Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

B-Man, yes there was a vulnerability in the windows operating system. However the the vulnerability was hacked by someone who decided to exploit it to send a worm around the net. Now had this person not intentionally created a program to exploit this vulnerability then everything would be fine.

I don't believe Microsoft are to be held accountable for what happened. It happened because some idiot decided to be a prick. The only person responsible for shit network performance due to packet loss is the person who wrote this worm. I have also recently been made aware that Microsoft did have a patch available to cure this vulnerablility (although I am reserving my judgement on the accuracy of this info). So therefore in my mind they found a problem and supplied a solution to it. I'll bet money on the fact that not 1 person I took a call from about this issue applied that patch.

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The patch was actually available quite abit before this worm made its appearance (I believe around 2 mths earlier).

But then again how many people even know how to switch off their PC correctly let alone logon to WindowsUpdate.com

No. But thats Microsoft for you !

So do you agree that it is unfair ?

B-Man, yes there was a vulnerability in the windows operating system. However the the vulnerability was hacked by someone who decided to exploit it to send a worm around the net. Now had this person not intentionally created a program to exploit this vulnerability then everything would be fine.  

I don't believe Microsoft are to be held accountable for what happened. It happened because some idiot decided to be a prick. The only person responsible for shit network performance due to packet loss is the person who wrote this worm. I have also recently been made aware that Microsoft did have a patch available to cure this vulnerablility (although I am reserving my judgement on the accuracy of this info). So therefore in my mind they found a problem and supplied a solution to it. I'll bet money on the fact that not 1 person I took a call from about this issue applied that patch.

I just think commercial operating systems should quality control their products better - MS are making quillions so they should be able to afford too. The vulerability was Microsoft's problem in the first place in my mind - had it not been there - No Blaster. Simple as that in my mind. I know all software vendors release product with bugs - but I reckon they should test it better before they release it - Not Linux and GPL software cause no-one makes $$ out of that the same way MS, Oracle, Peoplesoft, SAP, etc make money.

Imagine if SAP had a bug in their payroll module - then some shmuck decides to exploit it because he's pissed with his brother-in-law or whatever. And becasue of the exploit - no one gets paid for 2 months while SAP write and distribute the patch - That woiuld be un-acceptable right ? SAP's fault right ?

Software is software - you pay for a product - It should work.

That's only my view of course - And I do tend to wear rose coloured glasses looking at the perfect world out there - Cause I am pretty perfect myself, NOT.

Cheers

:cool:

Originally posted by B-Man

So do you agree that it is unfair ?

Yes I agree its unfair but nothing will be changed to fix the problem.

Software is software - you pay for a product - It should work.

When you pay for this product... then take it home.... remove it from the plastic... rip through the T&C's that state that no responsibility will be take for blah blah blah you have just laid the blame on yourself for anything that goes wrong.

When you pay for this product... then take it home.... remove it from the plastic... rip through the T&C's that state that no responsibility will be take for blah blah blah you have just laid the blame on yourself for anything that goes wrong.

Yes I know - and that's not fair either - All care and no responsibility.

I know I'm discussing this pointlessly - Everyone just accepts it - However, if we all didn't just accept the situation - the software vendors would do different - IMHO.

yeah, no doubt that levels of issues in software would never be tolerated in other industries....

...but in this case, the vendor has supplied a fix for their problem before some l337 haxor created the worm, they've done their bit by making the fix available to all licensed owners for no charge.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
    • In my head it does make sense to be a fuel problem since that is what I touched when cleaning the system. When I was testing with the fuel pressure gauge, the pressure was constantly 2.5 bar with the FPR vacuum removed. When stalling, the pressure was going up to 3.0 bar (which is how it should be on ignition).
    • ECUtalk pages don't mention they support the ABS computer (consult port has more than one CAN), so you might just need a different scan tool. But, I would expect ABS is a different light to the brake warning/handbrake light, do you see an ABS light come on for a few seconds when you turn the key from ACC to IGN? But since you said: I'd have a look at the ABS sensors in the rear hubs to make sure they are not damaged, disconnected etc.
    • OK, if it idles at 1000+ with the AAC, its not an idle airflow problem. The cold start valve just gives extra air when the engine is cold, but you have enough air without it to idle at 1000. I think you are back to a fuel problem, sorry. Can you see the fuel pressure staying constant or does it drop as the revs drop to a stall?  
×
×
  • Create New...