to Networking and Administrative tools, snapins, libraries, consoles, and features.
And again if you use tools to make such features work with 3rd party options Vista argues with the administrator that this is an illegal operation as this is not an intended function for that OS SKU. Basically get Home premium for MCE or Business for workstation functions, or Ultimate for both; which is Unreasonably High in cost IMO.
Drivers. OMG Drivers... For whatever reason this is a big one. Vista just does not have enough certified drivers that work in Vista for existing equipment that is perfect on XP, and really has no reason to be thrown away just cause they do not work as designed in Vista.
Finally the Activation WGA thing... Ok we all know this is going to happen and If Someone legally owns it its no problem ONCE. but doing it all the time is just unacceptable. Its simiply NONE of MS business how I use my equipment or What I do with the OS after the initial Legality check. If I proved to them I am legitimate once, beyond that, its none of MS business. If I opt to reprogram something to my desires and effectively turn something off that MS insists be on, it should be of no consequence... Does my writing a program to do something make my purchase of their software any more illegal then it was when I bought it for $500? no. But according to MS now I am a pirate because suddenly I fail the WGA criteria... Thats WRONG! Its wrong for consumers, its wrong for businesses, its wrong for developers. It BAD BUSINESS to call your consumers criminals. And THAT is what MS consumers are revolting from with the company.
Others like you PC_Tool believes in a socialist type society in which they trust companies or governments like MS to do what's in their best interest. But in my opinion such companies when given such power over the people will always and forever do what is best for the company not the people. Thats why I do not trust MS.
If you want to see a long video that in many ways echos my sentiments towards Vista and XP see this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HELrxLdP85c
Can I just say I miss TechTV. ;)
Score: 0
MS can and does do things without your permission on your machine to secure their strangle hold on the OS monopoly
Example?
Others are not happy with DRM issues that SHOULD not and does not have to be there at all,
What DRM issues? Support for playback of protected HD? Please let us all know how this is an issue. I'm really getting sick of this particular troll. It affects *nothing* other than allowing you to play back HD-DVD and BluRay content without downloading third party content.
so MS and the MPAA can control what you do and what you can program for your equipment to do.
Tinfoil hats getting tighter...
These limits are not wanted by consumers,
...and here comes the pure BS. What limits?? If anything, the ability to play protected HD content is an additional feature, not a limitation.
Its been proven that MS does things without your knowledge without regard to your security or policy settings. Auto Update silent updates is but one example.
...that's been documented for years on technet. Hardly a secret.
Again if such call homes are blocked in some way Vista conveniently slows to a crawl and eventually cripples itself because it can no longer call home to verify files and processes anymore.
Where'd you hear that little gem of BS?
Finally the cost. Vista is simply a rip off
Selling at the same price for the home version as XP sells is hardly what I'd call a rip-off.
It should NEVER have been offered as an upgrade as in the majority of cases no existing piece of equipment that didnt come with it already installed is not cut out for it anyway
...again, we actually agree on this one. The upgrade SKU should never have been offered.
Vista just does not have enough certified drivers that work in Vista for existing equipment that is perfect on XP, and really has no reason to be thrown away just cause they do not work as designed in Vista.
Just as Linux is not to blame for it's lack of drivers, neither is Vista. As for them not operating as designed, apparently you program. They do exactly what they were programmed to do. Whether it was the intent, or simply bad programming is another issue all together.
Finally the Activation WGA thing... Ok we all know this is going to happen and If Someone legally owns it its no problem ONCE. but doing it all the time is just unacceptable. Its simiply NONE of MS business how I use my equipment or What I do with the OS after the initial Legality check./i]
Second finally...third time's a charm? WGA checks gone bad affect probably .01% of users, and takes only a 2 minute phone call to fix. I've done it *once* with Vista Ultimate OEM after ****ing up the first install.
[i]Others like you PC_Tool believes in a socialist type society in which they trust companies or governments like MS to do what's in their best interest.
Did you just call me a socialist???
ROFLMAO...
Wow. Have you read *any* of my posts? Capitalist, sure. But I am probably one of the biggest Anti-Big Government people on this site.
But in my opinion such companies when given such power over the people will always and forever do what is best for the company not the people.
Idealistic gibberish. No offense, but businesses have always been and always will be in business to make money first. This generally happens best if they give the customer what they want (Supply the demand), and in Microsoft's case, they have succeeded in *creating* the demand. The ultimate wet-dream of any business.
Can I just say I miss TechTV. ;)
You bet. One more thing we agree on. :)
Look, I understand you don't want to use Vista, that's fine. No problem. No-ones trying to force you to (believe it or not). The only issue I really have with you is stating opinion and misinformation as fact (Re: DRM, secret updates) and your constant whine about not being able to hack a closed OS (duh?).
