[Dshield] FW: Microsoft Security Update
superc at visuallink.com
Thu Sep 4 17:30:24 GMT 2003
A little rant.
All agree a user should keep everything, box, stuffing, manuals and disks
when buying software. The reality is few do. Simple storage space and
fire hazard issues arise when storing empty boxes and associated papers
whether it be in the basement or the garage. Sadly I no longer have the
original boxes nor even some of the manuals for my Vic 20, nor even the box
for the SX 64, even though it is still operational and in use.
I think what we have is Microsoft (MS) displaying an attitude towards the
buyers of used PCs which are often sold with software and no disk, and
towards Joe Sixpack who is struggling to stay afloat with a $10 an hour job
and 2.5 kids, et al.
I know several people who have never earned enough to buy a new computer
and have only the computers others gave them, or which they bought second
hand. MS's attitude towards small home consumers has never been friendly
if the consumer is too poor to buy the newest software, latest operating
system or the newest bells and whistles. I know people who only have a 3.1
system. I know one who is still stuck in DOS and WP 5.1 and who scrapes by
with Net Tamer for the Internet. I know many who use 95. In my opinion,
by the way MS designed the latest VBA overflow patches MS shows they don't
like these people and obviously feel they are not deserving of patches.
When I finish with a PC (usually a Compaq as their usefulness is short) I
usually give it away as is (sometimes Goodwill, sometimes to someone who I
think should have one). If I still have disks I give them, if I don't, I
can't. I know I am not the only one who knows poor people or who gives
away PCs and which are sometimes missing an original disk or two. I also
know several stores that sell used PCs (sometimes acquired via mechanics
lien, sometimes sold in pawn, and sometimes purchased for resale when
companies go broke and are liquidated (lots of those in Tyson's Corner and
Reston the last two years). Those second hand stores sell the PCs as is.
Often with installed software and no disks. (Sometimes with interesting
information on the hard drives too.) Second hand is a good way for a first
time user to be up and running for less than $400. Nothing illegal or
unethical about buying or using a second hand PC or a used car. Nothing
illegal or unethical in turning the used PC on and discovering you now
legally own a copy of Office 2000 or Windows NT, XP, 95 et al. Kind of
like buying a second hand car as is and finding a bag of Krugerands in the
trunk. Guess what? In most states the law says the Krugerands are now yours.
Given the absurd prices being asked for new Office 2000 disks at Staples
and the ilk, I think MS is ethically wrong to design a patch that only the
monied who can afford to run out to the store and buy a new disk can
install. It potentially hurts all of us when an unpatched machine enters
the net. In the past 24 hours MS has unveiled about 6 new areas needing
patches. Those PCs which remain unpatched will potentially be the source
or carriers of new infections in years to come. MS helps no one with a
patch that requires the recipient of the patch run out and purchase a disk
they can't afford. It is analogous to not providing a Polio or Smallpox
vaccine to those who can't afford the cost of the injection.
No doubt some at MS feel that the Joe Sixpack user should throw himself on
his sword and say, "I can't afford the money for the new otherwise unneeded
disk so I can spend 3 hours online getting softpack ver 1, so I can spend
20 minutes downloading the new security patch, so therefore for the greater
good of all I will delete myself from the Internet gene pool and never go
on line again."
Not in this universe. MS needs to redo their VBA and other patches so even
a user without an original Office disk can apply them. In my opinion MS
places us all at risk of future infections by not doing so.
Subject:Re: [Dshield] FW: Microsoft Security Update
From:warpmedia <warpmedia at comcast.net>
Date:Thu, 04 Sep 2003 09:01:02 -0400
To:General DShield Discussion List <list at dshield.org>
Hehe, and in the mean time the people they are really are trying to foil
have a warez copy. Same "insert cd" caveat is true if you want to remove
This why new systems that come pre-installed should "waste" some of that
vast HDD space to hold an image of the CD "just in case". Of course we see
the warped side of that when that's ALL the vendor ships with the system.
At 22:46 9/3/2003, Kenneth Coney wrote:
> The biggest problem I see with the new Office 2000 patches is MS has
designed some of them so they won't work unless you have already installed
the service packs, and service pack 1 won't install without the original
software CD. I mean really, who keeps those? What home user in a house
full of kids knows where an install disk/CD is 3 years later? The result
or requiring the original disk be on hand years later before a softpack
update or VBA patch can be installed is a lot of home PCs (and maybe some
office PCs) will never be patched. How many Joe Sixpacks can even find the
box with the little yellow sticker with the authentication code? Many
never installed the software themselves anyway and had Staples or Office
Max install it for them. Now you are telling them they were supposed to
keep the disks and the box? Pfui. MS rides again.
warpmedia at comcast.net
More information about the list