REDMOND, Wash., Oct. 14, 2009
Microsoft Security Holes Hit Record High
Software Maker Patches 34 Holes, Designating Most as "Critical"
-
(iStockphoto)
The software maker plugged 34 holes and designated most of them "critical," Microsoft's most severe rating. Among them are fixes for Windows Vista, Windows XP, Windows 2000 and even Windows 7, which doesn't go on sale to consumers until Oct. 22 but has been in use by early testers and software developers.
The patches target a wide array of Microsoft software, including the Internet Explorer Web browser, Media Player, Outlook and the Silverlight technology underlying multimedia Web sites.
Security researchers at McAfee Inc., which makes antivirus software, noted that many of the holes addressed Tuesday are dangerous because they expose regular PC users to harmful programming code when they visit rigged Web sites or play media files that have been tampered with.
Consumers can get the updates by turning on the "Automatic Updates" feature in Windows or by visiting www.microsoft.com/security.
Previously, the most security flaws Microsoft had addressed in a single update was 31, which happened in June.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 18 Comments
- I have XP and have had few problems and those were quite minor.
- Reply to this comment
- nojoy01 October 14, 2009 8:48 PM EDT said:
"Your O/S isn't safe because it's better than the products that microsoft puts out. It's safe because writing a virus or finding holes/vulnerabilities that would affect less than 10% of the PC's in the world just doesn't give the same satisfaction that screwing up many, many more PC's does. "
UTTER NONSENSE. This is a myth. Percentage doesn't matter. Actual number does. And with Apple selling over 1 million computers PER QUARTER, there is serious bragging rights and satisfaction to be attained for infecting or disrupting millions of Macs.
Macs are safer than Windows PCs... not invincible, but safer. I've been in IT for 20 years and used and supported both platforms (and more), and definitely attest to that. - Reply to this comment
- I hate Macs. I use Windows and I keep them up dated as well as my McAfee. I have a firewall on as well.
- Reply to this comment
-
- Mac is superior but the problem is there is not as much software for it. I would use Linix if there was more software for it. Windows was flawed from the BUGining. It was based on DOS which was rushed into use and never finished by the creator. XP was a big improvement because it wasn't built on the DOS program, it was based on NT. All previous Windows were DOS based except NT.
- by jseymouriii October 14, 2009 4:17 PM EDT
Posted by legacyabq
"Try to configure a network card, go ahead. I'll be waiting. LOL!"
What's hard about this. Can't use a text editor. That is all that is needed to configure a NIC.
Really the problem is that microsoft made a hole industry of lazy users. And how can you trust any software that the code cannot be fully reviewed by peers. You never know what is hidden under the hood.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, jseymouriii, where bill gates & microsoft made all of their money was not in creating "a hole (sic) industry of lazy users". What they did was take an esoteric piece of electronic hardware that required incredibly specialized knowledge and almost constant tinkering in order to do anything remotely productive and produced a way for anybody who wanted to use one to be able to. What you need to realize is that most people, like say my 89 year old father, don't know & don't care what goes on "under the hood". The just want the thing to work when they turn it on. What's really funny, is that the Personal Computer era would've gotten exactly nowhere with out bill gates or somebody like him. With out an operating system compatible with the average users' lack of interest in knowing how it works the Personal Computer would have remained an interesting toy. Yeah, I know, microsoft products are susceptable to virus attacks, attacks on the operating system, etc. And you and your fellow linux users can tout the superiority of linux or mac because it doesn't have those problems. But then, if either of those two os's became as popular as microsoft os's, then the twisted, sick, and morally depraved clowns would start attacking them. And if you think either of those systems could stand up to the combined man years of study and programming that has gone into attacking microsoft products then you aren't thinking straight. Your O/S isn't safe because it's better than the products that microsoft puts out. It's safe because writing a virus or finding holes/vulnerabilities that would affect less than 10% of the PC's in the world just doesn't give the same satisfaction that screwing up many, many more PC's does. - Reply to this comment
- I like google chrome so I am waiting for thier OS
- Reply to this comment
- Once again the world's largest software monopoly proves that they can't "innovate" their way out of a wet paper bag. Writing "great" software means more than a fizzy press release and a TV ad campaign (and behind the scenes attempts to shove it down people's throats). It takes real work, lots of it, and it's hard work. But given the loud bleating this company does about how wonderful they are and given how much money they have in the bank, and given how many arrogant billionaire d0uchebags they have created, there is no excuse for this. None whatsoever.
- Reply to this comment
- Get a Mac!
- Reply to this comment
- I've been happily Microsoft-free for 2 years. No anti-virus, no malware, free office software, and no Windows Genuine Advantage. What could be better?
- Reply to this comment
- I have had a trojan virus on my PC for 3 months that is called msnupdate.exe. I pay a lot of money for Windows Live One Care that does not detect the virus. Every time I shut down MSN, I get a prompt from Vista asking me if I want to install this virus. It seems to me that Microsoft would take extra care to make sure their antivirus software would detect and remove viruses claiming to be Microsoft updates.
- Reply to this comment
-
- I am not that computer literate however, I would consider an alternative anti-virus such as Norton or McAfee.
Have you run the Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool? You can find it on the Microsoft Update website.
You can also research your problem through a 'Google Search.'
- I am not that computer literate however, I would consider an alternative anti-virus such as Norton or McAfee.
- This is a great reason why windows users should make the switch over to linux. For those of you interested in linux try Ubuntu. Most hardware will work with it and you will never need an antivirus or antispyware program again. it just works out of the box is free and no nore headaches.
- Reply to this comment
-
- No more headaches? Thats funny. The average user does not know the unix system, nor can they write scripts to get anything done. Linux has a long, long, long way to go before it can be adapted to a "wide audience". Even Ubuntu. Try to configure a network card, go ahead. I'll be waiting. LOL!
- I made the switch over to Linux (Redhat/Fedora) over 5 years ago and have never looked back. We run Fedora on all our laptops and desktops and RedHat on our servers.
- Posted by legacyabq
"Try to configure a network card, go ahead. I'll be waiting. LOL!"
What's hard about this. Can't use a text editor. That is all that is needed to configure a NIC.
Really the problem is that microsoft made a hole industry of lazy users. And how can you trust any software that the code cannot be fully reviewed by peers. You never know what is hidden under the hood.
The road ahead in Afghanistan, and the crucial decision Obama faces.
