the first malicious autorun showed up in 2005, i believe. it took until 2011 for microsoft to properly fix their mistake?
bad design decision-makers at microsoft that feign naivety about the significance of security vs. functionality trade-offs are more a danger than pirated systems.
i thought that msft is more "open" about keeping pirated systems clean. aren't security patches still downloadable on pirated microsoft windows installations?
Following February’s update issued by Microsoft limiting the propagation of AutoRun-based malware on Windows XP, the company has just reported that the move is working and that Microsoft is observing a significant decline in the propagation of AutoRun-based malware.
More specifically, the company is observing a 59% decline on XP, followed by 74% on Vista in comparison to the 2010 infection rates:
- 62 percent decrease on Windows XP SP 3
- 68 percent decrease on Windows Vista SP 1
- 82 percent decrease on Windows Vista SP 2
Millions of users continue using pirated Windows copies, preventing them from obtaining the latest Windows Updates, thereby exposing themselves to malware attacks.
Why do you think users continue using pirated copies of Microsoft’s products, thereby exposing themselves to security risks? Does software piracy really lead to higher malware infection rates?
What do you think?
Talkback.
), at the university I go to, that are running pirated versions of Windows Vista/Se7en ultimate and yet they are gaining all the benefits just like the genuine one.
