what do the antimicrosoft brigade want?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Rupert, Oct 15, 2003.

  1. Rupert

    Rupert Guest

    A new version of Microsoft Outlook makes it harder for spammers and scammers
    to invade users' computers through their e-mail.

    The software, available at the end of October with the release of Microsoft
    Office 2003, boasts more-aggressive security features, more options to
    disable malicious or snoopy code embedded in e-mails and attachments, and
    additional ways to block spam and other unwanted e-mail

    Security experts are giving mixed reviews to the updated version of the
    popular e-mail program. Some say little is innovative in Outlook 2003 --
    many of the new features are already included in other e-mail programs like
    Eudora.

    http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,60781,00.html

    Do they want MS to make it's software secure or not? You see them bitching
    if there is a security hole, MS updates it's software offering to (at least
    reduce them ) and they start complaining again....
     
    Rupert, Oct 15, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rupert

    T-Boy Guest

    In article <bmidp1$o0j$>,
    says...
    > A new version of Microsoft Outlook makes it harder for spammers and scammers
    > to invade users' computers through their e-mail.
    >
    > The software, available at the end of October with the release of Microsoft
    > Office 2003, boasts more-aggressive security features, more options to
    > disable malicious or snoopy code embedded in e-mails and attachments, and
    > additional ways to block spam and other unwanted e-mail
    >
    > Security experts are giving mixed reviews to the updated version of the
    > popular e-mail program. Some say little is innovative in Outlook 2003 --
    > many of the new features are already included in other e-mail programs like
    > Eudora.
    >
    > http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,60781,00.html
    >
    > Do they want MS to make it's software secure or not? You see them bitching
    > if there is a security hole, MS updates it's software offering to (at least
    > reduce them ) and they start complaining again....


    from that article...
    "
    Microsoft launched its Trustworthy Computing initiative in January 2002,
    in an effort to reduce the number of security problems that affected its
    software. The move included special training and "security boot camps"
    for Microsoft programmers, but some experts have said the results may
    not be seen until future products are released.
    "

    So it seems MS have just been giving us lip service to date - the
    possible new and continuing RPC exploit seems to back this up.

    MS have had time, and have known that, the MS03-029 was an interim
    solution, and that another followup patch would fix the RPC security
    problems completely.

    Users with NT or 2000 are now in a position where purchasing the product
    isn't enough - they also HAVE TO purchase a third party firewall.

    --
    Duncan
     
    T-Boy, Oct 15, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "T-Boy" wrote
    > Users with NT or 2000 are now in a position where purchasing the product
    > isn't enough - they also HAVE TO purchase a third party firewall.


    no they dont, you can filter the traffic out, you just have to know what
    your doing.
     
    T.N.O., Oct 15, 2003
    #3
  4. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "Howard" wrote
    > >> Users with NT or 2000 are now in a position where purchasing the

    product
    > >> isn't enough - they also HAVE TO purchase a third party firewall.


    > > no they dont, you can filter the traffic out, you just have to know what
    > > your doing.


    > I confess that I don't know how to "filter' hack attempts out, without
    > using a firewall. Can you give me a link to how to do that? (Serious
    > question, not a troll).


    The link was from the windows update page, I was playing with it the other
    day...

    I started here, http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/ chose Win2k

    and well, they have moved it... but anyway, you can go here...
    How to open ports in XP firewall
    http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/ports.asp
    and use port forwarding.
     
    T.N.O., Oct 15, 2003
    #4
  5. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "T.N.O." wrote
    > > I confess that I don't know how to "filter' hack attempts out, without
    > > using a firewall. Can you give me a link to how to do that? (Serious
    > > question, not a troll).


    > The link was from the windows update page, I was playing with it the other
    > day...
    > I started here, http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/ chose Win2k
    > and well, they have moved it... but anyway, you can go here...
    > How to open ports in XP firewall
    > http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect/ports.asp
    > and use port forwarding.



