Windows update fucks over Zone Alarm users

[n00b1n8R]

Hundreds of thousands of people who use the ZoneAlarm firewall to protect their PC have been locked out of the internet by Microsoft's latest round of software updates. Microsoft released four high-priority fixes as part of its regular Patch Tuesday update, one of which left ZoneAlarm users without web access.
The rest of the article can be found here (http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article4304820.ece)

Well that was fun on my birthday. Luckily my dad tried a rollback and that fixed it (then we found the article).

:mad:

[Rob Oplawar]

I use Zone Alarm too. It's been mildly annoying so far, but no more so than any other internet security suite I've used in the past.
But then this happened, and I almost threw the damn thing in the trash, until I learned that it was actually the Windows update that caused the problem.

If you don't mind, I'm going to temporarily go slightly off topic:

Long story short, through my attempts to get my system back to a stable state I actually ended up making it incredibly unstable for a time, and nearly lost my hard drive. This Zone Alarm conflict and the ensuing near catastrophe was the final straw- I'm done with Windows as my primary OS.
As soon as I get my new hard drives and transfer my data, I'm switching to Linux, and from then on I'll only ever go near Windows for 3DS and Steam. In fact, I'm going to see if I can do some sort of virtualization or emulation and get my apps running without that shit operating system.

Fuck you, Windows. If I didn't depend on so many Windows-only applications, I'd never look at Windows again.


You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

[jcap]

GOD DAMN MICROSOFT, why do you have to KEEP PATCHING WINDOWS?!? God...

So Microsoft issued a patch to protect its users, and an application which digs its roots into Windows is having issues with it?

It's not Microsoft's job to be responsible for the welfare of other applications; their responsibility is with their own applications, and they're doing just that. It's always nice to have no compatibility issues, but Microsoft doesn't and shouldn't have to bend over and take it up the ass from other companies because they can't do their job correctly.

[p0lar_bear]

GOD DAMN MICROSOFT, why do you have to KEEP PATCHING WINDOWS?!? God...

So Microsoft issued a patch to protect its users, and an application which digs its roots into Windows is having issues with it?

It's not Microsoft's job to be responsible for the welfare of other applications; their responsibility is with their own applications, and they're doing just that. It's always nice to have no compatibility issues, but Microsoft doesn't and shouldn't have to bend over and take it up the ass from other companies because they can't do their job correctly.
This.

[StankBacon]

jcap wins the thread.

[Bastinka]

I hated Zone Alarm, too bitchy. Also, I use Peer Guardian 2. Much better imo, top that with Avast and AVG Free.

[Snaver]

So I guess they don't thoroughly test these updates before they make them live for customers... well at least i guess they don't test them on a wide range of pc set-ups..

[Rob Oplawar]

Two things:
One: It's just pitiful that Microsoft still has to make such essential security updates to the core of their operating system- not the applications, or the user interface, or that nonsense, but to the friggin core of the os- every month for the past several years. By contrast, the updates to Linux improve user interface and application security, because the operating system is, gasp, secure. It's just pitiful that Windows is not secure, know what I mean? No, you probably don't, and you're going to tell me "hurf durf nobody's perfect". No. That's not it. Linux has built in security. Microsoft has had to constantly try to build security on top of their shitty operating system for years, and they're always one step behind hackers.

Two: The definition of refactoring code is that you improve the way it works in the background without changing the external interface. Clearly, Microsoft fails at this concept, because whatever they did, they changed the interface and now certain applications have become incompatible with it, through no fault of their own.
Perhaps it was the interface that was the problem in the first place, and if that is the case I say, once again, Microsoft's fault for making a shitty interface.



But I'm only getting warmed up for my real rant. Cover your ears, kiddies.

HOLY FUCKING JESUS CHRIST ON A FUCKING PONY.
I had automatic updates disabled, and somehow in this whole mess they got re-enabled, and now Windows has automatically reinstalled the fucking update and is constantly prompting me every 5 minutes to restart my computer.
I want to rant more, but I'm going to start foaming at the mouth. Dear god in heaven, I- I- I can't go on like this.


I honestly try to be understanding of Windows' shortcomings, and really the shortcomings are pretty much exclusively in the security department, but that makes it all that much more pitiful that a big wealthy corporation like Microsoft failed there, because security is one of the most important features in an operating system these days. And don't tell me that it's just because Windows was created before security was a major issue- Linux has been around for just as long.

Damn I'm pissed.

[InnerGoat]

Yeah If Microsoft made the OS right the first time they wouldn't need to patch it ever again. :mad:



You should get a mac.

