Microsoft Warns of Win 7 Graphics Security Hole

[Regulas]

OK, I just upgraded my gaming rig to 7-64bit. Going to play with it today and load up some games.

 

[skit75]

I had occasional "freezes" during the 1st year with Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit but the system always recovered which amazed me. I don't know that I could attribute the freezes to this or not but, I know it has not done this in some time now...(knocks on wood). I have recently OC'd my hardware as well so my freezes could have been some timing issue I accidentally fixed with the OC.

 

[Darkerson]

I really wish people would stop using this and similar situations as an excuse to promote how "superior" mac or linux is. NOTHING is perfect. At least they are working on it, instead of trying to cover it up or ignoring it.

 

[Guest]

the security guys at MS are amazing...they find stuff like this and fix it being they do a good job as the biggest target especially with their focus on supporting everything...I mean itanium =/ wow...

 

[koga73]

this is hardly a security issue. no need to worry

 

[Stryter]

Can't say Im really worried bout this. I have a feeling by the time someone figures out how to exploit it effectively, MS will have already released an update to fix it.

 

[shoshu]

thats why i stay with XP Pro!

 

[Gin Fushicho]

Really? That's a pretty big flaw.... Well anyway it's not going to make me turn off Aero, I don't think I have an enemies or interesting info.

 

[eddieroolz]

Nah, I'm not turning off Aero. Too good.

 

[Aussie_Bear]

[citation][nom]joytech22[/nom]Not unexpected, Windows has always been the vulnerable OS because of it's dominance...[/citation]

I don't know where you adopted this nonsensical excuse to justify reasoning, but systems aren't vulnerable because they're popular. They're vulnerable because they were:

(a) Poorly designed
=> Didn't account for certain scenarios and no fault tolerance fall-back mechanism was considered.

(b) Poorly implemented
=> Didn't apply secure coding/programming practices.

(c) Poorly managed.
=> The person leading the project doesn't know what they're doing; or are intentionally using office politics to get what they want. (At the cost of the project itself.)

To blindly presume popularity (a social factor) as the reason for technical issues demonstrates one has little experience in development of high integrity and assurance software.

What's another excuse commonly used to defend Windows?
=> "All software isn't foolproof."

This is pretty much a reason NOT to try and give the consumer a better designed solution because it will cost way more money and time to start from a clean slate.

Realise that even Windows 7 still retains old code developed in an era when secure coding practices weren't the norm like it is today. This is one of the reasons why you still need endless patches for bits and pieces that Microsoft should have thrown out years ago.

 

[Aussie_Bear]

[citation][nom]scott_madison1[/nom]Every OS. Has it's flaws. There is positively absolutely no way to make any piece of software 100 percent safe![/citation]

You have never programmed in Ada and Spark programming languages on Govt projects, have you?

 

[Aussie_Bear]

[citation][nom]pale paladin[/nom]It is just good to see MS man-ing up and telling everyone openly. How often do you see other OS's doing the same.[/citation]

I can't speak for Mac OSX because I don't own a Mac. But...

The inherent nature of open source based OSs like Linux, BSD, Haiku, etc has done this EVERYDAY for the last 17 years. They openly admit to everything by having a publicly accessible bug-list. Flaws and all are revealed.

That's the point of being open source: Admit to all problems, so we can fix them to improve.

Microsoft only admits to serious issues to the public when they deem it serious enough OR when a security researcher has threatened to release concept code that exposes a serious flaw. (The point is to push them to release a patch.)

You'd realise this if you've ever been a Govt customer of Microsoft. They reveal a lot more to you than they would to the public because Govt systems are considered more valuable than the one sitting in front of Jane/Joe Windows user.

A bug shouldn't be sensationalized and categorized for public/marketing reasons. Its an engineering problem, NOT a social problem (ie: popularity). It should be fixed by patches or a complete re-design of the affected component in question.

Users should be informed of all issues and temporary workarounds. Regardless if its a security exploit or not.

A bug is a bug. It should be fixed...And the only discussion you should have about it is exploring the best way to implement a proper solution so that the issue doesn't re-surface ever again.

 

[tpi2007]

Could any of the 10 people who voted my comment down on page one please say what is it you disagree with in my comment ?

I'd like to know.

And yes, I thought about the "But there is still no exploit". That is what Microsoft has for information. It does not mean there isn't one somewhere out in the wild and may be off the radar for now. You have to consider that possibility.

Much appreciated.

 

[Aussie_Bear]

[citation][nom]waylander[/nom]I just love MS haters... try to imagine where we would be in computing if there had been no MS... Don't try to bring up the other OS's because THEY wouldn't be here except for MS either.[/citation]

And I love the ignorance of Windows users! Especially with computing history! Linux, BSD, and a whole dozen other OSs came along WITHOUT the influence of Microsoft. They all had other goals in mind.