Regardless, as for the original question of "Sneaky BS", you addressed that using the Automatic update updates. Again, documented for years on Technet. No personal information changes hands, the only changes made are to the update system itself, which, if you've disabled, will have no effect on you or your system whatsoever. Could they have handled it better? Sure. Is it really as big an issue as everyone seems to make it out to be (using words like "Big Brother" to imply some personal information gathering and spying)? Um...no.
Score: 0
PC_TOOL-
You just want to win the argument at any cost.
Score: 0
Avion, you don;t even bother arguing. You post your opinions as fact and are unwilling to even attempt to back them up.
Care to show me where I was wrong?
You act as though winning arguments based on logic against folks who argue based solely on emotion and rhetoric is a hard thing. I'd feel sorry for anyone who *couldn't* win those arguments.
Score: 0
see what i mean........
Score: 0
No, we basically just see you trolling because as usual, you've got nothing.
If you can't back up a claim on your part, don't post it. Simple concept, really.
Score: 0
you just want the last word .......
Score: 0
No, I just want the last word to be semi-intelligent.
You, on the other hand, haven't added anything to the thread other than lame accusations and farcical claims of the tinfoil hat variety.
So here it is (though I'm sure you'll have something even more useless to add):
semi-intelligent
Score: 0
cant quit can ya.................
you have to win its ok tho..... i understand ;=0
Score: 0
the reason I do not want to elabrate on the subject of my first post is that i did not want to get into a match of who can win the argument. You pritty much know what I was refering to , I did not need to elabrate more on the subject because you would do your hardest to prove me wrong . I know what your stand is on windows op systems. I was just tryng not to beat a dead horse thats all..... I can agree to dissagree.
Simple I did not want this to become a pissing match on a moot point. over wga ,drm, ect.....
I dont know what trolling is, but i do think you do flame alot and atack on a level that most people (including my self ) can not respond to
So no hard feelings .....
Score: 0
Arguments != pissing matches.
If you didn't want to set off an argument, it would have been quite simple to post the statement without making unfounded accusations.
As simple as changing:
IF they would charge a fair price without all this sneaky B.S that comes out with the latest OP System ...........
To:
I'd be happier with them if they lowered the prices and didn't Update the updater without asking each time.
Saying the price is unfair implies you know the market better than they do, which I doubt, and calling it sneaky when it's been on technet for years is a stretch.
That simple. One engenders debate, the other comes across as a simple statement of opinion, not intended to turn up the flames, so to speak.
Score: 0
thats fair enough.......
I did not do well in english class.....
but I do like to post me views
thanks
:=)
Score: 0
I had a server do the automatic restart ... normally it would ask you, but this just went ahead and restarted... pretty rude
Score: 0
www.ubuntu.com
Forget about it!
Score: 0
That's what I did. Can't wait for 7.10 to come out in a couple of days.... I no longer dread turning on my computer. Its not perfect, but Ubuntu is still far better than Vista.....
Score: 0
Have to agree. Ubuntu is really a good OS, and it is _free_! The most amazing part is how easy the install was, i would say even easier than XP, not that XP is hard to install.
I only boot into Windows to play games.
MP3 support, check
Photo Editing, check (even picasa runs on linux)
Web Browser, check
Office Suite, check
Just need developers to stop writing in the closed, proprietary, M$ DirectX and use Open GL so ports of games to linux would be trivial.
Score: 0
Fact: Ubuntu has better hardware support OOB than XP.
Score: 0
I updated to Vista SP1 and it took forever to restart then when it did it said it was configuring updates for about 15 min.. then it restarted, not even going to the logon screen. When it restarted again my boot loader was corrupted. i entered the vista disk and it couldn't find any problems, all restore points were deleted and my Complete PC restore was disabled. BTW this is a legit copy of Vista Ultimate.
Score: 0
Might be a legit copy of vista, but only a BETA of sp1, if you even legally obtained that sp1
Score: 0
Ironically I had the same problem with Ubunto. One update, restart and boot loader was corrupted. Thankfully a friend had some sort of linux recovery disk that fixed everything up.
Point being that those sorts of problems are terribly unlucky and unfortunate and in no way linked to any specific OS. However testing a system critical service pack that’s a BETA like this, you acknowledge that problems may occur. Just remember to report it ?.
Score: 0
Loaded Ubuntu from CD and it wouldn't recognise my NTFS discs.
Doh .......................... ..... ... . . . .
Score: 0
Wow.
Now they're posting trolls about products that don't even exist yet.
Score: 0