PDA

View Full Version : Re: Windows XP SP2 and enhanced memory protection


Carey Frisch [MVP]
December 19th 03, 04:49 PM
This is a peer-to-peer newsgroup and no one, outside Microsoft, has credible
knowledge of any forthcoming SP2 "enhanced memory protection". The Microsoft
developers may have such knowledge, but they do not participate in answering
questions or commenting in this public newsgroup.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------

"Simon Merrell" > wrote in message:
...

| Does anyone know more about this new "enhanced memory protection" coming in
windows XP sp2? Would like to know some more details on this, and also if the
same technology is coming for Windows 2000 or Server 2003?
|
| Here's an extract:
| "Kaplan admitted that Microsoft's record on security has "not been good
enough", but he claims the company is improving. Security is now the number one
priority for Microsoft and that will be demonstrated with SP2, he said,
revealing that the update will contain enhanced memory protection in an attempt
to reduce the operating system's vulnerability to buffer overflow exploits. "One
of the primary way worms get onto the system is by what they call a buffer
overflow. There is a new technology that lets us lock out people's ability to
install code in Windows using a buffer overflow," he said."
|
| Full article
| http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-5091381.html

David Qunt
December 19th 03, 04:51 PM
"Carey Frisch [MVP]" > squirted these wordjisms
deep inside the bumtube of the news**** in
:

> This is a peer-to-peer newsgroup and no one, outside Microsoft, has
> credible knowledge of any forthcoming SP2 "enhanced memory
> protection". The Microsoft developers may have such knowledge, but
> they do not participate in answering questions or commenting in this
> public newsgroup.
>

No disrespect, but I simply don't see the point in your reply at all.

Now if you had said "wait and see", I would probably have understood.
--
*********************************
> David Qunt
>
************************************************** **

Google