full-disclosure - Re: what we REALLY learned from WMF

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri Jan  6 20:56:37 2006
From: se_cur_ity at hotmail.com (Morning Wood)
Subject: Re: what we REALLY learned from WMF

 I do know that MS prefers to do extensive testing on patches.
ms04-015 , i was told, had to go through over 200 differing
infrastructure / product / implimentation testings before release.
i am sure some of these test are done for large corps to ensure
no breakage across a multitude of architectures, etc. A patch
may work properly on 99% of everything, but its that 1% they
focus on before formal release. ( esp if that is a large enterprise )

my2bits,
MW