From: Scott 

IT (no pun intended...mostly) would seem probable that that move could
allow the government to run an exploit on someone's targeted computer that
they have the cure for, but the target didn't.

It could also be a reaction to the, "If you DON"T give us access
to 'the force', we're going to do things that won't make you, as rich as
you are, happy."

Just an obs  :)



Mike '/m' wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 15:45:45 -0500, "Rich Gauszka"

> wrote:
>
>
>>"Geo"  wrote in message
news:4234a44f{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>>>http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID=7876004
&src=rss/technologyNews
>>>
>>>NEW YORK (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile,
Research) is
>>>to give the U.S. government priority in fixing security holes in Windows
>>>and
>>>other software, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.
>>>
>>>Under a plan to take effect later this year, Microsoft will give the U.S.
>>>Air Force versions of software "patches" to fix
serious security
>>>vulnerabilities up to a month before they are available to others, the
>>>paper
>>>said.
>>>
>>>The U.S. Department of Homeland Security will give advance notice of
>>>problems to other government agencies and distribute patches to them, the
>>>Journal said, citing officials at Microsoft and the White House's Office
>>>of
>>>Management and Budget.
>>>
>>>----------------------
>>>
>>>ok so the question is, if the patches are available why not give them to
>>>everyone as soon as possible?
>>>
>>>Geo.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>So when the Homeland Security computers go down are we to assume that they
>>are testing a security patch?
>>
>
>
> Maybe Microsoft gave an early patch to the power companies in August 2003?
>
>  /m

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