Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7

On 20/05/2017 16:19, David E. Ross wrote:
However, Micro$oft released a security update to Windows 10 to block
WannaCry and WannaCrypt. To me, this indicates that Windows 10 was no
less vulnerable than Windows 7.

No matter what systems were actually attacked, much of the blame should
be focused on the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA
developed the tool used for ransomware and failed to secure its own
computer systems against theft of that malware. The NSA therefore put
United States -- people, businesses, organizations, and even the
government itself -- at risk instead of protecting us.

See my "The Great Computer Plague of 2017" at
http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PCplague.html.


Simple, on Windows 10 you are more or less forced to do your updates
while on Windows 7 you're not, plus a lot of stupid people have stopped
doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to
force spyware and Windows 10 on them.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

On Mon, 22 May 2017 02:16:30 +0800 (SGT)
mail.m2n Anonymous wrote:

In article
burfordTjustice wrote:

On Sat, 20 May 2017 08:29:47 -0500
Nobody wrote:

From: Nobody
Subject: Almost all WannaCry victims were running Windows 7
Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 08:29:47 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101
Icedove/31.7.0 Newsgroups:
alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.windows7.general,comp.os.linux.advocacy ,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Organization: albasani.net

So what?

That's what your mom said when she coughed you out head first on
a concrete floor.


Very weak, Stay on the Porch...

On Sun, 21 May 2017 18:04:37 +0100 (BST)
Nathan Hale wrote:

burfordTjustice wrote:

On Sat, 20 May 2017 21:31:15 +0100 (BST)
Nathan Hale wrote:

Booford


LOL grade school level..stay in school.


It was an obvious parody of your ignorant, redneck behavior you
moron.




very weak, stay on the porch.

Brian Gregory wrote:
On 20/05/2017 16:19, David E. Ross wrote:
However, Micro$oft released a security update to Windows 10 to block
WannaCry and WannaCrypt. To me, this indicates that Windows 10 was no
less vulnerable than Windows 7.

No matter what systems were actually attacked, much of the blame should
be focused on the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA
developed the tool used for ransomware and failed to secure its own
computer systems against theft of that malware. The NSA therefore put
United States -- people, businesses, organizations, and even the
government itself -- at risk instead of protecting us.

See my "The Great Computer Plague of 2017" at
http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PCplague.html.


Simple, on Windows 10 you are more or less forced to do your updates
while on Windows 7 you're not, plus a lot of stupid people have stopped
doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to
force spyware and Windows 10 on them.


CEIP was probably added a while back. CEIP *is* a good concept
when it is between customers and developers. I think the subsystems
in Mozilla Firefox, are an excellent example of an implementation.
Microsoft CEIP on the other hand, drops all the info at Microsoft first,
and the user never knows whether an actual developer logs into
their Microsoft account and takes any advantage of CEIP-related
info for their application. Whereas with Firefox, there is
good visibility (Mozilla documents some of the things it is
measuring). The lack of individually traceable documentation
on Microsoft CEIP, is why people don't trust it. Firefox has
tick boxes. Firefox has documentation. That's the right way
to do it. "Don't **** off your customers."

The annoying part in Windows Update, is adding software to
make it possible to run Store Apps. When no one is interested.

I don't have a problem with them offering any of that
in the "Optional" section of Windows Update. I will
object strenuously to the practice of putting unwanted
payloads *inside* purported security updates. We want
our security updates, to be little 500K nuggets that
just fix stuff. We don't want 200MB trojans with
a 500KB security update thrown in for good measure.

I don't see that as tinhat-ism.

So if I were to mention "**** you and your 200MB trojan",
then maybe you'd understand. It's a violation of the
concept they invented themselves, the "security" section
and the "optional" section.

I don't use the App Store on Win10. And how likely
am I to spend hours going through that on my
copy of Win7 ? Not damn likely.

I can understand business interests and business plans.
But, a company can take a light touch, and the high
road when doing stuff. They don't have to be douche
bags, all the time...

Paul

Per Brian Gregory:
plus a lot of stupid people have stopped
doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to
force spyware and Windows 10 on them.