    I found the page I used the other day.
    http://www.microsoft.com/security/incident/blast.asp
    scroll to the bottom(ish) and you find this link,
    http://support.microsoft.com/?id=309798 HOW TO: Configure TCP/IP Filtering
    in Windows 2000.
     
    T.N.O., Oct 15, 2003
    #5
  6. Rupert

    AD. Guest

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:08:32 +1300, Rupert wrote:

    > Do they want MS to make it's software secure or not? You see them
    > bitching if there is a security hole, MS updates it's software offering
    > to (at least reduce them ) and they start complaining again....


    Ahh, the classic fallacy that any loosely organised community should all
    speak with one voice. Easy to spot, just look for 'they' or 'them'
    mentioned a lot.

    Even so, saying it isn't (in their opinion) impressive or that it is long
    overdue isn't the same as saying MS shouldn't include those features.

    Are you wanting MS to be praised for including long overdue features that
    are common elsewhere?

    And you are also presuming that a security researcher that doesn't offer
    that praise is part of the 'antimicrosoft brigade'.

    Smacks a little of a 'you're either with us or against us' attitude.

    Cheers
    Anton
     
    AD., Oct 15, 2003
    #6
  7. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "T.N.O." wrote
    > http://support.microsoft.com/?id=309798 HOW TO: Configure TCP/IP Filtering
    > in Windows 2000.


    I just thought about what you said, I only know how to do it on 2K/XP but
    really, who would let the junior OS's online in this day and age :)
     
    T.N.O., Oct 15, 2003
    #7
  8. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "AD." wrote
    > Ahh, the classic fallacy that any loosely organised community should all
    > speak with one voice. Easy to spot, just look for 'they' or 'them'
    > mentioned a lot.
    >
    > Even so, saying it isn't (in their opinion) impressive


    errr, isn't your last statement a little like the them or they that you
    mentioned in your prior statement? :)
     
    T.N.O., Oct 15, 2003
    #8
  9. Rupert

    Warwick Guest

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:08:32 +1300, "Rupert"
    <> wrote:

    >A new version of Microsoft Outlook makes it harder for spammers and scammers
    >to invade users' computers through their e-mail.
    >
    >The software, available at the end of October with the release of Microsoft
    >Office 2003, boasts more-aggressive security features, more options to
    >disable malicious or snoopy code embedded in e-mails and attachments, and
    >additional ways to block spam and other unwanted e-mail
    >
    >Security experts are giving mixed reviews to the updated version of the
    >popular e-mail program. Some say little is innovative in Outlook 2003 --
    >many of the new features are already included in other e-mail programs like
    >Eudora.
    >
    >http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,60781,00.html
    >
    >Do they want MS to make it's software secure or not? You see them bitching
    >if there is a security hole, MS updates it's software offering to (at least
    >reduce them ) and they start complaining again....
    >


    If its part of the office suit it is likely to cost several hundreds
    of dollars. Seems a bit much to fork out a few hundred for the
    operating system and then 2 or 3 times that for secure email software.

    cheers
     
    Warwick, Oct 15, 2003
    #9
  10. Rupert

    AD. Guest

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:17:55 +1300, T.N.O. wrote:

    > "AD." wrote
    >> Ahh, the classic fallacy that any loosely organised community should
    >> all speak with one voice. Easy to spot, just look for 'they' or 'them'
    >> mentioned a lot.
    >>
    >> Even so, saying it isn't (in their opinion) impressive

    >
    > errr, isn't your last statement a little like the them or they that you
    > mentioned in your prior statement? :)


    Well 'their' referred to a specific persons quote rather than assigning it
    to a 'brigade'. Maybe I should used 'in _his_ opinion'.

