From: "Rich Gauszka" 


"Geo."  wrote in message
news:45f2e4b4$3{at}w3.nls.net...
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:45f2bef2$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>>> Aren't there zero-day exploits that need to be patched while Microsoft
>>> is twiddling its thumbs?
>
>> Yep - yet sometimes a rushed patch could be considered a malicious zero
>> day exploit.
>
> Right, it's not like users need to be concerned about the 6 zero day
> exploits..
>
> http://eeyeresearch.typepad.com/blog/2007/02/patch_tuesday_f.html
>
> Geo. (how is it still a zero day exploit after over 400 days?)

I didn't mean to imply that I was letting MS off the hook over the delay.
Just that a rushed patch can be more dangerous than an exploit.

I do wonder how many resources are allocated to the wga team vs. the
exploit fixers as we all now know what Microsoft considers a security
threat.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5