RSSMicrosoft to Patch Six Security Flaws
By Ed Oswald | Published August 4, 2005, 5:48 PM
Microsoft on Thursday gave advance notice of the patches it intends to release as part of its monthly security bulletin. Six patches will be issued for August, with at least one of them deemed "critical" - the highest rating given by Microsoft. Information was not available for what the patches would address, but a serious flaw in Windows 2000 that could open systems up for attack may be fixed.
Also to be released next Tuesday is an updated version of the Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool, as well as one high-priority update that is not security related. Each month Microsoft provides advance notice of security updates that are released on the second Tuesday. Three "critical" security patches were issued in July, two for Windows and one for Office.
windows xp sp3
http://www.windows-xp-sp3.host.sk
Score: 0
|Poor old bill lad allways under attack > Everones attacking the poor lad and his band of merry men > I must say I used win9x for ages > and now xp pro > Its a top draw bit of software > stable > and the add new hardware wiz is great > The monthly patch cycle just under lines the time and effort these guys put in keeping the hacking clowns out ! > Just bear in mind how many people use microsoft stuff > under some many diffrent configs > see ya
Score: 0
|Pretty much the exact same conversation every month eh? :P
Glad for the patches though :)
Score: 0
|That's bounty1990 for you, always bit(hing.
Score: 0
|Although I wish Microsoft didn't HAVE to issue new code that prevents the "bad guys" from taking over my computer... I am thankful that they do... Some companies don't fix squat and you take what you get until the next version.
And for all the people that criticize Microsoft for needing to patch code, I'll just be the first to remind everyone that every major Linux distribution issues updates on a regular basis too.
It sucks, I know... but it's a necessary evil, because there are people out there who just aren't... nice.
Score: 0
|The major qualm I have with Windows rather than Linux is that everything is done behind the scenes, not as trustworthy.
Though, if One thinks about it in a non-paranoid way, yes, it's much better than it used to be. Unfortunately I've noticed the registry isn't as simple as it used to be ...
Another qualm I have is that, although they've ripped off Black Hat & had the first Blue Hat meeting (commendable, I loved the report I read, can't remember which one), is that they shouldn't need the prompt to fix security issues, they should just do it. They have the turnover & the profit margins, lose the PR & make it public.
The problem is, they've got a bad reputation, & with good reason. I think it's important that all eyes are kept on them, so to speak - that isn't to say that this news is bad, if anything it's the opposite.
Score: 0
|Good point made. No matter how secure of a system is developed, there are going to be people with no more of a life than to spend the time trying to penetrate the security. This philosophy applies not only to software, but to any means of security, whether a padlock, an alarm system or whatever. As users, we can only watch and select products based upon how quickly flaws are found and patched. That is a measure of how customer oriented the company may be.
Score: 0
|I wish there was more diversity in the computer user space, so virii do not spread so rath.
Score: 0
|Yeah, usually within a day or two, not several months later as if often the case with Microsoft.
Score: 0
|I'm staying with Linux, as well. I agree about having more trust in work done in the open.
Score: 0
|Which is, of course, why we all run Windows. Let's see someone try to patch stuff faster than a couple of months after the discovery of a new vulnerability... ;-)
Score: 0
|Thats MS for u always patching.
Score: 0
|Would you rather them just leave all the security venerabilities? Atlest there doing something to improve there software.
Score: 0
|I Just Wish Microsoft Would Wait On Releasing New OS's Until They Worked Out All The Bugs And Security Flaws.
Score: 0
|If they waited until all the bugs had been fixed, their OS would never be released.
Score: 0
|You have never been involved in software development have you?
Security fixes will always be an ongoing occurance, there are simply too many code combinations and execution paths, different hardware and softwar combos to take into consideration.
To have XP as stable as it is, is a pretty good achievement, and to have regular security patches automatically applied to my MY for FREE (Apple charge BTW), is a bonus...
Score: 0
|Unfortunately, that's impossible.
They could have done a better job than they did do (which they ARE doing now), but they can't possibly catch all of them.
Score: 0
|http://www.apple.com/support/downloads//
Those look to be free to me.
"Security Updates released for Mac OS X are usually incorporated into the next Mac OS X Software Update. For example, Security Update 2005-001 can be installed on Mac OS X 10.3.7. However, the Mac OS X 10.3.8 Update included all of the fixes contained in Security Update 2005-001, so computers using Mac OS X 10.3.8 or later will not see Security Update 2005-001 in Software Updare preferences."
http://docs.info.apple.c...ticle.html?artnum=61798
They need to spellcheck, but it appears that the updates are infact free. They charge for .x updates just as Microsoft does NT 5.0 (2000) vs NT 5.1 (XP).
Score: 0
|