Microsoft: No security updates for 98, ME after Ju

Forum: Linux �and Free Software
Topic: Microsoft: No security updates for 98, ME after Ju
started by: noalternative

Posted by noalternative on Jan. 31 2006,17:28

Several interesting news items related to this.

Quote

< Microsoft Clarifies Support for Windows 98, Windows Millennium >

Microsoft announced a clarification in extended security update support for Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, and Windows Millennium (Me) Editions for critical security issues. Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition support was scheduled to end on January 16, 2004. The continual evaluation of the Support Lifecycle policy revealed, however, that customers in smaller and emerging markets needed additional time to upgrade their product. Therefore, critical security updates for Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, and Windows Me will be provided on the Windows Update site through June 30, 2006.

Key Dates:
� Paid incident support for Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, and Windows Millennium Edition (Me) is available through June 30, 2006.
� Critical security updates will be provided on the Windows Update site through June 30, 2006.
� Customers may request non-critical security fixes for Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows Me, and the most current version of their components until June 30, 2006 through typical assisted-support channels.
� Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, and Windows Me downloads for existing security issues will continue to be available through regular assisted-support channels at no charge until June 30, 2006.
� No-charge incident support and extended hotfix support for Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition ended on June 30, 2003.
� No-charge incident support and extended hotfix support for Windows Me ended on December 31, 2003.

Microsoft is already leaving these customers high and dry for the WMF security flaw.

Quote

< Windows 98, ME users left vulnerable to WMF bug?
January 5, 2006 5:17 PM PST >

Microsoft on Thursday rushed out an update to address a serious security flaw in Windows. Patches are available for Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003, but Microsoft left out Windows 98 and Windows Millennium Edition.

The flaw lies in the way the OS software handles Windows Meta File images. Microsoft deems the issue "critical" only for Windows 2000, Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, the problem is not as big for Windows 98 and Windows ME because it is harder to exploit on those OSes, the company said in its MS06-001 security bulletin..

Experts from iDefense, F-Secure and SANS agree that no attacks that target the older Windows versions have surfaced. Yet that might only be a matter of time, said Mike Murray, director of vulnerability and exposure research at nCircle, a vulnerability management company in San Francisco.

Releasing a patch for Windows 98 and Windows ME would be the right thing to do, according to Murray. "Even Microsoft acknowledges that the vulnerability exists in those OSes, someone will figure out how to exploit it," he said. .......

Here is someone in the reply section.

Quote

< MS is wrong not to support 98 >
Reader post by: Bill Dautrive
Posted on: January 8, 2006, 2:51 PM PST
Story: Windows 98, ME users left vulnerable to WMF bug?

Why?

Simple. Around 50% of the windows world is using something other then XP. So why would that mean that MS should still support it?

The intenet is an extremely dangerous place and MS is the primary reason for it. With so many older MS OS's out there unprotected, it causes serious problems for everyone.

No one should have to pay to have problems that MS neglected fixed. We are not talking features here, but security problems that are the fault of Microsoft. All these people using the lame car anology are missing the point and clearly lack understanding of the issues. Even if a 1950 whatever is found to be defective, how many are on the road, how many has 100% original parts? That anology does not even come close to fitting this situtation, stop being ignorant.

Bottom line: These are serious security issues that came about through incompetance and negligence on Microsofts part. Asking anyone but Microsoft to pay for this is beyond ignorant.

< Korea is responding by trying to go linux. >

Quote

The nation's six ministries including the Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) convened of late to discuss ways of reducing dependence on Microsoft, the world's biggest software maker.

``We agreed to cut down on our heavy reliance on Windows while promoting open-source programs such as Linux as an alternative,'' an MIC official said.

As action plans, the six ministries agreed to make Internet banking services and programs dealing with public grievance operable on a Linux-empowered system. Up until now, the programs could be run only through Windows.

``To secure broad-based adoption of non-Windows programs, the government will evaluate ministries regarding how much they brace for open-source programs,'' the official said.

but is the linux community offering an alternative to these former customers of Microsoft? Afterall, while there may be distros designed to work on older legacy computers, none of them are designed to be as easy to use as windows 98. Problems include, having to mount the disk drive from the command line, no control panels for easier customization and the greater difficulty encountered when installing a linux program. I can untar tarballs, but I can never configure one. make and "make install" never work.

