|
| T O P I C | |
|
|
With Outlook you're safe from... almost everything
May 16th 2000, 19:21 CEST by andy According to this story from the BBC, Microsoft has announced that Outlook will be updated with security measures intended to reduce the threat from viruses. The patch will by default prevent users from opening 37 different executable file types. It will also warn users when a program tries to access the Outlook address book and will set the default security mode to "restricted", disabling the scripting used by the ILOVEYOU virus. One interesting quote from the story:
Because the patch will still allow users to open Word .doc files it will not by default do anything to stop macro viruses such as Melissa. In addition to welcoming the new patch, Graham Cluley of Sophos echoes the sentiment that has been put forward by the technical community:
The patch will only be available for Outlook, not the cut-down Outlook Express. It should be available within the next week. More information is available on the Microsoft web site. |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: With Outlook you're safe from... almost everything
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
|
<b>#56</b> "Andy" wrote... <QUOTE>As for the rest of what you said, there's a nagging agreement in the back of my mind, but I'm fighting it because I know it's wrong.</QUOTE> I'm not saying "throw out all compassion", I'm not saying "don't protect the innocent". <b>Do</b> protect the innocent and have compassion...just don't put them in positions they're not ready for. Make sure people are qualified and skilled to perform the tasks they're responsible for. (American-centric semi-rant:) School systems are letting lazy, ignorant, idiots graduate because they don't want to traumatize them by holding them back and they don't want to waste funds on someone who can't or won't learn. Society is overflowing with the "let's make it fair" mentality. We have the capability now, more than ever, to make things "more fair" for everyone...but that comes at a cost: progress. We're constantly passing laws and posting warnings to protect people from themselves. If this had gone on a million years ago, we'd still be starting fires with a sinewy bow and stick get-up...if fire was allowed at all. Yes, I'm going over the top on this one, but it's a societal condition that grieves me. As an example, I play pool. Billiards, straight pool, one-pocket and snooker...primarily. I'm a "classical" player, not a big fan of 9-ball and the like. My favorite game is one-pocket. In a nutshell, each player "owns" a corner pocket near the rack. The first player to pocket (or "pot" for you UK readers) 8 balls in their pocket wins the game. It's a beautiful game, full of strategy and safety shots. It's as close as you can get to playing chess on the pool table. If one person is better than the other, the common practice for competition is to handicap the better player. You now have to make more balls in your pocket than your opponent...9-7, 10-6, 11-5 etc. This practice of handicapping is great for making sure you can get a money game, it's great for balancing a game for fun, and it will make the game more fair...and I have no problem with that. It is, however, a terrible to learn to play better. The lesser player isn't put in as many difficult positions, they don't have to learn how to play the game "properly" they only have to learn enough <i>to get by</i>. The also don't benefit from making and missing as many shots. The same applies for straight pool, where the better player will usually "spot" the opponent 10, 25, 50 or more balls in a race to 150. The best players learned the hard way, you play someone who's MUCH MUCH better than you are, you immitate, emulate, invent and experiment...eventually, you either learn to play well or you give up. You are going to lose. You're going to lose often and big. You're not going to learn much from having things handed to you or taking the easy road and that's what modern society is trying to do. Letting illiterate kids graduate to save their feelings, promoting dependency with welfare, and handing people jobs that they simply aren't qualified to do. Where do you think middle-management comes from? :) Had to inject a little humor, it was depressing. The important thing is that I'm NOT saying <i>punish</i> the majority for the "elite" minority. I'm staying stop dumbing everything down. Stop limiting the options of the rest of society to conform to the needs at the bottom. How many kids have been completely bored to tears at school because the teachers were forced to move at the pace of the slowest learner? How much potential is lost in a "limiting" process like that? Granted, we aren't going to agree, you're more compassionate to the "little guy" than I am. I prefer to be more pragmatic...if you put your hand on the hot stove after being told you'd get burned, who's fault is that? If you do it again and again, does that mean the rest of us should get rid of our stoves? -Valeyard<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
