Wednesday, February 20th 2008
Microsoft to Use Worm-Type Distribution Methods for Windows Update; Users Revolt
Microsoft had a rather clever idea. Why not use the worm virus for a useful purpose, such as updating Windows? Microsoft, for a while, was researching a way to make the worm code more efficient, and was going to put it to good use. That way, important security updates could spread just as quickly as viruses, if not quicker, considering that Microsoft's best were in the study. However, this idea was received about as well as the Giants victory in Super Bowl XLII. Some people cheered, but most people cried foul. Using a worm to spread things like Windows Updates would be a massive invasion of privacy, does not allow a user to say no to an update and would totally bungle up any attempt to uninstall or interrupt installation. What's worse is what would happen if a bad guy got their hands on the enhanced worm code.
Microsoft, upon hearing what users thought of a worm-based security patch, decided against using it. If the new worm they've developed will have any benevolent use, we certainly haven't heard of it yet.
Source:
PC World
Microsoft, upon hearing what users thought of a worm-based security patch, decided against using it. If the new worm they've developed will have any benevolent use, we certainly haven't heard of it yet.
22 Comments on Microsoft to Use Worm-Type Distribution Methods for Windows Update; Users Revolt
99.9% uptime running happily on windows server
worm gets in.. installs a shitty beta update
*BSOD*
-company had to refund hosting prices to the users for breaking the 99.9% guarantee.
or how about hospital computers or other critical computers & servers.
im willing to bet you that people will sue microsuck's ass for this if they carry it out.. and i will compeletely switch to mac os x & linux.. windows can kiss my ass
forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=667721&postcount=2
Y'know . . . they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions . . .
Thankfully, MS cleared up that brain-fart they had and decided against it.
Still deserving of the :slap:, though.
The key would have to be that the administrator could give parameters to the worm update so that it had to follow strict "rules of engagement" (ie. IP address range, OS version limitations, etc.).
Once all the parameter rules were completed, the worm would self-destruct.
But the key would have to be that the user launches the worm to the intended targets, not Microsoft.
For instance, hospitals labs her in the US, have successfully used the rubella virus to target cancer cells. They genetically changed the virus' "tag DNA" so that it hunted down, attached to, and destroyed cancer cells instead of the normal human cells that it normally goes after.
I always thought that ther would come a time when people would be writing "good" software viruses that hunted down and destroyed the bad ones.
HAsn't happened yet, though
anyways... did m$ just say that they had already planned ways to purpsofully infect user machines before killing the project? or were they just going to use an update to make the hole to easily get the diseased program in? *kinda voting they were egotistic enough to build the hole in and never consider patching it*
I sort of like the way Ubuntu keeps the system update. It just tells the user an update exists and could be installed, else there's just an orange tray icon which isn't a big deal really.
I remember some time ago when there was talk about there being a hole in Norton AV now that talk is gone but i guess there would not have to be a hole in a AV program as MS be allowed to spread it how it wants.
They shouldnt have got it to shutdown:shadedshu