| 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 |
 |
Study: 'Huge jump' in Microsoft flaws since last year | |
|
||
| Time: 17:47 EST/22:47 GMT | News Source: CNET | Posted By: John Quigley | ||
|
The past year has seen a massive increase in the number of flaws found in Microsoft software, according to vulnerability-scanning company Qualys. Between 2006 and 2007, there was an almost threefold rise in Microsoft flaws, Qualys said on Wednesday. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 162 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:45:02 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 92283 (142.32.208.232) at 11/30/2007 1:53:19 PM |
|
5 security bulletins for Excel in 2006
8 security bulletins for Excel in 2007 (Critical or Important) This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Friday, November 30, 2007 at 13:54. |
| #2 By 37047 (99.241.37.218) at 11/30/2007 1:57:31 PM |
| A 300% increase in security flaws! So much for the Secure Software Initiative, or whatever they were calling it. I'd hate to see what it would have been like without it! |
| #3 By 92283 (142.32.208.232) at 11/30/2007 2:06:03 PM |
| #2 OSS math. 5 to 8 is a 300% increase. |
| #4 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 11/30/2007 2:58:34 PM |
| #3: They were probably using Excel 2007 to do the math. You know, 850 x 77.1 = 100,000. |
| #5 By 28801 (71.58.231.46) at 11/30/2007 7:25:33 PM |
| They probably the Latchulator where no matter what formula you key in the answer is always negative towards MS. |
| #6 By 12071 (124.168.186.163) at 11/30/2007 8:09:20 PM |
|
I'm curious... do all the "fanboy's" here have selective reading abilities or is the problem with the blinkers that are permanently attached to the side of your heads that blocks text out? Let me quote the important bits and make it really obvious:
"We have seen a huge jump in the vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office products," said Amol Sawate, manager of Qualys' vulnerability-management lab. "These charts show growth of nearly 300 percent from 2006 to 2007, primarily in new Excel vulnerabilities that can easily be exploited by getting unsuspecting users to open Excel files sent via e-mail and instant message." Primarily, not exclusively. So pointing out how many fixed bugs there were in Excel in a given year is straight out lying given that there are a lot more components to Office than Excel. I think Latch is right - they must have been using Excel 2007 with it superior mathematical power and brilliantly hacked up non-implementable MOOXML. Let's count Microsoft style... 1 2 3 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... ... 65,533 65,534 100,000 |
| #7 By 92283 (64.180.196.143) at 11/30/2007 9:54:20 PM |
|
#16 Do you understand english?
Do you know what the word "primarily" means? How can an increase of 5 to 8 account for a 300% increase? Idiot. OSS fanatics continue to beclown themselves. This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Friday, November 30, 2007 at 21:55. |
| #8 By 12071 (124.168.186.163) at 12/1/2007 1:47:17 AM |
|
#7 "#16 Do you understand english?"
I see that you too are using Excel 2007. Good on you! I despise hypocrites. "Do you know what the word "primarily" means?" I sure do. Would you like me to explain to you what "a huge jump in the vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office products" means? "Idiot." Yes you are. |
| #9 By 23275 (216.231.166.194) at 12/1/2007 3:03:25 AM |
|
If we wish to take away anything of value from this we have to examine what is going with applications software in the context of security and the progams implemented to ensure they become as secure as the operating systems they run on.
Adobe has seen a serious increase in vulnerabilities and exploits - the same is true of Apple's Quicktime. Same drill over at CA and its line. The trend is as predicted - that applications have become as lucrative a target for criminal hackers as the OS has been in teh past. Without question, Windows users remain targets for both criminal hackers and security researchers making a living exploiting software [albeit from a different perspective and according to different motivations (I hope)]. Now, the challenge for end users and many in the SMB markets is how to keep all of these applications patched - MS products are largely covered but not entirely, but certainly better than most. Apple's updater is a challenge, because it doesn't reflect what the updates it does advise of are for - and seems to want to continually foist iTunes on people who only want Quicktime. Adobe is as unclear. What has to happen is that all houses have to start to work together - they have to coordinate and deliver patches [all of them], via Windows Update. They won't - they're too busy scoring points on one another - just as we have seen here. If we care about people and computing, we'll stop that and start devising and demanding unified patching systems. |
| #10 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 12/1/2007 8:15:38 AM |
|
#9: Using WU is a great idea but...
Have you consider the liability aspect? XYZ cpmpany releases an update, the patch is delivered trough WU, the patch disrupts an X number of computers. No matter what someone would blame MS, some "lawyers", the kind with a fin on the back, smelling money got on board etc. etc. We do not live in a perfect world. |
| #11 By 92283 (64.180.196.143) at 12/1/2007 11:59:02 AM |
|
#8 Still an idiot I see. I posted numbers. You posted .... crap.
Thats all that the OSS suckhole club posts ... crap. This post was edited by NotParkerToo on Saturday, December 01, 2007 at 11:59. |
| #12 By 92283 (64.180.196.143) at 12/1/2007 4:27:37 PM |
|
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=697&tag=nl.e589
"Not counting silent (undocumented) fixes, Apple has patched at least 32 security flaws affecting QuickTime in 2007. Last year, the QuickTime patch count was 28. Five were documented in 2005. Judging by the public release of details — and exploit code — for zero-day flaws affecting the company’s flagship media player, it looks like the number will rise again in 2008." |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 162 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:45:02 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
