It happens that Jupiter Jones [MVP] formulated :
Hi Jupiter
As Bill says they are Microsoft files from a Microsoft source since Microsoft
owns spynet.com.
I missed the connection with SpyNet so they are not 3rd party as I stated.
Ok
It should still be clear what I am talking about.
I am not just referring only to Microsoft products as I made clear:
"not just for Microsoft products, but also for others such as anti virus and
firewalls."
Did you miss that?
Well this was about definitions and 3rd party products are really
needed
now for protecting our PCs, MS SP2 firewall is too weak, and antivirus
protection is not available from MS.
In this case this is a Microsoft workaround for a Microsoft product.
But if the workaround had come from other than Microsoft, it would be
potentially dangerous since there is no source outside of Microsoft
authorized to distribute Microsoft products.
Yes, this bug is really dangerous and to direct download them with
no MD5/Hash signature is totally out of bounds.
Hopfully MS update lear to update definition kb.s before they release
them !
When similar situations have come up with anti virus and other software
related to security, I have said the same thing, get the fix only from the
source. It is not a good idea to get patches, updates etc from 3rd party
sources since the 3rd party is not the expert.
Normally the source does not even authorize the 3rd party to distribute.
So what you can have is patches, updates etc out of control of the source and
often have malware built in.
I would be very hesitant to use and more so to recommend a 3rd party
workaround for any security product, whether it be Microsoft, AVG, Symantec
etc.
Correct, security products must maintain high standards for all
details.
There were many sources for Service Pack 1 and 2 for Windows XP.
Some were found to be deliberately corrupted by the unauthorized distributor.
So the "service" some thought was provided was really a way to distribute
malware. That is only one legitimate source to get Microsoft stuff ,
Microsoft. Get Symantec stuff only from Symantec.
Get AVG stuff only from AVG etc
Etc.
Well, about SP1 - SP2 this is wrong, MS have "Control behavior" that is
nearly out of control nowadays, they can distribute SP2 within more
channels as
IDG magazines.
And for sure its important to go to source.
I am not "always stand up and be a knight for holy MS" as you suggest.
I am standing up for the integrity of the computer system that relies on the
user maintaining the integrity of their security software.
That gets nearly impossible if people attempt to get patches, updates etc
from an unreliable source.
Your comment below is not really relevant since I did not suggest any such
thing. "MS cannot isolate themselves within Fort Redmond..."
Well they are, this "Beta", I dont call it a "Beta" is a "life saver"
for IE,
nothing else until IE7 and this program works.
The important issue is to maintain high standards for key issues as
Information,
-we have a MS FAQ, dated January 6 ! :'(
-new versions and whats new
-a working NG GUI.
- Advertisments on MS Frontpage about MSAS -Scheduling which is not
working !
("Use your daily planner/reminder and start MSAS manual, blockhead !
will be my next answer" )
Distribution,
- Everything up and working, auto updates rolls out.
- New defs availalable and distributed to all download servers
-Updated kb about definitions before rollout !
This "Beta" now probably has 20 million users and thousands of newbies
downloads it
every day so I believe we all deserve better from MS. I cant understand
MS
why they dont do this better, is it shame for this situation or what is
it ????
Most important is information and updated FAQs within MSAS homepage.
IMHO
Þ