Security Incidents mailing list archives
Re: Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale
From: namor () att net
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 12:32:14 +0000
Fred, et all,
Don't bother with a class action. We have seen how
effective the legal system was in spanking the monopoly
to begin with. You really want to put them out of
business? STOP USING THEIR PRODUCTS. How many other
ways can it be said?
It is not like there aren't alternatives out
there. There are other OSes (free & non), other
browsers, other free media players, other free office
suites, etc. And in many cases they are compatible with
the current MS file formats (ie: StarOffice can read and
save as MS office formats). But as consultants,
contractors, and vendors we are not pushing our
customers to make the change.
It's the same in the Anti-Virus industry, who by
the way is the real culprit here. We keep using that
ineffective, reactive signature-file based garbage when
there are clearly better alternatives out there to offer
our customers (like behavior-based solutions such as
InDefense's Achilles Shield and Mail Defense products I
use -- infectionless since 1999!). Time for a better
solution.
If you are serious about this effort, then
education and proof are the keys to making it work.
Build two boxes, one MS and one Linux for example. Lock
them down as best you can then attack them while your
customer watches. The proof is in the results. When
the dust settles, which box is still operational? Which
one over time has more "uptime"? Uptime = money and
mission success, and THAT is where the victory will be
won.
Just my $0.02
Rob
In my view, the responsibility for NIMDA lies clearly in Microsoft's lap and the lap of the author, but there is plenty of blame to go around. I say forget about telling the ISPs what to do - start a class action suit against Microsoft for putting this crap into the market knowing full well how it might be exploited and knowing full well that it was choosing time to market over quality. The class is all users of Microsoft IIS servers and every person who has a system that has been affected by the virus. The dmages are the total cost of all actions taken to defend against or monitor this infection, in cluding all time taken by all parties involved. Put them out of business unless and until they can act responsibly.You should read the agreement you (and everyone else) just clicks "Agree" to whenever you install a piece of software (not just MS). I am not a lawyer but as far as I can tell it means "You accept that you are paying for this product as is and we make no guarantee that it will be secure, reliable, compatible, works as advertised or will even work at all" This is standard throughout the software industry, and no other industry in the world is allowed to operate under these terms. Anyone know whether clicking that Agree button removes all your rights to legal recourse? I would've thought it would; that's why they put it in. S. :)What many people fail to understand is that there is something called an implied warranty of sale that cannot be voided, even under contracts such as these. It is typically defined in terms of 'suitability for purpose'. Thelegal issues surrounding the non-warranty for software has never been setteld - and it should - and this would be a great case to do it with. FC --This communication is confidential to the parties it is intended to serve-- Fred Cohen Fred Cohen & Associates.........tel/fax:925-454-0171 fc () all net The University of New Haven.....http://www.unhca.com/ http://all.net/ Sandia National Laboratories....tel:925-294-2087 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
Current thread:
- Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale Fred Cohen (Sep 27)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale namor (Sep 28)
- Re: Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale fosterd (Sep 28)
- Re: Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale Chip Mefford (Sep 28)
- Re: Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale Jay D. Dyson (Sep 28)
- Re: Nimda esponsibility - Laying appropriatel - implied warranty of sale Chip Mefford (Sep 28)