My experience is that MS was, in fact, using updates to force Windows 10
on people. May have changed by now, but I almost burned myself a couple
of times. Not a huge deal if once has images to go back to... but MS
*was* using updates to push 10.... and my recollection was that they
were getting flack for it.
--
Pete Cresswell

On 5/22/2017 9:43 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Brian Gregory:
plus a lot of stupid people have stopped
doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to
force spyware and Windows 10 on them.

My experience is that MS was, in fact, using updates to force Windows 10
on people. May have changed by now, but I almost burned myself a couple
of times. Not a huge deal if once has images to go back to... but MS
*was* using updates to push 10.... and my recollection was that they
were getting flack for it.


Microsoft has a problem with buggy updates, which is another reason to
avoid automatic installation.

I turned off automatic updates. When I get an alert that updates are
available, I wait at least a week while I monitor this newsgroup to see
if anyone has an adverse result from installing the updates. I also
review the descriptions of updates, even going to linked Web pages from
the primary descriptive Web pages. More than once, I have avoided a
serious problem by rejecting some updates.

Of course, such a delay is not always sufficient. Since the end of
2014, I installed 39 Microsoft updates that replaced earlier updates
that were found to contain bugs. Of those 39, three were replacements
of earlier replacements of updates.

And then there are the updates that fail to install, even after a second
attempt.

--
David E. Ross
http://www.rossde.com

Consider:
* Most state mandate that drivers have liability insurance.
* Employers are mandated to have worker's compensation insurance.
* If you live in a flood zone, flood insurance is mandatory.
* If your home has a mortgage, fire insurance is mandatory.

Why then is mandatory health insurance so bad??

In message , Paul
writes:
[]
measuring). The lack of individually traceable documentation
on Microsoft CEIP, is why people don't trust it. Firefox has
tick boxes. Firefox has documentation. That's the right way
to do it. "Don't **** off your customers."
[]
Hmm. What's the definition of a "customer": someone who _has_ bought
something from you, or someone who _might_ buy something from you again
in the future? For Firefox, which is largely free (donations
notwithstanding), the overlap is larger. For MS, it's basically a
monopoly (certainly all high/main street stores, and the majority of
online ones), so they know you _will_ be a customer whatever they do
next time you need to buy a computer; whether ****ing you off in the
meantime matters much, ... are you a "customer"?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

For this star a "night on the tiles" means winning at Scrabble - Kathy Lette
(on Kylie), RT 2014/1/11-17

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Paul
writes:
[]
measuring). The lack of individually traceable documentation
on Microsoft CEIP, is why people don't trust it. Firefox has
tick boxes. Firefox has documentation. That's the right way
to do it. "Don't **** off your customers."
[]
Hmm. What's the definition of a "customer": someone who _has_ bought
something from you, or someone who _might_ buy something from you again
in the future? For Firefox, which is largely free (donations
notwithstanding), the overlap is larger. For MS, it's basically a
monopoly (certainly all high/main street stores, and the majority of
online ones), so they know you _will_ be a customer whatever they do
next time you need to buy a computer; whether ****ing you off in the
meantime matters much, ... are you a "customer"?

The customer is the consumer of your software.

The person who downloaded it.

The person who trusted you.

Paul

On 22/05/2017 18:43, David E. Ross wrote:
On 5/22/2017 9:43 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Brian Gregory:
plus a lot of stupid people have stopped
doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to
force spyware and Windows 10 on them.

My experience is that MS was, in fact, using updates to force Windows 10
on people. May have changed by now, but I almost burned myself a couple
of times. Not a huge deal if once has images to go back to... but MS
*was* using updates to push 10.... and my recollection was that they
were getting flack for it.


Microsoft has a problem with buggy updates, which is another reason to
avoid automatic installation.

I turned off automatic updates. When I get an alert that updates are
available, I wait at least a week while I monitor this newsgroup to see
if anyone has an adverse result from installing the updates. I also
review the descriptions of updates, even going to linked Web pages from
the primary descriptive Web pages. More than once, I have avoided a
serious problem by rejecting some updates.

Of course, such a delay is not always sufficient. Since the end of
2014, I installed 39 Microsoft updates that replaced earlier updates
that were found to contain bugs. Of those 39, three were replacements
of earlier replacements of updates.

And then there are the updates that fail to install, even after a second
attempt.