A world without Microsoft would certainly be different...

There would be:
* less malware and infected systems connected on the web.
* less user ignorance about good security practices.
* no preference of convenience/ignorance over security/knowledge.
* no multi-billion dollar security industry (AV companies, etc) that thrives on user security ignorance.
* more users who are knowledgeable and competent with computers. (The ability to think for themselves, than to blindly accept excuses to justify poorly implemented things.)
* more software that would be developed on the open model. (Meaning more competition such that the end-user benefits with lots of choices to meet their needs.)
* lower prices of pre-built systems. (As there would be no OEM license to pay for the OS. It would be approx US$100 less without Windows.)
* no market segregation based on features. (ie: No Windows Home, Pro, Ultimate, Server, etc Editions.)
* no one to laugh at when it comes to discussing engineering aspects of making better, fully featured products for the consumer.
* no "Genuine Advantage" and other online validation nonsense.
* the ability to install as many copies as I want; on as many systems as I want. Real or virtual. Without restriction.
* no Business Software Alliance (BSA is the software version of MPAA/RIAA); knocking on my friend's business door; because MS detected an inconsistency with the number of Windows licenses being used vs license bought...Eventually destroying my friend's livelyhood with fines and disruption of productivity. (It took me 6 months to rebuild his entire business to a profitable one again. And not base it on MS technology.)

[citation][nom]waylander[/nom]As aggravating as it is sometimes to encounter a bug, it's nice to know that MS is still LOOKING for bugs and giving us updates instead of ignoring them or not telling us at all.[/citation]

(1) Are you unaware of when security researchers need to threaten Microsoft by releasing concept code to exploit a weakness they reported 6 months prior? (MS prioritizes security issues. If they don't see it as critical, they keep they mouth shut. Security Researchers don't like this behaviour, so they will create concept code to force MS's hand.)

(2) Go work in Govt and get involved in the acquisition of MS Govt level contracts. You realize Microsoft does NOT tell Jane/Joe Windows user everything about the solutions they sell to the public.

 

[cmartin011]

I really like MS win 7! There are flaws in every code that's ever been written. They man up and try to hack there own software is a responsible and intelligent thing to do. I am ready for the next patch and operating system they program up knowing they will test and hack every one for peace of mind for the user

 

[helldog3105]

@Aussie_Bear - There is no such thing as 100% Secure coding. It cannot be done. Humans make errors, and compilers can only catch so many errors, as they are programmed by people as well. If Microsoft wasn't around whatever dominant OS would be suffering from the same issues that Microsoft deals with. It's not a matter of them being terrible at coding. They aren't the best, but they have very good compatibility and decent security considering the range of product they support. I have a couple of Linux distros that I like, but you cannot ignore the fact that Linus Torvalds created his Linux because he was unhappy with the state of MS DOS and Windows. Think of how different Linux would be if Microsoft wasn't around for him to be unhappy with. What OS would it have been then? Would Linux look anything like what it does now? How many different versions would there be of it? All the statements you made about malware, user ignorance AV companies and everything else is based off a biased opinion that everything that is wrong with computers is because of Microsoft's operating system. This is a fallacy. If Microsoft didn't exist, something would be there to fill the void and most probably it would be user intuitive, have a GUI, and be just as problematic. There are all sorts of rumours about viruses and exploits for OS X popping up in the wild, this is an OS that doesn't even have 10% market share. The simple fact is, as long as there are ways to gather information, be it either for illegal practices, or for advertising there would be spyware and malware, regardless of what ever the dominant operating system was.

 

[jfbetel]

Though I am loving Windows 7 I am not happy with the fact that Microsoft knew of this problem from past experiences and did not fix it. I am one of thoses unfortunate who has been affected by this bug as my system was acting weird. Thought I had to do a whole revamp to find the problem until I read the post on one of the many sites that I vist including Tom,s. Applied the "Diable Areo" solution and all seems to be alright for now,however shame on Microsoft for not fixing something that they knew about from past problems.

 

[WyomingKnott]

Sur-Prise!

 

[Zijn]

OK so i think this has happened to me.. My pc runs perfectly but after CPU change my pc hung at shutdowns and wont display when booting but all fans lights work

My Problem Thread: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/286622-13-clicking-monitor-signal#t2118431

Would love any input on how to fix this PLEASE

Very Urgent

 

[zmanz]

I love the flamewars that ensue on the very mention of Microsoft or Windows on this site.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

Still trying to understand exactly what the security flaw is. The comments went off on a tangent and confused me.