Unexpected IE 8 Update for XP

Anyone running XP get the unexpected IE8 update notification today? The patch is Security Update for Internet Explorer 8 for Windows XP (KB2964358 ). Here is a link to information about the patch:

https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/ms14-021

Here is the information link in the updates client:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2964358

It's dated today. This seems unusual, since Microsoft has been so clear about not patching Windows XP. I guess since this is a patch of an existing patch MS is extending the update to XP and IE 8 users. Apparently the end of support has not yet been reached for KB2929437 lol...

 

This link posted on another thread here takes you the the Microsoft Site explaining they are sending this update for XP http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2014/05/01/updating-internet-explorer-and-driving-security.aspx

Quote from Microsoft "Even though Windows XP is no longer supported by Microsoft and is past the time we normally provide security updates, we’ve decided to provide an update for all versions of Windows XP (including embedded), today."

Guess it is good for those still using XP.

 

This has to do with the "drive by" exploit affecting IE versions 8 — 11 that was reported in MG's news a few days ago. I expect the same update will appear for Vista — 8.1 (IE 9 and later) in the next couple of days.

 

It's available now. Just pull up "Windows Update" from the "Control Panel" and have it check for updates.

It's on the order of 18MB, as usual a re-boot is necessary. All total, it took almost 3 minutes.

 

Thanks for reminding me. Even though I don't use IE.

 

I read about the update at MGs, so I went to Windows Update and I was scanning for updates, my update notification icon popped up. I'm glad they didn't leave XP out.

 

I don't either. Microsoft made the effort for an out of cycle update, I should at least make the effort to install it.

 

Guess you might say XP is on life supprt, or circling the drain so to speak. I was happy to see this mega corporation still has a heart. Read a few IT guys didn't like it because it made them look like fools after telling customers "no more support for XP". It really is an Internet Explorer update though, made available to XP users.

 

Heh, same here. I installed it, and now I'm good to go.

But why did they also fix the issue on XP? Thought it was End Of Life? Now, those MSP's telling their clients that XP is no longer supported, and boom it still is?!?

 

It affected too many browser versions, and IE8+ is also on Windows Vista and Windows 7.

So technically, its not an XP OS patch. It is an IE patch, and because it affected those versions of IE8 still under support, they were nice enough to offer it to XP as well.

 

No way that could have been a winnable lawsuit. End of support removes all liability unless it can be proven they had prior knowledge and did not act upon it.

 

My challenge to you:

Find one legal precedent.

 

Just one reminder on this. Lawsuits are decided by a jury, rather than a judge or court. In this light, juries don't weigh their decisions on legal precedent like courts do.

I think it would take some wrangling to find MS guilty of negligence with regard to Windows XP at this point, but perhaps a good lawyer could make some case that .NET 4.0 is still supported in Vista, 7, and 8 to build a case that they should have continued to issue updates for XP until support for those features ended. Again, it would be up to a jury to decide if MS should or should not have continued their support in that type of case...

 

Except its not up to a jury. Its up to the law and the legal binding contract that everyone agrees to when using Windows.

Ever read the EULA?

You have a 90 day warranty.

On top of that, maximum liability is 5.00 or cost of product, and within those 90 days.

http://download.microsoft.com/docum...lish_9e8a2f82-c320-4301-869f-839a853868a1.pdf


Juries cannot create laws or break them. The judge makes the ruling, NOT the jury, as the jury has no legal jurisdiction. The jury gives a recommendation but if it defies law, its not binding.

Precedence is the only thing that might make a class action lawsuit stick.

Key word: might.


You guys are so silly to think that a company can be forced to reopen a warranty on an End of Life product, just because it inconveniences people. The EULA keeps MS from being sued for security exploits on products under warranty. How would anyone ever convince a court to go forth with a lawsuit for an exploit with an EOL product? No sane jude would allow it, and yes, they can overrule juries on guilty verdicts. It would open a can of worms that the country would never recover from. We would start seeing lawsuits for those using Windows 3.1!!!

 

The motion will be dismissed by the judge, won't even get to a trial.

Cheers...

 

I agree, the EULA would have to be challenged first. If that failed, then there wouldn't be grounds for a suit.

However, the suit I presented wouldn't be against MS' handling of XP, instead against its handling of XP with regards to the .NET framework. Not saying this would win by any means...just an example. Maybe it sounds ridiculous, but another example would be if there were some problem associated with IE8, and someone sued saying that MS should have removed it at the end of service for XP.

Yeah maybe batty, but it's just an example of how lawyers can think sometimes...

 

.NET has separate licensing though.

 

Guess that would have to be challenged too. Not saying I believe anything like this is going to happen...

If MS ever got sued I feel it would be over something completely unforeseen prior to the suit. Don't have any idea what, but I think to be successful the complaintant side would have to have the support of the Attorney General's office practically to get anything done. MS is big...