Posts by Barry Tabrah 149 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jan 2008
This seems to target those who are just smart enough to be able to root their phone and allow installs from untrusted sources, but dumb enough to follow any link they're given.
It is unfortunate that these people seem to be in the majority. I, for one, like to keep my phone security turned on and would always recommend that others do to.
Rooting seems trendy, but for the majority of people it's really not a good idea. (see Just smart enough)
I had 2 cumulative updates yesterday with the vague 'they fix stuff' as the description and to look up more details on the Knowledge Base. After some futile searching, I decided to try talking to the Microsoft Answers chap. His advice was to 'Search BING' and click on one of the results. I did as he suggested and it was basically an article on how Microsoft haven't posted any information on the updates. I think he was a bit red-faced on the other end.
Just because Smart TVs aren't configured by the user doesn't mean that they can't be reconfigured by a malicious source. This article demonstrates an industry more focused on profit than security, with a disregard for any security issues that would cause them to spend money to fix.
The less educated the end user is about the devices they are using like Smart TVs, the more likely they are to miss any malicious activity before it's too late.
And with the tendency moving towards activating these features out of the box there's going to be a lot of features turned on that most users don't even know about.
Given that IE9 was Microsoft's first stab at a standards-compliant browser it would not be surprising for IE9 to continue to perform well for the foreseeable future, even if Google abandon official support for the browser. This is the advantage of going standards-compliant.
Also, just a Firefox 3.x die hards accepted that rolling updates to browsers aren't such a bad idea, I predict that businesses will be less resistant to Microsoft browser updates in future. Provided, of course, that Microsoft stick to standards-compliance.
You might wish to check out Katy Levinson's talks on the defcon website. It may save a lot of pain and heartache. If nothing else it's entertaining. For example, velcro is your friend. Battery plus C-clamp equals fire.
Note: It's been a while since I listened to the talks so I cannot recall if they are completely safe for work.
I'd like to see the stats comparing corporate to personal. I'm not sure if it's possible to do this via IP address ranges or other means but browser usage is heavily influenced by usage environment and these statistics would be more meaningful if we can see the difference between choice (home users) and policy (corporate users).
There are many organisations which cannot operate without the dreaded three: IE, java, and flash.
When you work in an environment in which your systems need particular versions of Java, and these are mission critical systems that are no longer supported by the original vendor (who may or may not still exist themselves), the idea of removing or even patching Java is a non-starter.
The best we can do is lock out external devices, have draconian AV policies, and filter all website traffic. It's not a guaranteed catch-all but with luck and close systems management we can avoid disaster.
I, along with many others I'm sure, have sleepless nights over these issues. This story is going to haunt me for the next few weeks I'm sure. I think I'm going to need a drink.
I am sick and tired of abbreviations being hijacked for the latest fad. We fought hard to establish our abbreviations. Many computer companies died for them ... Tandy, Tiny, others beginning with T.
It was bad enough when politicians stole it for Political Correctness, now our own industry is stealing it again.
Well no more! This is where we stand and fight for our abbreviations! We shall establish a standard set, and all others shall abide. Are you hearing me Reg? Don't think I haven't noticed your headlines awash with the latest abbrevicreations! You're on notice as well.
Sure, consumers aren't going to buy a Windows 8 tablet. I mean, why would they want to? The kind of thing that the average user wants to do with a tablet doesn't require Windows.
But business on the other hand certainly will. That's the market where the Windows 8 tablet will really appeal. And that's where I think Microsoft should be aiming. And they'd better have a Windows 8 enhanced touch-friendly version of Microsoft Office ready to rock on release date. Because THAT will help sell those tablets like hot cakes.
The main crippling point for most home PCs is malware removal. The software most users run, commercial and shareware, cause their machines to be slower and more unstable than the malware they're supposed to protect them from. And that's the last thing we need on our mobiles.
Once again I believe that Apple's restrictive marketplace is the better of two evils. Sure, we're tied down to what Apple deem "suitable". But at least the devices remain responsive and relatively safe.
I believe that Android developers should offer a similar approach, particularly in vetting the apps before they make it onto their marketplace. Let those that seek the freedom to twist their devices to their will do so with impunity, but give the mass public the safety, security, and performance that comes from a controlled and regulated marketplace: locked down with the option of opening rather than the reverse.
Chrome is running as a user and is only installed in the user folder using user rights. This is the decision they made to allow for rapid updates. Sure, it breaks standards a little but it keeps the security layer intact.
Chrome does offer an Enterprise installer that installs to the Program Files folder but sticks with UAC for updates.
'The Firefox team is testing a "Windows service approach" to get around the UAC issue; the service would install an optional component that would automate the update install without giving the UAC prompts, Bondy said.'
Chrome gets around this by running with user privileges in the user folder. What Mozilla are suggesting seems to punch a hole right through a rather important security layer. One small coding bug now makes the entire Windows platform vulnerable to malware, all to prevent a pop-up every 6 weeks.
Something tells me that this would NOT be the preferred solution for Enterprise. The preferred solution for Enterprise would be a pre-packaged MSI update that they could control the deployment of.
It's the OEMs that are going to have to allow disabling of this feature. Many organisations rely on older OS models and the arguments for keeping XP as an option are already pushing OEMs towards backward compatibility.
This requirement for legacy support from medium and large business is why I'm not worried about this. Any decent OEM is going to include an option to disable this just to keep the business.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