Well, not that I don't think this discussion has pretty much been beaten like a red headed dead horse, I've decided to add some constructive critism and some possible solutions for all of us. Have several different versions of Outlook for release at retail (or on the internet, as applicable). Outlook standard, Outlook Express, and Outlook Advanced. The backbone would all use the Outlook engine and the frontend wouldn't have to be changed at all. Outlook standard works just like Outlook does post security patch (and if you still don't believe this was a MS security issue, I'm really sorry for you). Outlook Express looks the same as it does today post equivelant security patch. Outlook Advanced - ahhh, Vale's Holy Grail. a small 3 meg patch (or even a slightly more expensive version at retail) available only to registered owners of Outlook. Advanced gives you the power to; disable/enable file opening, puts an 'add/remove' list to programs that have access to your address book. "Power Feature after Power Feature", so to speak. And it's not like this hasn't occured to Microsoft, look at so many of their programs with technical differences (yet interoperability). Hell, look at their latest Flight Simulator that comes in seperate flavors. And voila, ILOVEYOU never happens. Tell me a flaw with this Vale. (other than the <i>obvious</I> OEM bit of sandbagging) |
|
Well, this will probably only make it worse around here but this was posted over at Blue's from ZDNet. <a href="http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2570727,00.html">Microsoft's 'Clippy' a security nightmare?</a> MS has already posted a patch, saying something about an ActiveX control that was incorrectly marked as 'safe for scripting.' It can be found <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms00-034.asp">here</a><I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#59</b> "Seth Krieg" wrote... <QUOTE>Tell me a flaw with this Vale. </QUOTE> What you're proposing already exists, to a degree. Outlook Express, Outlook with warnings turned ON and Outlook with warnings turned OFF (or ignored). If people are turning the warnings off <b>now</b>, and still getting "hit", the same people will be using your Outlook Advanced...and will still get "hit". Additionally, three separate version is going to be way too confusing for the general population...they've already proven how rough two versions can be. It's not cost effective for MS to distribute and market three versions of Outlook. Some people who get Outlook Standard will be complaining that they have to "upgrade" to Advanced to get the feature that they won't. Some people will be complaining that Outlook Advanced has the features they need, but that it's not as "safe". The list is endless. The solution, for the nth time, is training. Teach people how to use the tool, teach them the dangers and hazards - or don't let them use it. Or at least stop listening to their complaints. -Valeyard <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
<b>#12</b> "Bad_CRC" wrote... <QUOTE>umm macros are disabled by default in Word... ummm, since when? </QUOTE> At the least, it's that way in Word2000. Every time you try to open a Word doc that has macros it gives a nice little warning that macros could be dangerous and asks if you'd like to <i>enable</i> macros. You say no and it opens the doc without macros ;) If you do enable macros, though, I believe you have the choice of doing so just for that document. That alone has saved me from quite a few macro virii (simply because, yes, I was expecting the document, but the person that sent it to me was a moron that wasn't aware they had a macro virus). If I was really, really bored I could probably install Word98 and see if it's the same there, but I'm not... <b>#37</b> "Jowr" wrote... <QUOTE>[Sup painkiller? You know me, actually :)] </QUOTE> /me wonders... |
|
If you're using Outlook Express: Tools - Options - security -- set to Restricted Zone instead of Internet Zone. Now go edit your IE settings in the Restricted Zone to allow downloads, not run scripts (even those marked safe), and not allow auto running. <I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I> |
|
I am an asshole. |
|
Agreed. Jesus Christ, that is unbelievably retarded! - lwf
|
|
Puzzling! |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: With Outlook you're safe from... almost everything
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
| P O S T A C O M M E N T |
|
|
| C R A P T A G S | ||||||||
|
|
| There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details] |
|
Powered by blah 0.9.1-dev •
PlanetCrap is © 1997-2035 Hendrik "Morn" Mans |