Microsoft's Velvet Glove

Microsoft's Velvet Glove
Mark Burnett, 2005-01-31

Redmond's plan to make you install Windows authentication software before downloading vital security patches is a reasonable and gentle effort to limit piracy.

Expand all | Post comment

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-01
Anonymous (1 replies)

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Anonymous (2 replies)

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-04
Anonymous

Microsoft&#39;s Velvet Glove 2005-02-05
Anonymous

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-01
Anonymous (1 replies)

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Anonymous

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-01
j0hnsolo

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-01
Todd Knarr (2 replies)

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Aenox (1 replies)

Microsoft&#39;s Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Anonymous

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-03
Anonymous

Bandwidth costs 2005-02-01
Anonymous (3 replies)

I'd imagine that Microsoft has to pay for the bandwidth costs of patch downloads. It can't be cheap -- it could easily cost millions of dollars.

So, why should they pay for patch bandwidth for pirated copies of windows? If they're smart, they should find a way of distributing the cost using ISP mirrors or a P2P downloading service for all pirated copies of Windows.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/295/30292#30292

Bandwidth costs 2005-02-02
Anonymous

Bandwidth costs 2005-02-03
Anonymous (1 replies)

Bandwidth costs 2005-02-08
Anonymous

Bandwidth costs 2005-02-04
Anonymous

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-01
Anonymous (1 replies)

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-04
Anonymous

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Anonymous (2 replies)

Microsoft's Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Anonymous (3 replies)

Microsoft&#39;s Velvet Glove 2005-02-02
Anonymous

Microsoft&#39;s Velvet Glove 2005-02-03
Anonymous (1 replies)

Microsoft&amp;#39;s Velvet Glove 2005-02-03
Anonymous (3 replies)

Microsoft&amp;amp;#39;s Velvet Glove 2005-02-03
Anonymous