• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Auto-Patcher is down (gone).

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
The patches can all be legit and you could still slip one extra one in there. In the case of my batchfile technique, it would just require one more line in the batchfile and one more executable in the package. Doing a quick Google search for "Trojanized Linux Distro" showed I'm not the only one who's ever thought of this.
Click to expand...

If you can get the person to install a trojaned patch then you can probably get them to install any number of other things too.

Of course you have to trust the person running the mirror that you're getting software from, that goes without saying. Although the security of packages differs between distributions, for example RH/FC sign every package while Debian/Ubuntu only sign the APT package list so while RH/FC will verify the signature on package install install (i.e. rpm -i blah.rpm) Debian/Ubuntu only verify on download so if you install a .deb manually with 'dpkg -i trojan.deb' it'll install just fine without any warnings.
 
If you can get the person to install a trojaned patch then you can probably get them to install any number of other things too.
Click to expand...

It evidently wouldn't take anything more than hacking the servers hosting a popular freebie download of some sort.
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon


Now tell me, did those manufacturers' techs tell Mr. and Mrs. Average to use AutoPatcher? And why is it a big deal to reboot the computer a few times at intervals, in the middle of a Windows installation that you'll probably do once every few years? I can think of much more tiresome things... commercial breaks in your TV shows, having to put gas in your car, and so on.

If you reinstall Windows often enough for this to be a sore spot, then set up a batchfile like I suggested. If you're always reinstalling on the same computer, use imaging software; I have one system that gets reimaged 2-5 times a day, and I'd have no one but myself to blame if I were doing fresh Windows installs every time.
Click to expand...

No, but they call their sons/daughters/nephews/nieces etc. who "know computers." It is a lot easier for that family member to download autopatcher than the alternatives of: 1 downloading every update and writing a batch file or 2 babysitting windows update for an entire evening.

Anyway, the point is moot. MS's update system takes a long time and is not easy to use. That is why autopatcher was so popular.
 
Automatic Updates doesn't require "use" at all. Background Intelligent Transfer Service, heard of it? 😉

Anyhow, the suggestion of monthly patch rollups has been sent in. You never know... 😉
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon
Automatic Updates doesn't require "use" at all. Background Intelligent Transfer Service, heard of it? 😉

Anyhow, the suggestion of monthly patch rollups has been sent in. You never know... 😉
Click to expand...

Yes, I have heard of it, and I thought that it was the worst name ever for a legitimate piece of software.

Monthly rollups would be the one of the smartest things that MS has done in the last few years (in addition to Windows Home Server, which happens to rock).
 
i read on the comments at the autopatcher website, and one person mentioned that microsoft knew about this for 4 years and did nothing, and just now they want to close the site down, the reason being they want to force ppl to buy vista by making the update process a chore for XP and also since more ppl are still on XP and sales of vista are not doing well.

i agree. i kind of even doubt SP3 for XP will ever come out. SP1 for vista will come out 1qt 2008, 2008 server will come out, and the new windows, windows 7 has a tentative release date on 2010.
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon
If I were Microsoft, I wouldn't want third parties redistributing my software to the public either.
Click to expand...
Microsoft have known about Autopatcher pretty much from day 1 and the Autopatcher team has numerous contacts with them over the past 3 or so years.
They haven't seemed to mind up until now.

And if Autopatcher were putting any malware in the files, then I think we'd have heard about it by now and MS would have shut them down years ago.

And we're all entitled to ease and convenience, no matter what. Heaven forbid that we should have to, like, download five things instead of one thing.
Click to expand...
So you think that we're NOT entitled to ease and convienience?

Heaven forbid that, like, people do stuff in their own time for free and to benefit the community. :Q
 
Originally posted by: Canterwood
Originally posted by: mechBgon
If I were Microsoft, I wouldn't want third parties redistributing my software to the public either.
Click to expand...
Microsoft have known about Autopatcher pretty much from day 1 and the Autopatcher team has numerous contacts with them over the past 3 or so years.
They haven't seemed to mind up until now.
Click to expand...

I don't see what your actual point is, if there is one. They've evidently decided they mind enough to ask that it stop. It's their software and that's their prerogative.

And if Autopatcher were putting any malware in the files, then I think we'd have heard about it by now and MS would have shut them down years ago.
Click to expand...

No one said that the AutoPatcher guys would put malware in the files. But the bad guys who hack servers, e.g. Bank Of India's servers to restrain myself to just one recent example, probably would have a grand time of it.

And we're all entitled to ease and convenience, no matter what. Heaven forbid that we should have to, like, download five things instead of one thing.
Click to expand...
So you think that we're NOT entitled to ease and convienience?
Click to expand...

At the expense of the rights of the software's real owner?

i agree. i kind of even doubt SP3 for XP will ever come out. SP1 for vista will come out 1qt 2008, 2008 server will come out, and the new windows, windows 7 has a tentative release date on 2010.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect. WinXP will be supported until at least 2013 (edit: excuse me, make that late 2014!), and SP3 will be coming out. Tentative timeframe for SP3 is 1H CY2008, as I linked to above.
 
For as long as I've read the posts on the OS forum, .......we've been implored to keep our OS up-to-date by installing all the many MS security patches. Autopatcher was the easiest way for many of us to do just that.......witness the popularity of the program, popular enough to cause MS to pull the plug on a supposed competitor.

Now OS security doesn't matter so much as the MS monopoly......I'm disappointed. :frown:
 
Originally posted by: Bluefront
For as long as I've read the posts on the OS forum, .......we've been implored to keep our OS up-to-date by installing all the many MS security patches. Autopatcher was the easiest way for many of us to do just that.......witness the popularity of the program, popular enough to cause MS to pull the plug on a supposed competitor.

Now OS security doesn't matter so much as the MS monopoly......I'm disappointed. :frown:
Click to expand...

Very dramatic. 8/10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top