Microsoft Email
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Microsoft Email

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6

    Microsoft Email

    I will tell you this I enjoy earnning money from as we say the idiot behind the key board. People wake up have a coffee , smell the roses. Befor you read email that tells you of security problems f and patches from Microsoft security@ what ever... Microsoft does not send emails about a patch your OS will autoupdate unless you disable it and for the novice I would not recommend disabling your auto updater program but remember this about email and it is strong advice IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO or WHAT or from WHY it came to you do NOT open it TRASH IT. OR spend needless money for someone to clean up the trash.
    \" A Mind is Like a Parachute, It Only Works When Opened.\"

  2. #2
    Senior Member nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    ThePCDoctor

    I think that you lie...............you do not "enjoy" making the money.............you would not have posted your warning if you really did?

    You enjoy a challenge, as we all do?

    Good luck

  3. #3
    I would recommend turning off Microsoft's auto update feature if you're a fairly active user. Sometimes the patches that are released, and automatically installed if you leave this option on, cause a conflict w/existing SW/HW on your machine and you spend days wondering what went wrong until you remember...

    Also, I am totally new here, so I don't know how much it has been covered, but yes, someone 'forged' an email from Microsoft that is elusive enough that the normal user might click on the .exe. There are many flaws in the email that he could have corrected, grammatically, etc...but still, I showed it to a couple friends and they were clueless. They said with all the M$ problems of late they thought it would be another update.

    As mentioned, M$ would never email you an update...always get your security patches directly off microsoft's site, and if for some reason it's down (ddos anyone? lol) get it from another well known security site like symantec.

    I only took a brief view at the headers of the email, anyone else happen to do any dissecting? I'm a complete n00b in some areas, know a little in others. Hope I can be of help here and that the forums/site is as good as I heard. (forum is only as good as its users =P)

    Star****ers|Inc

  4. #4
    Senior Member nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,190
    Star.....change that flag...................I am more a "grenouille" than you

    I agree with you about autoupdates. Not only Microsoft, but all the others....the autoupdate does not know what you are doing, but just cuts in on the system clock.

    I have had a few crashes thanks to this "feature" and always turn it off for everything.

    Cheers

  5. #5
    AO Ancient: Team Leader
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,197
    Ok..... I'm game..... Here's the opposite point of view.....

    I run servers that provide public services. On the bright side none of the services are "mission critical", (basic informational web pages and email is the vast majority of the traffic).

    I run auto-update automatically on all public machines. The Auto-update wizard allows you to schedule the installation time and I set it to 0300hrs every morning. At 0530 I take my first look at my boxes. If any have failed the first thing that springs to my mind is the auto-update.

    Why do I do it this way? I'd rather have a box down than vulnerable box. Fixing a box is a lot easier than a forensic investigation - I can have the box back up in 2 hours or less. I fully understand that this is not possible in all environments but wherever the box is not mission critical I believe it should be implemented this way.
    Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you.....
    \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    6
    nihil, I also agree to some extent with auto updates But and I say But if you are running Windows XP home or as I prefer the Pro version you can have auto update set in various ways and 2 of them will ask if you be notified prior to download and install or download the update then ask you when you want to install the update to wit that windows 85,98 and 98 se as well as Me do not do that and yes some updates you deffinatly do not need. and yes I agree also that star should CHANGE YOUR FLAG

    Tigersshark....... Yes I agree with how you are running your updates and am greatful that someone understands the OS
    \" A Mind is Like a Parachute, It Only Works When Opened.\"

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    77
    I think the point that Nihil was trying to make was that it was not just the installing of the patch, but also the program connecting to the internet to see if a new patch was available.

    Slightly off topic, has anyone had a problem with two executables claiming to be the autoupdater? The main PC in my home LAN has this problem, where the firewall (McAffee V7 (from memory)) keeps asking if you want the new program to be allowed to connect to the net (I presume this is because the programs location has changed, therefore it's counted as a different program). They both have the same name, are there two versions of the auto updater around, or does it use two executables, or has someone downloaded something they shouldn't have? (I'm using Windows 98 First Edition by the way).
    \"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives.\"
    A. Sachs

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,146
    I agree with Tiger Shark. It is much easier to deal with the odd system that sometimes just needs a restart than to find a compromised system that's hosed the entire network.

    da'dodo:

    Not sure about Win9x, but there are some trojans and such out there right now that make registry entries to try to redirect the auto-update feature. I'd run a complete scan to make sure you don't have something.

    We have had a few show up. Fortunately, we catch them before they do major damage.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    889
    Hey PCDr. ya that old fart pushing the stupid CD's fpr free only a 29.95 mailing fee? On the gulp TV? Gawd what a perfect con! Play on the free just pay shipping on a 10 cent CD. Humm lets see M$ ussued a IE patch for IE 6.0 guess what did not work so what trust their auto update blame the end user. Well I say quit marketing swiss cheese as American (outsourcing). M$, ISP, need to STOP marketing the WEB as a safe fun place becuse it is anything but that, take a Win box plug it in or dial in and within 20 minutes or less it is toast and owned by someone else and even they will take time to get to it cause they have so many. Out of the box it is full of holes does a newbie to the WEB know out of the box they need 48 critical patches and some of the patches need a patch? NOPE enjoy your money and big house on the Hill and yep I owe my living to M$ faults I earn my money everyday 8 hours a day, securing a simple business operation not giving aways for free for just shipping charges like it costs even $5.98 to mail a CD try 46 cents. Damn crook!

    OOps forgot this site is not for promoting your damn product!
    I believe that one of the characteristics of the human race - possibly the one that is primarily responsible for its course of evolution - is that it has grown by creatively responding to failure.- Glen Seaborg

  10. #10
    Member amorphous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    61
    Originally posted here by da'dodo
    Slightly off topic, has anyone had a problem with two executables claiming to be the autoupdater? The main PC in my home LAN has this problem, where the firewall (McAffee V7 (from memory)) keeps asking if you want the new program to be allowed to connect to the net (I presume this is because the programs location has changed, therefore it's counted as a different program). They both have the same name, are there two versions of the auto updater around, or does it use two executables, or has someone downloaded something they shouldn't have? (I'm using Windows 98 First Edition by the way).
    The auto-update program changes from time to time, not just the location. Thats why m/s checks for new version of auto-updater every time you go to the site. The firewalls I have dealt with all recognize when a program has changed and want new permissions configured or granted when they do. This may be your problem.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •