Bad Advice or Bad Browser from MicroSoft

Discussion in 'Windows Update' started by Taylor, Jul 3, 2004.

  1. Taylor

    Taylor Guest

    Due to "sniffers", advice from MSFT was to set security
    in IE6 for Internet to "high" - did that. Tried to
    update. Failed.

    Advice from MSFT was to insert various sites into
    Trusted - did that. Was still unable to update. Have
    several machines with different uses, so I experimented.

    - use of asterix as a wildcard appears non-functional,
    so "*.windowsupdate.com" in Trusted does not work but I
    added "v4.windowsupdate.com" and it did (at least in one
    computer)

    - on another which has secure https required for
    business, I tried to use Intranet category with the
    checklist off and strength set at "medium-low" (I'll be
    d*mned if I am going to set any unsecure connection
    to "low") - even though "support.windows.com" was added I
    could not post this message until I dropped Internet
    setting to "medium"

    In these days of increased pressure from Malicious Idiots
    and Thieves, I find it very difficult to be pleased with
    an Update capability which relies on a Vulnerable
    Browser. To then find that the Advice from the Programmer
    does not work makes me think there must be a better way.

    Why isn't Windows Update separate and secure?
     
    Taylor, Jul 3, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Taylor

    Taylor Guest

    Expanding on earlier comments, discovered why I could not
    use newsgroup with "support.microsoft.com" at medium-low.
    It is because the actual location of newsgroups
    is "communities.microsoft.com" even though this does not
    appear in the address line.

    Perhaps my issues with update resolve with knowledge of
    hidden links?!?

    Is there some method for tracking automated/hidden links
    to determine if along the line the linkage dropped
    to "High" security level Internet?

    Has anyone given any thought to how this Gordion's Knot
    has evolved?

    My guess is "not".
     
    Taylor, Jul 3, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Taylor

    Taylor Guest

    Yet more results.

    On machine 3, finally obtained success when I entered
    "windowsupdate.microsoft.com" into Trusted sites. The
    wildcard "*.windowsupdate.microsoft.com" recommended by
    MSFT is not sufficient. From my long history in computing
    (about 35 years), I dimly recall that "*" works only on
    the unspecified portion of the string.

    Does the period (".") matter? Seems it does.

    Should the advice from MSFT
    be "*windowsupdate.microsoft.com" and
    not "*.windowsupdate.microsoft.com"?

    Mozilla won't protect me from bad advice that is for sure.
     
    Taylor, Jul 3, 2004
    #3
  4. Here Here, Taylor. Well spoken.

    An Update Capability that relies on a vunerable browser
    (patching/warning/lecturing on the vunerabilites we so
    shamelessly allow to exist).

    A sick world. (I blame the advertisers and the hacks who
    have been making the agents for them).

    The Internet is as safe or as dangerous as walking or
    driving down an street or road at any given time. You
    might step in Dog you-know-what, you might find a $20
    dollar bill.

    Cable TV (and Tivo) same things. In the name of "serving
    you" and giving us what we want (but must pay for it
    first), infomation what we watch, buy, click on, is stolen
    from all of us constantly.

    Why can't each us (easily) host an email "server" on our
    computer and store our email folder locally? So criminals
    can scan AOL, Hotmail, ATT, Startrek.com freely.
     
    Brent & Nova \(Planet of the Apes\), Jul 10, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.