I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including
most optional ones unless there is a clear reason not to like with the
update previews that have started to appear recently. As soon as I heard
MS was pushing Windows 10 I ran Never10 and that's all I had to do to
make sure I wasn't upgraded to Windows 10. I've never seen any real
evidence that Microsoft stealing my data, I assume that some researcher
somewhere would notice if they were and a big fuss would be made.

I can only assume that people who have problems largely have them
because they have chosen to ignore some weird semi random set of updates
which happens to be a combination that Microsoft did not test for bugs.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

On 22/05/2017 13:10, Brian Gregory wrote:
On 20/05/2017 16:19, David E. Ross wrote:
However, Micro$oft released a security update to Windows 10 to block
WannaCry and WannaCrypt. To me, this indicates that Windows 10 was no
less vulnerable than Windows 7.

No matter what systems were actually attacked, much of the blame should
be focused on the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The NSA
developed the tool used for ransomware and failed to secure its own
computer systems against theft of that malware. The NSA therefore put
United States -- people, businesses, organizations, and even the
government itself -- at risk instead of protecting us.

See my "The Great Computer Plague of 2017" at
http://www.rossde.com/editorials/edtl_PCplague.html.


Simple, on Windows 10 you are more or less forced to do your updates
while on Windows 7 you're not, plus a lot of stupid people have stopped
doing updates on Windows 7 believing that Microsoft is using updates to
force spyware and Windows 10 on them.


Actually it seems that there was a bug in the XP version of the exploit
(as implemented in WanaCry).

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

On Mon, 22 May 2017 23:05:32 +0100, Brian Gregory
wrote:

I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including
most optional ones

So you were vulnerable from August 2016 - March 2017 to an
exploit M$ knew about.
Most XP machines are so hardened by firewalls and lack of
PEBKACs that very few were affected. (only 1% of all victims)
Carry on training. You WILL eventually hit your mouth with
that ice cream. Meanwhile, wipe it off your nose graciously, don't
make such a fuss. Sht happens.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

In message , Shadow
writes:
On Mon, 22 May 2017 23:05:32 +0100, Brian Gregory
wrote:

I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including
most optional ones

So you were vulnerable from August 2016 - March 2017 to an
exploit M$ knew about.
Most XP machines are so hardened by firewalls and lack of
PEBKACs that very few were affected. (only 1% of all victims)

Is that, 1% of all victims of WannaCry were XP users? How does that
compare with the percentage of (*online*) computers that are running XP?
(Figures claimed for that vary widely, of course.)

Carry on training. You WILL eventually hit your mouth with
that ice cream. Meanwhile, wipe it off your nose graciously, don't
make such a fuss. Sht happens.
[]'s
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur". ("Anything is more impressive if
you say it in Latin")

On 24/05/2017 13:41, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2017 23:05:32 +0100, Brian Gregory
wrote:

I never really had any problems myself. I install all updates including
most optional ones

So you were vulnerable from August 2016 - March 2017 to an
exploit M$ knew about.
Most XP machines are so hardened by firewalls and lack of
PEBKACs that very few were affected. (only 1% of all victims)
Carry on training. You WILL eventually hit your mouth with
that ice cream. Meanwhile, wipe it off your nose graciously, don't
make such a fuss. Sht happens.
[]'s


Actually it seems that there was a bug in the XP version of the eternal
Blue exploit (as implemented in WanaCry, don't know about in the stolen
NSA document).

I wonder if the NSA leaned on Microsoft? Probably not, but it wouldn't
really surprise me if they did, maybe that's why the patches were
delayed from February to March.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

On Sun, 21 May 2017 14:06:40 -0700, tesla sTinker
wrote:

Ransom ware is mal ware, same ****.

the way this company programmed its malware remover,
is that if its not of the op system files, it checks it,
and marks it. So its like, say goodbye to malware if
your using it...

It will locate several of them first time you run it.
And it matters not, if you have run malware removers before.
And what is amazing, is this thing is only 2mb in size.

Would not be caught dead without it... Malware Remover
Or many of his other good small softwares that are free.

http://www.novirusthanks.org/free-tools/

Since you keep promoting that site, I wonder whether you have a
connection to it in some way. Is it your site? Just curious.

--

Char Jackson