Let’s see…

They added a peview pane to Outlook Express that would automaticall launch any attachment, including executable files. Users then had to disable the preview pane and MS had to patch a security hole created by a “feature” that they never should have added in the first place.

They added ActiveX to Internet Explorer to allow web sites to install and execute software. They then had to patch the gaping security hole that they created.

They designed the WMV format with the ability to add browser triggers to videos, which automatically open a web browser and send it to a particular site. They then had to add options to Windows Media Player to disable these triggers.

They created auto-run to automatically execute code on any disc or drive that’s connected to the system, paving the way for silent virus and mallware installation. They then had to create patches and provide options for users to disbale this huge security hole. Not only that, but you can’t even disable auto-run 100% on any version of Windows past 98. No matter what you do, there are still situations where auto-run will still execute the code on a disc/drive without asking.

The key word being “automatically”. None of these things would be an issue if they stopped and asked the user’s permission, but they don’t, they just do it.

“the funniest thing about all this is that everyone points their finger at MS instead of pointing it at the low life’s that use the security hole to launch malicious code.”

Yeah, that’s because this isn’t some obscure bug that allows hackers to exploit an undocumented feature, it’s a piece of software designed to allow web sites to silently download and run software. MS has a long history of adding “features” that are tailor made to be exploited.

It’s like a car company putting a button on the car’s door that will instantly unlock it, in case you lose your keys. You take one look at it and ask WTF were they thinking? What’s the point of even having a lock if there’s a way to instantly bypass it.

It’s ’secured’ allright, but not the way you think.

None of Msoft S problems are accidents per se.
Most of these ‘vulnerabilities’ are the direct result of backdoors
that were deliberately built into the OS to allow Msoft and others
with the cash to pay to be able to snoop on internet connected systems.

Their secret little backdoors are being found and used against them.
Stop trying to snoop and close those backdoors, and just maybe
there won’t be as many problems.

The result of MS slosh corporate gread is that : Shity code that can not stand the competion!

Neither am I surprised to see a M$soft publicist post the drivel you spout.

Micorsoft has a very long history of pushing ‘patches’ that cause
competitive apps to have problems. That’s actually the reason
IE was ‘merged’ into Windows as an unseperable part of the OS.
they were sued many years ago when they kept creating
‘patches’ that broke the Netscape browser, which at the time was
the only real browser competition. Msoft pushed a patch, broke
Netscape, Netscape patched to fix the problem, Msoft pushed another
patch that broke netscape etc. ad nauseum. They were sued and ordered
to make windows available with no browser. Msoft countered by making
IE inseperable from the OS to get around the order.

Yup Microsoft knows better than enyone else how to ‘break’ competitive
apps.

I believe microsoft made this specifically for firefox. That’s like asking “why does something designed for firefox work with firefox?” Microsoft had no business modifying firefox on our systems without explicitly asking.

but as a programmer I blame FireFox, why is it that their application is vulnerable to a windows component, or are they using windows components instead of building their own, which would be the better practice when security is imperative.

Unbelievable!

I mean come on:

IE 8 120MB of shit! still unsecured still buggy and still unstable.

Firefox 3.5 8mb, very stable and 20 time faster! I am not kidding! And it does the same thing and it more compliant to internet standard than IE.

Another example:

Window vista cut to the bone: Boot time on a superfast machine AMD quad core/ Serial ata 2terabyte segate/ 4gb DDR3: 1 minute 20 sec.

Linux Unbuntu 3.2:< 29 sec.

I mean really! Come On Microsoft!