[17914] in bugtraq
Re: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS00-092
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Boyce, Nick)
Tue Dec 5 12:23:23 2000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID: <C1B2296C5D3ED11182DB00805F9A097E01506219@GBHBM001>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 19:49:46 -0000
Reply-To: "Boyce, Nick" <nick.boyce@EDS.COM>
From: "Boyce, Nick" <nick.boyce@EDS.COM>
X-To: "forrest@mibsoftware.com" <forrest@mibsoftware.com>
To: BUGTRAQ@SECURITYFOCUS.COM
On 02 Dec 2000, Forrest J. Cavalier wrote :
> I dislike this new format of MS security bulletins
[...]
> It is more convenient to quick scan details in an email,
> rather than open up a browser.
[...]
> There must be many people who still read their email off-line.
[...]
> Will this URL work a year from now ?
[...]
> there was a time that microsoft URLs had a half-life of a few
> months. And occasionally required enabling javascript.
[...]
> Will Microsoft announce every correction/clarification in email, or
> will they sometimes update the web page silently ?
[...]
> If I get a vote, I vote to return to the old format.
Couldn't agree more, on every point - hear hear.
I wondered if I'd missed some soothing explanation of the new format. All
I've seen is the comment at the head of MS00-091 saying
"We are in the process of changing our bulletin mailing format for
better customer satisfaction. If you have any feedback please send
mailto:secfdbck@microsoft.com."
Let's vote please, Microsoft.
PS: in *this* bulletin (MS00-092) the email says affected software = SQL
Server 6.5 and 2000, whereas the linked web page says affected software =
SQL Server 7.0 and 2000, so ... er ... which is it ?
Nick Boyce
Systems Team,
EDS Healthcare, Bristol, UK
