RE: Bill Gates blames the victim

[Lim Swee Tat <st_lim () stlim net>]

On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 01:51, Robert Ahnemann wrote:
> > Again, the message is M$ should fix their software.  Trying to automate
> > the patch cycle without the permission of the user is and still does
> not
> > solve the initial problem.
>
> Good point, but my emphasis was on people obtaining the patches in the
> first place.  While yes, they might be unreliable, they at least cover
> the publicized exploit.  When was the last time that a worm was
> extensively spread via an undocumented hole, or even a hole that was
> documented and never patched?  MS is good about fixing what it finds.
> Whether or not those fixes cause further issues which require patching
> is a separate issue.  As long as the patch is ahead of the virus, where
> does the accountability really fall?
It's great that you think that way...  So the last I heard, a patch
eventually caused machines all over the place to shut down
automatically.  From the way you are gushing about the merits of
patching, I believe you'll rather that happens than that your machine
gets hacked, while I believe there is realistically no difference, and
would rather have the machine up for another day/month.

Ciao
ST Lim

----------( Thank god!! ... It's HENNY YOUNGMAN!! )---------- Swee ----(
)---- Tat

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part