Microsoft released two "critical" patches and five "important" security updates on Tuesday - but none of the fixes address a zero-day vulnerability in Internet Explorer discovered two weeks ago. The two critical patches tackle a remote-code execution vulnerability in the Windows Print Spooler (MS13-001) and similarly serious …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections

This topic is closed for new posts.

Wednesday 9th January 2013 12:06 GMT Anonymous Coward

Good ol' Micro$haft

I wonder if this'll take them ten years, like the font rendering exploit in their kernel.

Meanwhile, looks like Samsung has sorted that Exynos bug which RICHTO got so excited about:

http://www.sammobile.com/2013/01/03/galaxy-s-iiis-latest-software-update-fixes-exynos-security-exploit-sudden-death-issue-too/

3 wks... and over Christmas & new year B-)

4 4
1. Wednesday 9th January 2013 12:56 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: "Micro$haft"
  
  Stop that, AC. You made my dickhead detector go so far off the scale that it snapped.
  
  2 5
  1. Thursday 10th January 2013 03:03 GMT Anonymous Coward
    
    Re: "Micro$haft"
    
    Credit where credit's due... I thought it rather appropriate in this context.
    
    Smile, your micro's been $hafted!
    
    1 1
Wednesday 9th January 2013 12:52 GMT Anonymous Coward

"Of course ... you could also just update your browser to Internet Explorer 9 or 10"

Yeah - if your PC isn't controlled to the hilt by an IT department that thinks Win XP Pro and IE8 are bleeding-edge technology, and that highly technical users aren't competent to install or upgrade anything.

[AC to protect the guilty.]

1 1
1. Wednesday 9th January 2013 12:58 GMT dogged
  
  Re: "Of course ... you could also just update your browser to Internet Explorer 9 or 10"
  
  In that instance, AC, if you get infected while at work then it's the IT department's fault for a) not screening the malicious page or office document that infected you and b) using a 10 year old OS.
  
  So relax.
  
  0 4
2. Thursday 10th January 2013 19:22 GMT Tom 13
  
  Re: controlled to the hilt by an IT department that thinks Win XP Pro and IE8
  
  Downvoted because I'm the low level HelpDesk Monkey who gets called in to fix crap when you "highly technical" users frack it up while ignoring company policy. Also because it some of you other "highly technical" programmers who shaft us with home grown software that causes us to KEEP users on IE8 and Java 1.5.16.
  
  Not anonymous because I know who where the bodies are.
  
  1 0
Wednesday 9th January 2013 13:00 GMT NorthernCoder

Sources..?

"the so-called 'Mad Woman in the Attic' hole"

Why is it called so, and by whom?

3 0
1. Friday 11th January 2013 03:08 GMT Androgynous Crackwhore
  
  Re: Sources..?
  
  Anthony Perkins?
  
  0 0
Wednesday 9th January 2013 13:39 GMT historymaker118

Still using IE?

If you are still using internet explorer 6 then you deserve to get hacked!

1 2
Wednesday 9th January 2013 13:40 GMT Anonymous Coward

Why did my XP Pro box crash 5 TIMES.....

trying to install these updates - and blue screened after installing (and rebooting) each one individually.

(And strangely muted the audio output).

M$ need to get their $hit together - must try harder!!!!

1 2
1. Wednesday 9th January 2013 14:11 GMT dogged
  
  Re: Why did my XP Pro box crash 5 TIMES.....
  
  Because you're using a ten year-old OS? Maybe?
  
  Honestly, if you're that much of a cheapskate, install something free.
  
  1 8
  1. Wednesday 9th January 2013 14:20 GMT Paul Crawford
    
    Why should the OS age matter in terms of being patched correctly? If anything, the older code should be better understood and so less likely to have problems.
    
    5 0
  2. Wednesday 9th January 2013 18:43 GMT Charlie Clark
    
    Re: Why did my XP Pro box crash 5 TIMES.....
    
    @dogged
    
    Why not use it? It's still officially supported my Microsoft until next year.
    
    2 0
    1. Thursday 10th January 2013 02:59 GMT Anonymous Coward
      
      Re: Why did my XP Pro box crash 5 TIMES.....
      
      Indeed... after TEN YEARS in production use, with three "service packs" and God only knows how many patches, shouldn't the code be approaching something resembling maturity/stability by now?
      
      0 0
      1. Thursday 10th January 2013 16:13 GMT dogged
        
        Re: Why did my XP Pro box crash 5 TIMES.....
        
        @AC - are you suggesting it's immature and unstable?
        
        (I bet this AC doesn't know that some linux fixes - for example, I speak as one involved in a long-term love/hate relationship with debian - can take up to nine years. I bet this AC just wants upvotes from the "we hateses micro$haft lolz0rs crowd).
        
        1 2
2. Thursday 10th January 2013 19:24 GMT Tom 13
  
  Re: Why did my XP Pro box crash 5 TIMES.....
  
  Run a rootkit scanner on your system.
  
  0 0
Wednesday 9th January 2013 22:20 GMT arctic_haze

Mr. Mador's advice to upgrade to nternet Explorer 9 or 10 or Chrome or Firefox works only 50% for XP users.

There are no IE 9 or 10 for Win XP.

But that's not my problem. I use the other half.

2 0
Thursday 10th January 2013 04:37 GMT david 12

MSXML

Garghhh, not another MSXML patch. It took me years to fix up the broken MSXML patches around here -- and one laptop was fixed by replacement with an Apple laptop.

What is it with MSXML? MSXML patches have given me more trouble than the rest all put together.

BTW, any answer to my previous question: Is there an exploit for the MS Explorer bug that does not involve the abuse of FLASH?

1 1