Quote:
Originally posted by Sion
...Would it be so hard for MS to assemble a small team of security experts to examine EVERY [I would change this to as MANY as POSSIBLE way] possible way into the system and securely close them before the product goes to market? I think not. As the MSBlaster worm showed, even a mediocre hacker can find and expoit these security flaws. That suggests that MS didnt do enough to eliminate the hole in the first place.
...MS still bears some culpability for a) not eliminating the problem before selling the product, and b) not taking a stronger proactive position to make sure all its customers knew about the existance of the patch and the danger that not running it presented.
|
Good point Sion. Like you, I am not saying that MS should have been perfect. But (1)these viruses and their mutations have shown very clearly that "even a mediocre hacker can find and exploit these flaws" and (2)that MS is not doing enough to protect and/or inform their consumers. Instead of releasing 30 patches a year, just release a rewritten or corrected OS every 2 years. Considering the amount of $$ that MS has, that is very doable. Apple has been able to do this. Again, I'm not trying to get into Mac vs. Pc here, only to point out that releasing a major OS is reasonable every 2 years. I am no computer techie, but from what I heard Windows XP was still using some of the same codes as the older versions. These were the codes that contained the flaws.