Am I wrong to think the Windows worm was an inside job?

[tonyinv]

It was Bill Gates himself that created the hole and the worm, he secretly hates Windows and is trying to push people over to Linux.

[paulat]

If a "fit-it" worm was a good deal for MSFT...why haven't they been using it all along for all updates, service packs, etc.?

Sorry...meant "fix-it"

[afz400]

Actually I think it may be a way for Microsoft to find out who has counterfeit copies of Windows - when you download the patch, are they checking whether you registered with them? Maybe the service packs contain code that allows Microsoft to conduct even more surrepticious surveillance on you.

[AIRFORCE76]

One piece of first-hand evidence. We have had the soft-ware patch on-hand for nearly a month. Our management, in their infinite wisdom, refused to spend the money before anything happened. After one department was completely shutdown they decided to install the patch.

[Lunatic Fringe]

More than one quarter million infected microsoft products . . . , I would call it "lack of due diligence".

And I bet every one of those 1/4 million humans sitting behind the keyboard forwards e-mail hoaxes to everyone in their list, but refuse to download and apply a 1 MB patch file.

[Redcloak]

[Lunatic Fringe]

One piece of first-hand evidence. We have had the soft-ware patch on-hand for nearly a month. Our management, in their infinite wisdom, refused to spend the money before anything happened. After one department was completely shutdown they decided to install the patch.

Umm, spend money on what?

[Proud_texan]

I don't think this is the case but if you use the follow the money theory the ones that really gain from all this are the anti-virus software companies.

But again, I don't think they had a hand in it but they do make huge bucks every time there's a new virus/trojan outbreak.

So let's see, that would mean there's a conspiracy between MS and Symantec and McAfee, et al. MS opens the holes and they sell the software to plug them.

[paulat]

I have been the "help desk" for my family and every place I've worked because people DO know how to "forward" emails. However, they know NOTHING about keeeping their software up-to-date, defragging disks, firewalls, etc.

[nravoter]

Thanks for the post, mmkay? With the speculation, and the conspiracies, and the PARANOIA! Glavin...

--Professor Frink--

[Lunatic Fringe]

I don't think this is the case but if you use the follow the money theory the ones that really gain from all this are the anti-virus software companies.

NO KIDDING! Check this out...

[paulat]

No...I think the anti-virus folks are collateral beneficiaries.

[maxwell]

Mmmmmm... Disk defragging... So cathartic...

Patched and defragged just this week. Feelin' like a million bucks. MasterBlaster can stick it.

[js1138]

No one accuses Symantec or McAfee of being evil when they license their software on an annual basis. If anyone has a motive for releasing worms it is the security companies.

[Pukin Dog]

Actually M$ is suffering from money flow problems.

Microsoft just set a new revenue record for the past reporting period which has caused stock analysts to upgrade their predictions on the next quarter.

[beckett]

Am I wrong?

Yes.

[ksen]

Care to share what you think, ksen?

These guys have probably gone beyond the idea that the anti-virus companies throw out the occasional virus to make sure people continue to use their products.

[Gunslingr3]

1) MSFT knows it put out flawed software.

Spurious charge. I've never met flawless software - the creativity and genius of idiots cannot be overestimated.

2) MSFT knows that a hostile hacker could take malicious advantage of the flaws.

Which is why, when the flaw in RPC was brought to their attention, they issued a patch July 16th to correct the flaw

3) MSFT knows that no one has been downloading the patches they've been sending out.

Anyone managing a windows machine is causing themselves problems if they refuse to get patches that MS issues to address exposed bugs.

4) MSFT sends out a relatively benign worm that does not destroy data, but gets users to update their machines. 5) MSFT deflects suspicion by putting a "Billy" message in the worm, and intimates that the real weapon will be directed at MSFT on Saturday.

I disagree, I see a worm written by someone hoping to give MS a black eye by first compromising machines that people were too lazy or ignorant to patch, and then using those compromised machines to perform a DOS attack against MS

5a) MSFT doesn't direct the worm at old versions of Windows because they don't care about them any more and provide almost no support.

Or maybe the real reason is that the service the worm exploits doesn't exist in the previous OS. It would help your case to know what you're talking about.

6) MSFT gets mildly annoyed customers to download the patches, and, probably, to pay more attention to patches in the future. 7) On Saturday, MSFT can claim that it has successfully fought off the worm. 8) Ergo, MSFT has covered its posterior. 9) Someone in Redmond will be getting a big, big raise.

This isn't show business, there is such a thing as bad publicity, and there are plenty of alternatives to MS if people care to explore and invest in them.

[FierceDraka]

It's actually pretty easy to prevent. Just close the ports that the worm attacks.

[Grit]

then there would be no sense of urgency, no push to download patches, no need to buy new versions or subscriptions.

If the motivation were to get people to buy new versions... It would make infinite more sense to have the worm attack the Win9x users only.

If a "fit-it" worm was a good deal for MSFT...why haven't they been using it all along for all updates, service packs, etc.?

Exactly! This is why your theory is preposterous.