Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Apr 2009 09:54 UTC
Bugs & Viruses Whenever the Conficker worm comes up here on OSNews (or any other site for that matter) there are always a number of people who point their fingers towards Redmond, stating that it's their fault Conifcker got out. While Microsoft has had some pretty lax responses to security threats in the past, it handled the whole Conficker thing perfectly, releasing a patch even before Conficker existed, and pushing it through Windows Update. In any case, this made me wonder about Linux distributions and security. What if a big security hole pops up in a Linux distribution - who will the Redmond-finger-pointing people hold responsible?
Thread beginning with comment 358729
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Bug fixes - Apple
by jabbotts on Wed 15th Apr 2009 21:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Bug fixes - Firefox 3.0.8"
jabbotts
Member since:
2007-09-06

The problems with Apple's system go deaper than the browser but fixing Safari would be a huge step ahead for them as will be the promised features in the next OS major version. Let's not look to closely at the non-existant network issue that was quietly included in later patches after the media frenzy passed.

That's osX though which is limited by Apple's development scheduals. The openly available Unix like platforms will likely continue to make the lifespan of an exploit very short. For computers in general; update, update, update, for the love of baud update. That would have negated Conficker right there and continues to negate threats against Unix like platforms quickly after discovery.

Reply Parent Score: 2