Windows updates and careless users
Monday, 13. April 2009, 05:35:48
I was just thinking about Conficker after reading (yet again) about it this morning.
None of my 3 systems at home were affected by this worm in any way. Microsoft apparently provided the patch months ago and as i usually do, i've update as soon as updates were available.
However, now i'm wondering how come Conficker (also known as Confi and Kido) infected so many Windows systems? Most of users would and will again brag about how Microsoft sucks at anything security related, but in reality, Microsoft did their job. This time the users themself failed.
Why is it so hard to update your systems? Does it cost you anything? I don't know how updating works on pirated Windows since i have originals on all 3 systems, but as far as i know, critical updates are still delivered to everyone.
So, what's really a problem here? I can only assume that these ppl think they know it better and either disable Windows Update or don't install updates because they deliberately ignored them.
I think we could massively decrease such scenarios if updates were enforced for home users while they remain optional for corporate editions of Windows (so admins can verify and check what's going to install to their workstations). I'm sure if Windows updated automatically without users fiddling with it, we wouldn't be talking about Conficker today. Users are always the main factor why systems get infected. Microsoft has nothing to do with it and antivirus companies missing samples here and there don't either. In (huge) most of the cases, it's all about the factor between chair and keyboard. The user.
Bottom line, the easiest way to avoid most of such global incidents is to keep your system up to date.
Antiviruses work the best only when fully updated. It's no different with operating systems.
They are the most secure only when they are fully updated. Updates are antidote for operating system immune system. They cost you nothhing, but you can benefit so much from them.
Keep your systems updated at all times!
None of my 3 systems at home were affected by this worm in any way. Microsoft apparently provided the patch months ago and as i usually do, i've update as soon as updates were available.
However, now i'm wondering how come Conficker (also known as Confi and Kido) infected so many Windows systems? Most of users would and will again brag about how Microsoft sucks at anything security related, but in reality, Microsoft did their job. This time the users themself failed.
Why is it so hard to update your systems? Does it cost you anything? I don't know how updating works on pirated Windows since i have originals on all 3 systems, but as far as i know, critical updates are still delivered to everyone.
So, what's really a problem here? I can only assume that these ppl think they know it better and either disable Windows Update or don't install updates because they deliberately ignored them.
I think we could massively decrease such scenarios if updates were enforced for home users while they remain optional for corporate editions of Windows (so admins can verify and check what's going to install to their workstations). I'm sure if Windows updated automatically without users fiddling with it, we wouldn't be talking about Conficker today. Users are always the main factor why systems get infected. Microsoft has nothing to do with it and antivirus companies missing samples here and there don't either. In (huge) most of the cases, it's all about the factor between chair and keyboard. The user.
Bottom line, the easiest way to avoid most of such global incidents is to keep your system up to date.
Antiviruses work the best only when fully updated. It's no different with operating systems.
They are the most secure only when they are fully updated. Updates are antidote for operating system immune system. They cost you nothhing, but you can benefit so much from them.
Keep your systems updated at all times!
WIDGETIZE
Steve Pifer # 16. April 2009, 23:04
The day that happens is the day I will never use a new version of Windows again, unless I am at work. New updates can have regressions in performance, security, and stability. Contrary to what Microsoft may want the user owns the machine and not Microsoft.
And yes, I did not get infect with Conficker either. Considering that it was designed to target lazy people who do not update it is rather pathetic that it was able to infect corporate networks. I heard on a news program that CBS got infected in March.
jp10558 # 27. April 2009, 15:28
1. I've had Autodesk Inventor have parts stop working with a particular update.
2. Remember SP2 for XP? Where many computers didn't come back up? Do you REALLY want MS forcing that on users?
RejZoR # 27. April 2009, 16:44
jp10558 # 29. April 2009, 18:32
Anonymous # 8. May 2009, 11:44
I have lost work, and so have my coworkers, when Windows applied an update and restarted the computer while I was out of the room.
I personally cannot afford that - even just losing my open browser tabs is a pain (OK, I admit that doesn't happen in FF :) )
Also, scenariops such as the following inane one [which just started this week] are all too common: (I do not have Conficker or any other bug, am up-to-date with all, and keep my nose clean.)
On my laptop I have just 156MB of space left.
Every single time I start my laptop, MS tries again to download the latest update.
After nigh locking up the computer while it attempts to download (and I have no idea why it uses so much CPU to do a download) for about ten minutes, it gives up.
A visit to MS's update site informs me that it has failed due to my not having enough disk space.
It claims the update requires 66MB. [Math, anyone].
Everyone's advice - shut off update!
RejZoR # 8. May 2009, 14:29
Everyone's advice should be "Notify user" and let them install the updates.
And users that actually apply them when they have time.
Anonymous # 10. May 2009, 11:36
Please explain:
I had this morning (when I booted the computer) 338MB free space.
(I ran a scan with MalwareBytes and Anti-vir over the weekend. All clean. Cleaned out my temp files to make space.)
After update.exe ran my CPU at 90% for close to half an hour, it stopped - just like that - no update applied, no explanation offered.
I went to Windows Update, who suggested an express install requiring 66MB. I hit express install, which after just ten minutes or so tells me "the updates were not installed".
An explanation is on the page I'm directed to
Problem: Not Enough Disk Space
This repeats itself every single time I boot the computer - Windows again tries the download. Again realizes there is not enough space (because 66 is more than 350). Along the way my computer is unusable for a half an hour.
What method do you suggest as being better than disabling updates (granting MS's absolute disregard for my productivity).