Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 11th Jan 2006 18:04 UTC
Bugs & Viruses Tests at Microsoft's Linux lab show that counting the raw number of security updates required by the various operating system flavors is not as meaningful as examining the efficiency of the update process.
Thread beginning with comment 84844
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Patching process
by oguie on Wed 11th Jan 2006 23:56 UTC
oguie
Member since:
2006-01-11

Come on people, MS may not be your favorite OS but you have to admit that their patching process is pretty streamlined. (true, in debian is as simple as apt-get update but is that what you call intuitive?)

As long as you can live with the following truths:
1. Windows (as any OS) will always need patching
2. Patches in an OS as widely used as Windows will always take time to be available (10% of the total time will be spent writing the patch, 90% in testing)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Patching process
by kensai on Thu 12th Jan 2006 00:05 in reply to "Patching process"
kensai Member since:
2005-12-27

Do they test patches? LOL I think obvius answer is no. When MS needs to patch a vulnerability opened by another patch.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Patching process
by suryad on Thu 12th Jan 2006 07:25 in reply to "Patching process"
suryad Member since:
2005-07-09

I am an avid XP user because I prefer it to Linux simply because it is easier for me and less hassle configuring and downloading packages and compiling and adding switches and tweaking that file etc etc. Lets face it the right way to do any kind of *NIX is the OS X way of doing it. Period. That is not what we are discussing here however. The patching process in XP is pretty streamlined. But that is not also what the article is about. Tests at MS's Linux lab sounds crazy right from the start! WTF is MS doing with Linux? Sure they are experimenting and learning and doing various things trying to improve their own OS. That is all great and good. But you cannot expect anyone to seriously believe that these results shouldnt be taken with a grain of salt. Hire an independent tester. Hire someone who will be the mediator and will take a look at both MS and Linux code. Make them sign NDAs or whatever the hell if MS is so freaking paranoid about losing their precious code...like the OS is not pirated at all by millions of XP users anyway right? Bottomline is MS can easily hire an independent group of testers but they will never do that beacuse the truth is that Linux is more secure. I am an XP user because simply I am used to it and there are a lot of softwares I use that do not run on Linux. But I will be ready to admit XP's weaknesses. Things have improved a lot there is no doubt but there is still room to improve. MS knows XP is security compromised...they should just nail all the damn flaws they know all at once. They have a huge number of employees after all.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Patching process
by hal2k1 on Thu 12th Jan 2006 10:05 in reply to "Patching process"
hal2k1 Member since:
2005-11-11

"in debian is as simple as apt-get update but is that what you call intuitive?"

Try this instead then:

Configuration -> Packaging -> Synaptic Software Manager
(enter the root password)
Click toolbar button "Mark All Upgrades"
Click toolbar button "Apply".
(wait for all downloads to complete & packages to install).

Done.

{BTW, apt-get update will only refresh your local cached copy of what is contained in the repositories. You actually need to do 'apt-get upgrade' for this same operation on the command line).

Edited 2006-01-12 10:10

Reply Parent Score: 1