According the same article more asinine members of the linux community are probably gearing up to infect these people with viruses in July.

Quote

`Windows 98 is still widely used. Some people would replace their programs with advanced systems like Windows 2000 and XP. But some will continue to bank on Windows 98 even after this July,'' Seung Jae-mo, the researcher at the Korea Information Security Agency, said.

He expected hacking and virus attacks would rage in the latter half of this year as global crackers would launch full-throttle attacks on Windows 98-outfitted computers that will not be updated regularly.

I personally feel the efforts of all those code vigilantes would be better spent creating an easy to use distro for older computers but what do I know?

According to Wikipedia, small business customers of Microsoft who can't pay for an upgrade to xp are being offered a < thin client > but the program is getting no advertising from Microsoft, and it is not being offered to home users of of Win 98 and ME. There is a something like a thin client being offered developing countries called < Windows XP Starter Edition >, but Microsoft is not offering this to home users in the developed countries and we may not be able to afford the latest thing either.

Yes, I am biased because I am a Win 98 user. I switched to feather as a dual boot, but I don't find it easy to use, and I started out with a Dos system so I am not ignorant of command lines like most 98 people. The heavier distros just run way slow. I have tried Debian Woody with KDE and and Red Hat 7.3 with Gnome. Neither Gnome nor Kde were much easier to use than Fluxbox despite the more familiar appearance. They still made it difficult to install programs, and there plug n play wasn't nearly as good as Feathers. They also didn't have easy to use control panels though the control panels existed.

Windows 3.1 and 95 users were left in the cold in 2002.

This didn't harm 3.1 users as much since the hackers focused on 32 bit Windows after 95 was invented, but most any virus that involved NT/Xp will harm 95, 98, and ME.

Blaster harmed 95 users badly, and I remember having to work on a number of friends computers as a result of it.

I posted this at feather as well. Know of any other good places?

Posted by doobit on Jan. 31 2006,18:22

I am not known as one to flame, but I take exception to this post. I'm getting tired of people whose idea of justice is that we support their laziness when the resources for success are already at their fingertips, and in front of their faces. Every good thing has a learning curve. Granted, there are those with challenges who we should and can accomodate, however, I don't believe Windows 98 users are challenged in this way. Incidentally, I also use Windows 98.

1. I can think of no good place for your post, including here.
2. Linux is not Windows. See this site: < http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm >
3. Linux distros that are easy to use are already available - DSL, for example. They may be different from Windows but they are easy. To install a program in a Frugal install, one only needs to download it to the same partition as the KNOPPIX directory and reboot. What could be easier than that? All menus are available with a single right click on the desktop. What is easier than one mouse click? The control panel is right there on the desktop and is also availble from the right click menu. Mounting a hard drive means opening a file manager (similar to My Computer), navigating to the drive location, right clicking on the drive letter and, choosing "mount" (like picking "open" in Windows) OK, that takes one more step than Windows.
4. Why should anyone support your unwillingness to change for the better?

Posted by noalternative on Jan. 31 2006,18:46

and just who are you or the person you linked to, and why should I care. Linux is opensource so if someone wanted to make it act more like windows they could.

Posted by doobit on Jan. 31 2006,18:56

I am a newbee with an opinion, like yourself, and I should ask the same question of you. Why should anyone care?
That said, and my anger subsided, I would add that I and others that I know are perfectly willing to accomodate other Windows or former Windows users, and to help them into the world of Linux through education. If Linux changes, as the community changes it, then it changes, and we must all learn it's course together.

Posted by noalternative on Jan. 31 2006,19:05

Quote (doobit @ Jan. 31 2006,13:56)

Why should you be angry at all? Just because i violated your arbitrary rule. You're not god. Also your post was a flame, so you should be known flaming even if you aren't, and it also seemed you violated the first rule of the forum which was to be respectful to the forum posters. Saying my post shouldn't be posted anywhere doesn't exactly qualify.

You also make assumptions. Like the idea that anyone that won't learn the command line is lazy or that the person didn't seek help.

I spent hours and hours online trying to figure our the make install problem to no avail. It is also pretty obvious that I have read a howto or three or I wouldn't even know about the make install command.

Posted by doobit on Jan. 31 2006,19:14

OK, then, I apologize. You deserve better for your effort.