6 ms·

Computers can get compromised simply by visiting a malicious website Since Microsoft has not released a patch for this vulnerability yet, Internet users are st

by givan 14y ago

Computers can get compromised simply by visiting a malicious website Since Microsoft has not released a patch for this vulnerability yet, Internet users are strongly advised to switch to other browsers. The long release cycle of internet explorer is a very big problem for ie users, unfortunately most of them don't even now what a browser is.

greenyoda 14y ago
The long release cycle for new versions of IE is irrelevant. Internet Explorer security patches get pushed regularly through Windows Update, which Microsoft encourages users to set up for automatic installation. So this problem will get fixed for the average user as soon as Microsoft sends out the patch. It requires no more knowledge than updating Chrome does. Note that I'm not recommending that anybody use IE. I'm just pointing out that it does get automatic updates, just like other browsers.
- just2n 14y ago
  I don't think I'd compare Windows Updates (the most broken updating system I've ever seen) to how Chrome manages updates. I've fixed computers running IE7 and with WU disabled. I ask why and I'm told "because the popups are annoying, and because upgrading IE is a pain in the ass." I agree. When I install Chrome for them, then later point out that it has updated 10 times in the past few months, they say "I never saw anything." As it should be.
  - ladzoppelin 14y ago
    I find Windows update to be the most reliable update of any software. Since 2005 I can't even imagine how many updates I have run on thousands of computers that never once "broke" because of an update. MS worked out how to test updates years ago and now , unless you have malware, its probably not going to break anything. Also keep in mind that if Chrome was released in 1998 with its current update model it would of failed with people screaming to governments that Google was spying on them.
- thaumaturgy 14y ago
  True, but there is an important difference between Chrome background updates and Windows Updates: Windows Updates are easy to disable, and, in our experience, frequently are disabled by users for various reasons. Users find that they hate trying to reboot (or start up) one day and then wait for 30 minutes while their computer does nothing more than display a "Now installing update 3 (of 30)..." screen. (This is especially obnoxious on big Windows Server installations where this process can take a server down for an entire weekend.) Or they hate being nagged all the time that there are updates available. Or they hate having their computer insist every five to ten minutes that it needs to be restarted now. Or they're gun-shy about it because an update once changed the layout of Windows Live Mail and left them completely confused about why it was suddenly so different even though they hadn't changed anything. In one fun case, we had a corporate client disable automatic updates for their entire research lab because one night Windows update decided it needed to automatically reboot every single system there. They were running overnight experiments and came in the next morning to find that all of the night's data was missing or corrupted, costing them a day on a tight schedule. Microsoft does software updates in a very, very wrong way, and that means that a rather large number of people think it's better to just ignore the updates.
  - com2kid 14y ago
    Windows Update is very configurable, both through AD policies and on a per user basis. If a machine shouldn't be auto-updating, set it to manual reminders. Plain and simple. As for updates, in my experience they are generally small and fast to install once you have gotten over the initial update push of a clean Windows installation. And of course in domains, you can setup custom update roll outs, no need to use MS's update servers. Finally, for servers, install the OS onto an SSD. Updates will take seconds. Problem solved. While it would be nice if more components could update without restarts (and I think people forget how much better things are now than they used to be!), the fact is every major piece of software out there requires restarts to install updates. Of course there are awesome-cool Linux and other OSs that do not require restarts (IBM obviously has had that tech for ages, really cool stuff), but with how Windows is designed (back-compat first), that isn't likely coming any time soon. I've also had long running work disrupted by Windows update. The simple solution was to check "Ask before installation". Problem solved. (And to be honest, Browser restarts are just as troubling to me now days as rebooting my entire PC!)
- mtgx 14y ago
  I disable the automatic updates as soon as I install Windows. I find them very annoying, and unless there's a serious issue with that version of Windows, I'd rather just wait a couple of years for the next service pack or something, before I install the updates.
  - greedo 14y ago
    There are serious issues on an extremely frequent basis with Windows and all it's applications. Whether it's the OS, Office, or IE, it's rare for there not to be critical updates on a monthly basis. This month was the first time in four years that my team had the option to defer patching til next month.
dfc 14y ago
"Most of the don't even now (sic) what a browser is." Bullshit. Its time for us to get off our high horses and realize its not 2001 anymore. Users know what a web browser is, its the thing they use "to surf the internet." Just like MS Word is the thing they use to write a document.
- Cyranix 14y ago
  A stronger counter-claim would have included non-anecdotal data.
  - dfc 14y ago
    I think you may have hit reply on the wrong link. I did not include any data or anecdotes. Maybe you meant to reply to the parent "a stronger claim would have included any supporting data"?
    - dangrossman 14y ago
      From 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ
- daave 14y ago
  I wish you were right, but sadly I don't believe it. My crappy anecdotal evidence is that less than 50% of my non-dev friends know what a browser is. They generally use the default browser that comes with their system (Safari or IE), and they call it "The Internet".
- dubfan 14y ago
  They may know intuitively what a browser is, but they don't always know it as a "browser". When I did public-facing tech support, I found I encountered much less confusion when I told people to "pull up Google" or "go to Yahoo" versus "start your browser". Doing tech support work interacting with the generally computer non-literate is like civil service for the tech world. It's not pleasant but it expands your perspective, and many HN readers would do well to go through it.
mkwayisi 14y ago
Every HN reader is sophisticated enough to decide which browser to use and why. And trust me, in 2012, there's nothing you want from someone using IE[6-9] with Windows Update disabled and no antivirus software installed.

