On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 03:06:27AM +0100, Juraj Bednar wrote:
> he meant, that setting the liability precedent is quite important thing.
> if someone sues microsoft over security flaw and wins (even in korea),
> anyone can sue *insert your favourite os vendor name here* and win too.
>
> every software has bugs, making vendors liable is not a trivial thing.
> making vendors liable for not providing security fixes in timely manner
> is another thing (and maybe better).
What may be interesting here is that you a) could "acidentally" install the
vulnerable component by doing a full install of one fo the bigger office
packets - so you really aren't aware that you are running the vulnerable
software on your workstation and b) the windows update button doesn't
list/provide the needed patch.
Ciao
J�rg
--
Joerg Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I found out that "pro" means "instead of" (as in proconsul). Now I know
what proactive means.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
