Security Basics mailing list archives
RE: microsoft updates
From: "Worrell, Brian" <BWorrell () isdh IN gov>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:29:58 -0500
That's not exactly what I meant, but I guess I can agree that any unpatched (Pirated or not) version of Windows are potential botnet hosts. What I was saying is that if more people knew you could pirate a copy and still get patches, rather than spend $200, do you not think they would? -----Original Message----- From: Ali, Saqib [mailto:docbook.xml () gmail com] Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 11:27 AM To: Worrell, Brian Cc: Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers; security-basics () securityfocus com Subject: Re: microsoft updates
But that aside, if M$ let people update pirated copies, would that not
let more people think they can pirate it, rather than buy it? Which would make a larger bot network by your theory?
This statement assumes that "ALL" Windows machines are potential botnet hosts...... saqib http://www.quantumcrypto.de/dante/
Current thread:
- RE: microsoft updates Worrell, Brian (Jan 02)
- Re: microsoft updates Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Jan 02)
- Re: microsoft updates Vince Hall (Jan 02)
- Re: microsoft updates Alexander Klimov (Jan 03)
- Re: microsoft updates Vince Hall (Jan 02)
- Re: microsoft updates Ali, Saqib (Jan 02)
- RE: microsoft updates Worrell, Brian (Jan 02)
- Wired security improvements Jesse Rink (Jan 03)
- Re: Wired security improvements Kurt Buff (Jan 03)
- Re: Wired security improvements Andrea Gatta (Jan 03)
- Re: Wired security improvements Garry Baker (Jan 04)
- RE: microsoft updates Worrell, Brian (Jan 02)
- RE: microsoft updates Pranav Lal (Jan 03)
- RE: microsoft updates jmacaranas (Jan 03)
- Re: microsoft updates Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Jan 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: microsoft updates David Harley (Jan 02)
- RE: microsoft updates Dixon, Wayne (Jan 02)
- Re: microsoft updates Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers (Jan 02)
- Re: microsoft updates Tom Yarrish (Jan 02)