by givan 14y ago

greenyoda 14y ago

The long release cycle for new versions of IE is irrelevant. Internet Explorer security patches get pushed regularly through Windows Update, which Microsoft encourages users to set up for automatic installation. So this problem will get fixed for the average user as soon as Microsoft sends out the patch. It requires no more knowledge than updating Chrome does. Note that I'm not recommending that anybody use IE. I'm just pointing out that it does get automatic updates, just like other browsers.

just2n 14y ago
I don't think I'd compare Windows Updates (the most broken updating system I've ever seen) to how Chrome manages updates. I've fixed computers running IE7 and with WU disabled. I ask why and I'm told "because the popups are annoying, and because upgrading IE is a pain in the ass." I agree. When I install Chrome for them, then later point out that it has updated 10 times in the past few months, they say "I never saw anything." As it should be.
- ladzoppelin 14y ago
  I find Windows update to be the most reliable update of any software. Since 2005 I can't even imagine how many updates I have run on thousands of computers that never once "broke" because of an update. MS worked out how to test updates years ago and now , unless you have malware, its probably not going to break anything. Also keep in mind that if Chrome was released in 1998 with its current update model it would of failed with people screaming to governments that Google was spying on them.
thaumaturgy 14y ago
True, but there is an important difference between Chrome background updates and Windows Updates: Windows Updates are easy to disable, and, in our experience, frequently are disabled by users for various reasons. Users find that they hate trying to reboot (or start up) one day and then wait for 30 minutes while their computer does nothing more than display a "Now installing update 3 (of 30)..." screen. (This is especially obnoxious on big Windows Server installations where this process can take a server down for an entire weekend.) Or they hate being nagged all the time that there are updates available. Or they hate having their computer insist every five to ten minutes that it needs to be restarted now. Or they're gun-shy about it because an update once changed the layout of Windows Live Mail and left them completely confused about why it was suddenly so different even though they hadn't changed anything. In one fun case, we had a corporate client disable automatic updates for their entire research lab because one night Windows update decided it needed to automatically reboot every single system there. They were running overnight experiments and came in the next morning to find that all of the night's data was missing or corrupted, costing them a day on a tight schedule. Microsoft does software updates in a very, very wrong way, and that means that a rather large number of people think it's better to just ignore the updates.
- com2kid 14y ago
  Windows Update is very configurable, both through AD policies and on a per user basis. If a machine shouldn't be auto-updating, set it to manual reminders. Plain and simple. As for updates, in my experience they are generally small and fast to install once you have gotten over the initial update push of a clean Windows installation. And of course in domains, you can setup custom update roll outs, no need to use MS's update servers. Finally, for servers, install the OS onto an SSD. Updates will take seconds. Problem solved. While it would be nice if more components could update without restarts (and I think people forget how much better things are now than they used to be!), the fact is every major piece of software out there requires restarts to install updates. Of course there are awesome-cool Linux and other OSs that do not require restarts (IBM obviously has had that tech for ages, really cool stuff), but with how Windows is designed (back-compat first), that isn't likely coming any time soon. I've also had long running work disrupted by Windows update. The simple solution was to check "Ask before installation". Problem solved. (And to be honest, Browser restarts are just as troubling to me now days as rebooting my entire PC!)
mtgx 14y ago
I disable the automatic updates as soon as I install Windows. I find them very annoying, and unless there's a serious issue with that version of Windows, I'd rather just wait a couple of years for the next service pack or something, before I install the updates.
- greedo 14y ago
  There are serious issues on an extremely frequent basis with Windows and all it's applications. Whether it's the OS, Office, or IE, it's rare for there not to be critical updates on a monthly basis. This month was the first time in four years that my team had the option to defer patching til next month.

dfc 14y ago

"Most of the don't even now (sic) what a browser is." Bullshit. Its time for us to get off our high horses and realize its not 2001 anymore. Users know what a web browser is, its the thing they use "to surf the internet." Just like MS Word is the thing they use to write a document.

Cyranix 14y ago
A stronger counter-claim would have included non-anecdotal data.
- dfc 14y ago
  I think you may have hit reply on the wrong link. I did not include any data or anecdotes. Maybe you meant to reply to the parent "a stronger claim would have included any supporting data"?
  - dangrossman 14y ago
    From 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ
daave 14y ago
I wish you were right, but sadly I don't believe it. My crappy anecdotal evidence is that less than 50% of my non-dev friends know what a browser is. They generally use the default browser that comes with their system (Safari or IE), and they call it "The Internet".
dubfan 14y ago
They may know intuitively what a browser is, but they don't always know it as a "browser". When I did public-facing tech support, I found I encountered much less confusion when I told people to "pull up Google" or "go to Yahoo" versus "start your browser". Doing tech support work interacting with the generally computer non-literate is like civil service for the tech world. It's not pleasant but it expands your perspective, and many HN readers would do well to go through it.

mkwayisi 14y ago

Every HN reader is sophisticated enough to decide which browser to use and why. And trust me, in 2012, there's nothing you want from someone using IE[6-9] with Windows Update disabled and no antivirus software installed.