    Anyway, their is not they or them, nya nya so there... pfbpfbpfbpfb*

    *the raspberry noise - I'm not sure I spelled it right :)

    Cheers
    Anton
     
    AD., Oct 15, 2003
    #10
  11. Rupert

    T-Boy Guest

    In article <bmif0o$ne6q2$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > "T-Boy" wrote
    > > Users with NT or 2000 are now in a position where purchasing the product
    > > isn't enough - they also HAVE TO purchase a third party firewall.

    >
    > no they dont, you can filter the traffic out, you just have to know what
    > your doing.


    While "HOW TO: Configure TCP/IP Filtering in Windows 2000" might be a
    (fuken awful option) for the likes of some - I doubt yer mum and dad
    would know what a port is, let alone which ones to put in, or what TCP
    or UDP or other protocols are.

    Seriously, it's pathetic; and certainly doesn't satisfy *my* definition
    of a Firewall.

    --
    Duncan
     
    T-Boy, Oct 15, 2003
    #11
  12. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "T-Boy" wrote
    > > no they dont, you can filter the traffic out, you just have to know what
    > > your doing.


    > While "HOW TO: Configure TCP/IP Filtering in Windows 2000" might be a
    > (fuken awful option) for the likes of some - I doubt yer mum and dad
    > would know what a port is, let alone which ones to put in, or what TCP
    > or UDP or other protocols are.
    > Seriously, it's pathetic; and certainly doesn't satisfy *my* definition
    > of a Firewall.


    that is because it is not a firewall, if you want a firewall, download one,
    I was simply offering an alternative, and I did say, "you just have to know
    how" which implied at least a little knowledge of what your doing.

    besides, I also gave another link to some normal types of traffic too, see
    the link about opening ports in the XP firewall.
     
    T.N.O., Oct 15, 2003
    #12
  13. Rupert

    bt Guest

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:08:32 +1300, "Rupert"
    <> wrote:

    >Do they want MS to make it's software secure or not? You see them bitching
    >if there is a security hole, MS updates it's software offering to (at least
    >reduce them ) and they start complaining again....
    >


    Havn't seen anyone complaining here about it. Take your pills.

    But on the SUBJECT of these new 'innovations' from MS (that YOU bring
    up):

    BIG FAT GREASY DEAL IN TOO SMALL SHORTS.

    MS is due only luke warm praise for finally bringing their software up
    to date with everyone else.

    MINUS a bit for taking so f'ing long to do it.

    MINUS a bit more for leaving some cool spam/virus blocking stuff out.


    Brendan (Avatar)

    --
    ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸

    Check out my cool Water Cooling Project! http://www.computerman.orcon.net.nz/WaterCooling1.html

    Email: corum.usenet@myrealbox (dot com). No Timewasters. No UCE.
    My comments are IMHO, IIRC, FYI, and Copyright.
     
    bt, Oct 16, 2003
    #13
  14. Rupert

    T-Boy Guest

    In article <>, says...
    > "T-Boy" wrote
    > > > no they dont, you can filter the traffic out, you just have to know what
    > > > your doing.

    >
    > > While "HOW TO: Configure TCP/IP Filtering in Windows 2000" might be a
    > > (fuken awful option) for the likes of some - I doubt yer mum and dad
    > > would know what a port is, let alone which ones to put in, or what TCP
    > > or UDP or other protocols are.
    > > Seriously, it's pathetic; and certainly doesn't satisfy *my* definition
    > > of a Firewall.

    >
    > that is because it is not a firewall, if you want a firewall, download one,


    exactly my point - you HAVE TO use a third party firewall.

    > I was simply offering an alternative, and I did say, "you just have to know
    > how" which implied at least a little knowledge of what your doing.


    true - and that's fine for "us" - but for joe bloggs user.

    >
    > besides, I also gave another link to some normal types of traffic too, see
    > the link about opening ports in the XP firewall.


    My post is not, and was not; about XP.

    --
    Duncan
     
    T-Boy, Oct 16, 2003
    #14
  15. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "T-Boy" wrote
    > > that is because it is not a firewall, if you want a firewall, download

    one,

    > exactly my point - you HAVE TO use a third party firewall.


    you dont have to... it is just a **** of a lot easier than configuring
    traffic filters.