[Amit]

...and now Windows has automatically reinstalled the fucking update and is constantly prompting me every 5 minutes to restart my computer.


you know you can turn that off...right?

[n00b1n8R]

GOD DAMN MICROSOFT, why do you have to KEEP PATCHING WINDOWS?!? God...

So Microsoft issued a patch to protect its users, and an application which digs its roots into Windows is having issues with it?

It's not Microsoft's job to be responsible for the welfare of other applications; their responsibility is with their own applications, and they're doing just that. It's always nice to have no compatibility issues, but Microsoft doesn't and shouldn't have to bend over and take it up the ass from other companies because they can't do their job correctly.
Perhaps if MS told 3rd party manufacturers that this patch was coming out in advance, they could have updated their apps so it wouldn't have caused an issue? :downs:

[kenney001]

Perhaps if MS told 3rd party manufacturers that this patch was coming out in advance, they could have updated their apps so it wouldn't have caused an issue? :downs:

again


It's not Microsoft's job to be responsible for the welfare of other applications
people there is a fix for it all (http://www.ubuntu.com/)

[n00b1n8R]

Your right, microsoft doesn't need to worry about the people who make the programs which spur the sail of their OS's. :downs:

[Jelly]

From the BetaNews article (http://www.betanews.com/article/Windows_DNS_bug_fix_can_impair_firewalls_including _ZoneAlarm/1215617981)


It is a very serious fix to what could have been a catastrophic exploit, and it's being implemented not just on Windows but on Linux, and within routers and other network equipment as well. It's a major cooperative effort, but one side effect for now, due to an apparent lack of cooperation among software vendors, is that some software firewalls may need to be disabled, throttled back, or turned off altogether while a fix is under way.
Your right, microsoft doesn't need to worry about the people who make the programs which spur the sail of their OS's. :downs:
It works the other way as well. Are businesses and home users going to change their entire OS or their firewall when one conflicts with the other?

[n00b1n8R]

Obviously the firewall, but if MS had let them know what was going to happen before it happened then they could have got a patch out and the issue would never have come up at all.

[Reaper Man]

Tl; dr. I fixed the problem by setting my network security to medium after the update.

[Llama Juice]

Obviously the firewall, but if MS had let them know what was going to happen before it happened then they could have got a patch out and the issue would never have come up at all.

Do you think M$ knew this would happen?

I agree entirely with Jcap. What's sad is that since everyone already is on the hate M$ :bandwagon: the "news" caters to that.

Rather than saying "Microsoft's new update provides added security here and does this." they say "MICROSOFT BROKE ZONEALARM"

[Rob Oplawar]

*skims over article*
Ahhh, interesting, this recent update actually fixed that DNS exploit that I had heard about a couple of weeks ago.

I'm done with my foaming raving ranting, but I still hate windows. I'm calm and collected and have given it due consideration, and I still conclude that Windows is inferior.

[Llama Juice]

^Greetings from my MacBook Pro

[legionaire45]

The only reason that Linux and Mac OS are more secure when compared to Windows is because they have a much smaller audience to attack. Hackers want to hit as many targets with their malware as they can and the biggest and most popular platform out there is Windows. Recently Mac OS has grown in popularity and as a result malware is being developed for it. Linux has never been particularly popular in terms of market share and as a result malware writers don't even bother. Saying that any system is secure is like asking a hacker to figure out a way to break it - there is no such thing as a completely secure system and there never will be unless you remove the hackers themselves.

As per the zonealarm issue, I don't understand why everyone is making a big deal out of this considering it will be patched soon/has already been patched. If you are really freaking out about security then just download AVG or stop going to porn websites. The best way to avoid getting malware is to not go to sites that look dangerous in the first place.

[Rob Oplawar]

While I agree that part of the reason Linux users have a much easier time with malware is because they are a smaller target, I have to say that the architecture is by design much more stable and secure than Windows. It's just because of the bloat of Windows- the fact that since Windows 95 they have been adding to and expanding the same code over and over. It's become huge (read: Windows Vista is purportedly 50 million lines of code) and as a result, much harder to manage and test and debug and secure. The fact that I can compile many Linux distros from the source code in just a couple of minutes is a testament to how much smaller and more efficient and easier to manage it is.

Then there's also the fact that it is open source while Windows isn't- hackers can actually see the source code of most distributions, while they have to reverse engineer Windows. Also, many if not most webservers run Linux, and webservers are a prime target for attack.
e: and yes, the fact that hackers can see the source code makes Linux more secure, not less. Because most hackers are not malicious. Most hackers will inform the developers of an exploit they discover in the source, and it will be fixed.

On an aside, I need to deliver a belated thank-you to Zone Labs for fixing the problem. Thx.