Son of MSBlast on the way?

TalkBack 28 of 41:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

New approach and view of problems

I know that patching is necessary for software companies, including Microsoft, including Sun, Oracle, IBM, OSS solution providers, game developers, etc etc. It?s the nature of software to need some post release fix(es), especially over time and in evolving environments. Those nightly builds are addressing something besides the desire to update the last changed date.

But under fire from the speed of internet-based attacks on services running by default, there needs to be a rewrite to MS software and implementation that addresses the current crop of Windows, not just the future Longhorn. It?s their code so they should know by now what?s a prime target to black hats, and after mega bytes of downloaded patches, maybe they could just release a software rewrite that doesn?t just patch but recodes the software itself into that secure thing it should have been if MS wasn?t try to run a dog and pony service show. If an Admin wants to run a messenger, let him or her turn it on when and if they choose and let the responsibility of end-user services be determined by the customer and whatever IT staff administers. It?d be interesting to know how many Admins actually use it, versus using e-mail, phone, IM or supervisor correspondence regarding server side issues requiring a need to communicate with the end-users.

By now, there should be worst case scenario testing where they throw everything and the kitchen sink at every software level, each service, right down to the screen savers. The past few years have been a wealth of knowledge on what not to do, what others have exploited and how to build the fixes and not quite fixes, so their probably should not only be more human testing but software built to run the scenarios, even the ludicrous possibilities. Buffer overruns, why oh why are they still such a MS bane. Buffer overrun everything and learn from the results. Somebody is thinking outside the clean room, and its not MS, at least not on the current software.

And the home version is not the pro version is not the server version, so why deploy them the same way, minus cosmetic eye candy and a pro service there, besides the money. It just increases the likelihood that everybody suffers the same bad fate. And with more of the world going online and more ppl going broadband, MS won?t grow more market share as more worms and viruses grow. And they can't count on most consumers to make it any easier.

Posted by: FilledOut   Posted on: 10/25/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now