Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Apr 2009 15:19 UTC
Windows The Conficker worm, which spreads by infecting Windows computers who are not properly kept up-to-date, was supposed to make a big splash on April 1, but that day passed with a deafening silence on the Conficker front. Since then, there has been some movement by the worm, and data gathered from enterprise users of Sophos' Endpoint Assessment Test indicates that 10% of Windows machines have still not been properly patched, leaving them wide open to a Conficker infection.
Thread beginning with comment 358498
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by kaiwai
by sbenitezb on Tue 14th Apr 2009 15:58 UTC in reply to "Comment by kaiwai"
sbenitezb
Member since:
2005-07-22

This sort of upgrades, critical upgrades, should be automatic and without user intervention. In other words, it should be pushed down the throat (at least after certain period of testing).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by orestes on Tue 14th Apr 2009 16:03 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Nah, I'd rather not see someone without my admin password capable of installing random **** on my system under the guise of an important update. I'd be much more apt to say ISPs need to start sandboxing or outright kicking unpatched machines off their network or better yet, holding end users criminally liable for any damage caused by their machines due to negligence.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by sbenitezb on Tue 14th Apr 2009 16:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
sbenitezb Member since:
2005-07-22

End users are not responsible for defective software and malware development. You talk like a Microsoft's person, putting all that crap in the shoulders of users. Users are victims, and they shouldn't know how to fix they computers (which they didn't broke). It's Microsoft's fault if their OS is crap, and ISP's fault if they don't block shit comming through their lines (guess what, they do filter torrents).

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai
by Jon Dough on Tue 14th Apr 2009 21:55 in reply to "RE: Comment by kaiwai"
Jon Dough Member since:
2005-11-30

This sort of upgrades, critical upgrades, should be automatic and without user intervention. In other words, it should be pushed down the throat (at least after certain period of testing).


Only if the machine is configured to automatically set a restore point before the update is installed. I've seen way too many updates hose an OS to let it automatically install without a restore point.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kaiwai
by hollovoid on Wed 15th Apr 2009 03:52 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai"
hollovoid Member since:
2005-09-21

Cant be certain about earlier versions of windows, but I know in Vista it does create an restore point before an update is installed.

Edited 2009-04-15 03:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2