Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Jan 2010 22:00 UTC
Internet Explorer Ah, the security vulnerability that was used in the Google attack. It's been around the internet about a million times now, and even governments have started advising people to move away from Internet Explorer. As is usually the case, however, the internet has really blown the vulnerability out of proportion. I'll get right to it: if your machine and/or network has been compromised via this vulnerability, then you most likely had it coming. No sympathy for you.
Thread beginning with comment 404877
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
How is this for double-speak?
by lemur2 on Tue 19th Jan 2010 10:32 UTC
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/microsoft-switch-from-ie-and...

although the vulnerability has only been used against IE6, the company has not ruled out that something similar could be used against the later versions.


OK, so Microsoft admit there is a vulnerability, and that a better exploit may possibly be used against other versions of Windows and IE.

Then they say this:
With Microsoft not prepared to give details of how soon a fix will be released, and advising people to leave the appalling IE6 and its successor for the latest version – IE8 – Microsoft's UK security chief Cliff Evans insists that a non-Microsoft browser is the worse option.


Say whaaat?

Translation: "Our older code is rubbish, but our newer stuff, which BTW you will have to pay all over again for, and which has exactly the same vulnerability, is way better. Seriously. No, really. Don't use the other guy's stuff which isn't known to be broken, because we say it might be."

Windows with IE has an unpatched, well-publicised, 0day, remote code execution vulnerability, common across all versions of Microsoft's OS and browser, they can't say when they will have a fix ... and yet they want people to believe that a non-Microsoft browser is worse?

ROFLMAO at Microsoft. They only prize they win for this one is "The Chutzpah Award".

Edited 2010-01-19 10:43 UTC

Reply Score: 4

strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20


ROFLMAO at Microsoft. They only prize they win for this one is "The Chutzpah Award".


Beware, someone might nominate you as the troll and Linux zealot of the year.

Reply Parent Score: 3

larwilliams2 Member since:
2009-12-02

"
ROFLMAO at Microsoft. They only prize they win for this one is "The Chutzpah Award".


Beware, someone might nominate you as the troll and Linux zealot of the year.
"
Too late, he already has been lol

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

A retail company with a widely known problem in an older product is suggesting people move to a newer product from there own line while using the same marketing scare tactics they've always employed against competitive products; this has to be the first time in history such a thing has ever happened.

Really, your surprised that the MS recommendation involves the newest browser on the newest OS platform they provide.

The browser part is obvious, they have put effort into security during design of IE7 and IE8. They are actively discouraging IE6 and preferring IE8 become most popular. I wouldn't want to support three versions of the same program either.

The os recommendation has the obvious angle of pushing for another sales unit. Win7 also has security features missing from winXP; there is some technical basis for recommending it to maximize user protection if your sticking with an all MS stack.

Reply Parent Score: 3

deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

Not to go all medieval on yer tuchas Samuel L. Jackson style, but Englisc, modor wyrter! Gedon eow cweþan hit!?! (and yes that was english, just a few CENTURIES out of date)

Seriously, how the blue blazes do you get THIS:

Translation: "Our older code is rubbish, but our newer stuff, which BTW you will have to pay all over again for, and which has exactly the same vulnerability, is way better. Seriously. No, really. Don't use the other guy's stuff which isn't known to be broken, because we say it might be."


from this:

With Microsoft not prepared to give details of how soon a fix will be released, and advising people to leave the appalling IE6 and its successor for the latest version – IE8 – Microsoft's UK security chief Cliff Evans insists that a non-Microsoft browser is the worse option.


Given that the vulnerability does not exist on IE8, the upgrade to IE8 and windows upgrades to remove the vulnerability is FREE if you are on a OS made less than a decade ago, etc, etc...

The only part that needs to be taken to task is the 'non-microsoft browser' part - since we all know it's bullshit and IE is basically playing russian roulette with your computer.

But the entire rest of your post reads like that free*** anti-corporation reality distortion field has really gotten you in it's grip; interpreting the exact opposite of everything said.

Next you'll be telling me there are less IE users today than there were five years ago because you believe the lie of 'share'.

NEWS FLASH
2009 - 62.5% of 1.7 billion is 1062 million IE users
2005 - 90% of 1 billion is 942 million IE users

So while IE lost market share, it gained 120 million users. Percentages can lie - in fact they mean jack **** if the size of the sample pool changes, or you don't poll the exact same people every time, or if firefox is double counted due to prefetch, or if Opera is mis-counted thanks to the use of masking to get around faulty browser sniffing...

http://my.opera.com/deathshadow/blog/2010/01/11/browser-statistic-l...

Don't blindly believe the outright lies and propaganda spewed forth by groups like the FSF. They use fact omission (card stacking) as proof, random user comments on slashdot as if they are legitimate sources, and at times outright lies to push their socialist agenda that has little to nothing to do with what freedom means.

I blogged about that too.

http://my.opera.com/deathshadow/blog/2010/01/19/windows-7-sins-nope...

... and it's SO obvious if you know ANYTHING about marketing and propaganda - they use cult-like indoctrination and misinformation; Any second I expect the Church of Stallman followers to don purple robes and eat the poisoned yogurt so the aliens from Haley's comet will take them to heaven.

-- edit -- oh wait, even that would make more sense than most of the claims of it's die hard fanbase.

Edited 2010-01-19 19:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

Don't blindly believe the outright lies and propaganda spewed forth by groups like the FSF. They use fact omission (card stacking) as proof, random user comments on slashdot as if they are legitimate sources, and at times outright lies to push their socialist agenda that has little to nothing to do with what freedom means.


and it's SO obvious if you know ANYTHING about marketing and propaganda - they use cult-like indoctrination and misinformation; Any second I expect the Church of Stallman followers to don purple robes and eat the poisoned yogurt so the aliens from Haley's comet will take them to heaven.


That's my favorite part, it really is. So... the FSF are crazy socialists cultists? Are they also in the State department? Are they responsible for flouridation? Tell me, DeathShadow, have you ever seen an FSF member drink anything other than whiskey?

Reply Parent Score: 3