On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 6 of 81:
Next »
« Previous
Why don't we look at what MS identified as the problem
"And your programming expertise, which drives you to
decide that 200 days is too long to investigate, write,
debug, test, re-write where required, re-test, etc., would be
what...?"

From the MS security bulletin (MS04-007) for the patch:

"What causes the vulnerability?
The vulnerability is caused by an unchecked buffer in the
Microsoft ASN.1 Library. If exploited, an attacker could gain
system privileges on an affected system."

What effect should adding code to test for a buffer overflow
have on any other part of the system? Closing this
vulnerability should only effect code which relied on the
unchecked buffer condition to execute correctly. Maybe this
is why it took so long to patch;-)

Slapmaxwell, you don't find 200 days to fix this a little
excessive?

If it takes 200 days to close one unchecked buffer in
windows, then it's officially a piece of rubbish.
Posted by: Richard Flude   Posted on: 02/13/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

200 days unacceptable  d_jedi | 02/13/04
Yeah?  slapmaxwell | 02/13/04
since when?  stephen732@... | 02/13/04
Since  slapmaxwell | 02/13/04
Re: Yeah  d_jedi | 02/13/04
Why don't we look at what MS identified as the problem  Richard Flude | 02/13/04
Yes, 50 billion in the bank, and this is the best they could do??  DonnieBoy | 02/13/04
trendsetting ?  guido_z | 02/13/04
Time contsraints  dscherf | 02/13/04
Re: time constraints  d_jedi | 02/13/04
I mostly agree with you  dscherf | 02/13/04
Why this?  Mack DaNife | 02/13/04
why compare?  stephen732@... | 02/13/04
Re: Why compare?  Mack DaNife | 02/13/04
would you compare m$ to the republicans?  middle of nowhere | 02/13/04
political parties  stephen732@... | 02/13/04
how is quality defined in redmond?  stephen732@... | 02/13/04
Quality  guido_z | 02/13/04
If it's making money, it's Quality!  gath | 02/13/04
How is quality defined, period?     | 02/13/04
I'll take bets on that "forever"  IT_User | 02/13/04
OS X  stephen732@... | 02/13/04
I agree  richdave | 10/09/04
gnu/linux  guido_z | 02/13/04
Actually  michael-t | 02/13/04
You are missing the point...  Mike Cox | 02/13/04
Back in form  Mack DaNife | 02/13/04
Bloatware  Chris Moller | 02/13/04
Fixin winders???  James Schroer | 02/13/04
Mr. Cox....Do you have a website?....  el1jones | 02/13/04
cox site  bway al | 02/13/04
Try this  IT_User | 02/13/04
Well why didn't you say anything Mr. Cox?  James Schroer | 02/13/04
integration  BarbarianHorde | 02/13/04
mmmm goood  James Schroer | 02/13/04
linux kernel  guido_z | 02/13/04
Guido and Mike Cox  crocd | 02/13/04
He did once  Michael Kelly | 02/13/04
Don't have to...  Mike Cox | 02/13/04
Please do me a favor  Michael Kelly | 02/13/04
Integration is important to users  jfrankcarr | 02/13/04
MS does NOT do integration  Mack DaNife | 02/13/04
Welded design?  Mike Cox | 02/13/04
Modular is bad?  IT_User | 02/13/04
Modular design  Chris Moller | 02/13/04
Over do I'll agree with  jfrankcarr | 02/13/04
Simple integration isn't the issue.  Michael Kelly | 02/13/04
Don't think anybody would disagree  IT_User | 02/13/04
Excellent explanation, IT_User  BarbarianHorde | 02/13/04
you are correct  JWatson77 | 02/13/04
yes but...  ryusen | 02/13/04
BLOATED????????????  Drgnslider | 02/13/04
Mike Cox - FUDmeister, strikes again  mwgary | 02/14/04
Is this the same "Mike Cox" ?  doug_mentohl@... | 02/14/04
Cause may be conflict of $ales interest  KeithRisler | 02/13/04
flawed analogy  bway al | 02/13/04
Didn't MS just brag how much quicker they fix stuff?  Xunil_Sierutuf | 02/13/04
Stupid friend     | 02/13/04
Yeah  Richard Flude | 02/13/04
Hmmm  John Carroll ZDNet Moderator | 02/13/04
Delegation of shame.  Chris Moller | 02/13/04
So John, say something, tell us you think this was a brilliant MS move.  DonnieBoy | 02/13/04
Are you missing the point John?  Tim Patterson | 02/13/04
Carroll hits nail squarely on head..  Mike Cox | 02/13/04
Wrong nail  IT_User | 02/13/04
Hmmm  Update victim | 02/13/04
hahahahaha  JWatson77 | 02/13/04
please tell me that was a joke...  ryusen | 02/13/04
A few scenarios spring to mind  jfrankcarr | 02/13/04
or it was outsorced  Hanover Phist | 02/13/04
options...  guido_z | 02/13/04
response  ryusen | 02/13/04
They Spent More Time Manipulating Their Bookkeeping.  brenthawkinsmd | 02/13/04
They say Microsoft can "turn on a dime"  George Jay | 02/13/04
If it takes 200 days to release a patch ...  George Jay | 02/13/04
It isn't the total number of bugs...  IT_User | 02/13/04
Maybe the windows source code was stolen because of this flaw (NT)  K B | 02/13/04
Hate it when companies are slow to respond  FilledOut | 02/13/04
Procedural Collapse  michael-t | 02/13/04
This reminds me of...  DragonBRockin | 02/13/04
Windows Works --- Linux is full of bugs that can't be fixed FACT!!!  idnew2005@... | 02/16/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement