Microsoft slams NSA for enabling recent Ransomware attack

By William Gayde ยท 35 replies
May 15, 2017
Post New Reply
  1. bmw95

    bmw95 TS Maniac Posts: 199   +164

    And this is definitely the other side to the coin. My initial comment was about things being Microsoft's fault, and I still stand by that because of MS attitude that they can do no wrong and then question why companies are doing what they are doing. I was in IT for a little bit and I totally understand why it's so important to wait for a bit after MS releases an update.

    Then on the other side, you have companies who are still on windows XP, making ridiculous statements that Microsoft is some horrible company that doesn't support them at all. And then when they get bit from something that the NSA does as per your comment, they just automatically blame MS for their own problems.

    I guess it's just a very destructive cycle. My point though is that people would be a lot more happy to stand behind microsoft if the company didn't just simply dismiss itself as even just a tiny part of any problem that shows up. For example they could take a look at the reason why companies are so slow to update, and notice the amount of support calls they get from their customers after releasing updates. Then think, 'well hmmm, maybe we're contributing to this problem a bit'. Instead the company either blames the customer or bullies customers into doing what they want.
  2. merikafyeah

    merikafyeah TS Enthusiast Posts: 84   +36

    Because businesses use a completely different version of Windows with completely different patches from end users? What world do you live in?

    But if you want an example of businesses being affected more than end users then I remember KB3163622 broke Group Policy which affected organizations everywhere. It was HUGE.

    There was also MS16-075 and MS16-076 which affected Netlogon and SMB server functions. KB3161606 update rollup caused numerous issues including many bugs with Hyper-V instances.

    Microsoft's quality control is lower than ever and anyone who manages these systems would know first hand.
  3. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,935   +764

    Seems like you and I can keep yelling about things like this, but even though we are vociferous about them, there are those who simply cannot understand that when an update breaks a business computer, it costs the business a lot of money.
  4. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,935   +764

    If you want the references, I am sure you are skilled enough to find them yourself.

    As you noted, there are versions of 10 where a user can disable updates. I've done so. Why? Because updates have broken things to the point of making my PC unusable, and also to the point of making some features that I regularly use unusable on at least one of the machines where I have disabled updates.

    So I should allow M$ to push updates to my PCs so that my PCs break and become unusable? I don't think so.

    And before you go lecturing me about how I am going to get a virus, I've been using PCs since the early 90s and have never gotten a virus simply because I am security conscious, don't expose my internal network to the outside world, and am easily able to see a scam. I am not saying that I won't or can't get a virus, but in 25+ years of PC ownership, most of them using M$ operating systems and 20+ years of internet usage, I have yet to get a virus. It is pretty easy, from my point of view, to NOT get a virus.

    As I see it, it does not matter how many people M$ hired. If the answers that have been posted to technical questions on M$ main site are any indication, there are a large number of people that they have hired that are completely clueless, and their answers to the questions are less than useless.

    M$ has only one thing in mind and that is $$$$. Poor M$' seems to think that it has a spotless reputation and that the NSA is somehow tarnishing that reputation. What they don't realize is that they themselves, meaning M$, have trashed their own reputation.

    And your statement regarding "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" sets aside reality - at least as I see it. Not everyone is some dumb wanker who needs have sh!t shoved down their throats.

    Like I said, though, when "updates" make PCs completely unusable (such as the 10 update that left my PC with a black screen and only the mouse cursor showing), or break major features that are regularly used, then those updates are less than useless - at least in my eyes. I image backup when I do 10 updates. If they break things, I restore the image. IMO, M$ has taken a gigantic leap backwards with 10.
  5. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,935   +764

    And like end users do not exist in businesses, and an end user in a business cannot have the same problems that an "end user" has in the "real world?" :confused: Do you live on Earth, or are you just throwing straw men into the fire?
  6. wiyosaya

    wiyosaya TS Evangelist Posts: 1,935   +764

    (y)Awesome! I thought I was old running XP/XP64. :D
  7. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 2,045   +680

    None of that was relevant to what I was curious about, but you tried. :)
  8. marko88

    marko88 TS Rookie Posts: 17

    Great haha
  9. skribat

    skribat TS Rookie

    "there is simply no way for customers to protect themselves against threats unless they update their systems." guilty or not .. sure Microsoft are going to be top of the list of suspects .. they stand to make the most money from these forced upgrades ..
  10. Darth Shiv

    Darth Shiv TS Evangelist Posts: 1,811   +472

    For corporate embedded systems that work, an OS upgrade introduces many many new services which need lockdown, patching, migration. Very very expensive exercise for no business gain until compromised. Management prioritise something with no monetary benefits very low in a budget. It's hard to get customers to pay for something they already have unless you pad your initial contract or include maintenance which decreases your competitiveness.
  11. James00007

    James00007 TS Rookie Posts: 17

    "there is simply no way for customers to protect themselves against threats unless they update their systems" At least its a way to ensure a poorly designed update doesn't do as much damage as the threats we are trying to avoid or at least reduce functionality. More important is at least a basic awareness of the dangers online and knowing how to protect against them (don't use suspect sites, click links in dodgy emails or download that harmful exe, scr or bat file). Currently my PC with Windows 10 is working fine (older update), getting those updates could mean hours or even days of troubleshooting. Worth the risk?

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...