    > > I was simply offering an alternative, and I did say, "you just have to

    know
    > > how" which implied at least a little knowledge of what your doing.


    > true - and that's fine for "us" - but for joe bloggs user.


    us? Ng users? well all those who have read my message, not all would have
    "got it", you don't seem to have... my point was, you *can* get away without
    a firewall, it just takes more effort.

    > > besides, I also gave another link to some normal types of traffic too,

    see
    > > the link about opening ports in the XP firewall.


    > My post is not, and was not; about XP.


    but the link I gave listed common ports and the applications that use them,
    which is what you said jo bloggs didnt know.
     
    T.N.O., Oct 16, 2003
    #15
  16. Rupert

    Howard Guest

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:30:07 +1300, T.N.O. wrote:

    > "T-Boy" wrote
    >> Users with NT or 2000 are now in a position where purchasing the product
    >> isn't enough - they also HAVE TO purchase a third party firewall.

    >
    > no they dont, you can filter the traffic out, you just have to know what
    > your doing.


    I confess that I don't know how to "filter' hack attempts out, without
    using a firewall. Can you give me a link to how to do that? (Serious
    question, not a troll).
     
    Howard, Oct 16, 2003
    #16
  17. Rupert

    T-Boy Guest

    In article <bmkrbt$o54u4$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > "T-Boy" wrote
    > > > that is because it is not a firewall, if you want a firewall, download

    > one,
    >
    > > exactly my point - you HAVE TO use a third party firewall.

    >
    > you dont have to... it is just a **** of a lot easier than configuring
    > traffic filters.
    >
    > > > I was simply offering an alternative, and I did say, "you just have to

    > know
    > > > how" which implied at least a little knowledge of what your doing.

    >
    > > true - and that's fine for "us" - but for joe bloggs user.

    >
    > us? Ng users? well all those who have read my message, not all would have
    > "got it", you don't seem to have... my point was, you *can* get away without
    > a firewall, it just takes more effort.
    >
    > > > besides, I also gave another link to some normal types of traffic too,

    > see
    > > > the link about opening ports in the XP firewall.

    >
    > > My post is not, and was not; about XP.

    >
    > but the link I gave listed common ports and the applications that use them,
    > which is what you said jo bloggs didnt know.


    /me waves hello to your parents

    --
    Duncan
     
    T-Boy, Oct 16, 2003
    #17
  18. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "T-Boy" wrote
    > /me waves hello to your parents


    If your implying that my parents are "Jo Average" computer wise, your
    probably wrong... my dad yes, but my mum has been programming for ~20 years,
    I was raised by wolves while she went to Otago Poly, then Uni.
     
    T.N.O., Oct 16, 2003
    #18
  19. Rupert

    ~misfit~ Guest

    "T.N.O." <> wrote in message
    news:...

    <snip>

    > I was raised by wolves while she went to Otago Poly, then Uni.


    That explains it.
    --
    ~misfit~


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10/10/2003
     
    ~misfit~, Oct 16, 2003
    #19
  20. Rupert

    T.N.O. Guest

    "~misfit~" wrote
    > > I was raised by wolves while she went to Otago Poly, then Uni.


    > That explains it.


    Explains what? :)
     
    T.N.O., Oct 16, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. unholy

    Do want this HDD given away?

    unholy, Oct 27, 2005, in forum: The Lounge
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    3,897
    zachig
    Nov 16, 2005
  2. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    465
    DVD Verdict
    Dec 11, 2003
  3. Tom Meyer
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    482
    Tom Meyer
    Jun 29, 2004
  4. Siddhartha Jain

    The charge of the 4/3rds brigade

    Siddhartha Jain, Feb 27, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    384
    Siddhartha Jain
    Feb 27, 2006
  5. Collector»NZ
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    356
    Collector»NZ
    Nov 18, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page