In a message dated 06/05/00 05:16:53 GMT Standard Time,
> Blame Bill Gates
> Linux and Mac users are happily immune to the ill effects of ILOVEYOU,
> depends upon the Windows Scripting Host to get launched once it's triggered
> on the user's computer.
> And that's where Microsoft needs to belly up to the table.
> It's been more than a year since ExplorZip should have sent a wake-up call
> to Microsoft, about the dangers of Visual Basic scripts running in e-mail.
> The silence from Redmond has been deafening.
> Microsoft has always been about features, features, features. But in its
> rush to throw everything into its products but the kitchen sink, the
> has given security criminally short shrift.
I agree with you Harvey, Microsoft has always payed less than adequate
attention to security in its products. Even when security flaws are found,
exploited and published they still dont address the issues properly if at
As a Microsoft certified pro, or *Sheep* if you will. I was taught that
windows NT was the most secure O/S since "sliced bread v 1.2" , but even with
the documentation and wide use of L0pht heavy Industries "L0pht Crack" for
breaking NT passwords, Microsoft still sold NT as Uncrackable and only after
years have they addmited its weaknesses and still havent
come up with a solution.
I deal with MS software all day every day, and It scares me to look at
security alerts because every time I do, there is another hole in an MS
The "I Love You" virus has not taken me by suprise at all. I have dealt
with 4 seperate "infections" in the last 6 months. All of which have been MS
I think the programers at MS should spend less time trying to circumvent
their own security in order to get hidden "Easter Eggs" released with their
software to impress their friends, and more time ensuring that the finished
product is at least some way near secure for the end user.
rant rant rant......etc
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:10:37 MDT