Wills
join:2001-01-03
Port Charlotte, FL
| reply to rip_sketches
Re: What?
He made his point perfectly clear, just not in the right words.
Microsoft wants to control the access because sooner or later on the P2P programs some smacktard is going to insert a virus into the service pack, put it up for download, then Microsoft is going to get thousands of calls.
You get it from Microsoft and that worry is non-existant.
--
Abit VP-6 twin 800EB's @ 1002 Mhz.Proud member of the XDC. |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| Yes. Because Microsoft's own servers have been so iron-clad secure that there's never been the possibility of insertion of bogus code... 
-tom
--
"There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't."
"That's only 2 types of people, moron" |
|
VirtualLarry
Premium
join:2003-08-01
| reply to Wills
Like the infected files on MS's own download sites, for example? (There were several instances of this - one that I remember involving Word macro virus infections in their .DOC files (notice how those are all zipped into self-extracting .exe files now?), and one that I think involved some binaries too.)
The funny thing is, file-integrity shouldn't be an issue here, the SP2 installer is digitally-signed by MS. So if it were possible to modify the download, in a way that was not able to be detected by the digital signature "wrapper", then that would be directly akin to MS admitted that their whole digital signature system doesn't work. |
|
