| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
MS to intro product key check in WinXP SP1 WPA | |
|
||
| Time: 13:09 EST/18:09 GMT | News Source: The Register | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft has released details of the changes being made in Windows Product Activation (WPA) with WinXP Service Pack 1. As expected, SP1 will fail to install if either of "two well-known pirated product keys" has previously been used to activate the system, and such systems will also be denied access to Windows Update. But the changes will have a far wider impact than this, as Microsoft appears to be trying to cover all currently known holes in WPA security. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 154 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:57:23 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1401 (162.39.116.61) at 8/26/2002 1:28:21 PM |
| Two well know product keys? I know one of them. I wonder what the other one is... |
| #2 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 8/26/2002 6:57:51 PM |
|
Defragged - Ohhhh! 2 years ago.
I started using Linux in 1992. I started using Windows NT in 1995. Linux was never any more stable than NT. bob670 - NT was solid at version 3.51 released in 1995. |
| #3 By 7797 (63.76.44.26) at 8/26/2002 8:04:33 PM |
|
How does one stay on top of all these "critical" security patches microsoft is releasing these days?
They are releasing a couple patches a week that are "critical" nowadays and each of them require a reboot. Best practice would advise to install each patch on a test network to ensure it will not break something when installed on servers in the production network. My question is how are admins supposed to administer their network if they spend most of their time testing YET another MS critical patch etc when they could be doing other more useful things. My guess is that the TCO of MS Server is skyrocketing becasue of the many additional hours an admin has to spend testing / installing patches. Not to mention that for best backup practices one also is supposed to document all this for successful restores. Not to mention that one has to reboot servers each time a patch is installed. So what does that do to the five 9's of uptime? This post was edited by tgnb on Monday, August 26, 2002 at 20:06. |
| #4 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 8/26/2002 8:04:50 PM |
| #3 You are licensed to use the software on ten machines. Certainly if one of the orignal ten stops using the software, you can bring in a new machine and install the softare on it. |
| #5 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 8/26/2002 8:15:32 PM |
|
tgnb - It doesn't take that much effort to test.
These patches also don't come out that often. There has only been 47 this year. Furthermore, they are specific to only certain types of servers. So you pick and choose which patches you need apply, then apply them only to the select group of servers it is necessary on. You'll have the same issues with Linux, etc. certainly given their propensity to release even more patches, and then they aren't nearly as mature on documenting the issues as Microsoft has been. Also as far as five 9's of uptime... that applies to the entire system. The only way to get that kind of uptime is to install clustered servers, so you can take machines out of the loop and do maintenance on them, then put them back in and move on to the next server. |
| #6 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 8/26/2002 8:32:40 PM |
|
sodablue,
Why bring up linux for comparison? I purposely didnt mention that OS. But since you bring it up, i can do most upgrades on linux without restarting the server, Even without taking the affected service offline during the patch / upgrade. And you are plain wrong about Linuxes maturity on documenting their patches. Besides, comparing Linux here is apples and oranges since linux is nothing but a kernel that you can run other services on that are not part of the actual OS. But i dont even want to compare or question the superiority of either system here. If you would follow best practice then applying these patches DOES require QUITE an effort to test. Especially in an environment with lots of custom written software, and where you use just about all of the Server services. I can't pick and choose what patches apply to me since pretty much all of them do on one server or another. Only someone who doesnt know or follow best practices can IMO make such a statement that testing patches doesnt take a lot of effort. I can't see how any other serious Admin here can agree with you that researching, keeping track, testing and applying all these patches, documenting them for backups etc can agree with you that it doesnt take a lot of effort or time. I truly would like to know how other admins that try to follow best practices deal with this problem. |
| #7 By 135 (208.50.201.48) at 8/26/2002 11:15:51 PM |
|
tgnb - Test automation, my friend... Test automation.
Why create a lot of work for yourself when you can just push a button to validate your deployment? see WinRunner |
| #8 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 8/27/2002 1:11:01 AM |
|
Shall we begin to disucss the security issues with Linux? Let's check the most recent version of Red Hat Linux. That would be version 7.3. It's only been out for a few months and already has 41 security alerts. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh73-errata.html
Let's try TurboLinux. They have 87 security fixes since June 5th. http://www.turbolinux.com/security/ SuSe has 33 alerts since January of this year. http://www.suse.de/us/business/security.html Debian has had 62 alerts since January of this year. http://www.debian.org/security/2002/ Before you attack Microsoft for its insecure operating systems and endless security issues and jump on your Linux chariot, try looking at the facts. A sampling of a few of the largest Linux vendors shows that each of them has issued many security warnings and patches. Linux has had several remote root exploits this year. So much for being superior to Windows. |
| #9 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 8/27/2002 1:17:01 AM |
|
Forgot to add in Microsoft's numbers. Since January they have posted 47 security bulletins. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/security/current.asp
These bulletins are not solely for a version of Windows, but cover all of their products - Windows, Office for Windows and Mac, Internet Explorer, Media Player, Exchange Server, SQL Server, etc. Some of these bulletins are also cumulative patches, so they include previously posted bulletins. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 154 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:57:23 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
