On Fri, 18 May 2007 08:33:28 +0100, BearItAll wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 17 May 2007 17:04:38 +0100, BearItAll wrote:
>>
>>>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20070510/tc_infoworld/88424;_ylt=AmG6tVfakzdyOhladyyKQMYjtBAF
>>>
>>> That one was sort of an inevitable target, get hold of that and you
>>> effectively have all XP/Vista machines under your thumb. I suspect many a
>>> hacker has spent many hours on this one, the prize to them is too great
>>> to ignore.
>>
>> Why? It's a service. It's publicly documented. Anyone can use it in
>> their apps. It's designed to download files over http during low network
>> use times. In effect, it's wget with bandwidth throttling.
>>
>> Nobody would have to spend any time on this. The reports of "hacking" it
>> are just plain ridiculous.
>
> Updates are not just a basic wget thing at all. If it were there wouldn't be
> any safe updates going on anywhere. There is security involved.
No, there's not. BITS is not an update system. It's a download system.
That's it. There's nothing privileged about it.
|
|
