Microsoft 'stealth' Windows update damages trust

Microsoft has been criticised for automatically uploading and installing files to PCs even if their users have specifically forbidden the auto-installation of patches.

Microsoft described the procedure as "normal behaviour" because Windows only updated the Windows Update tool itself, and not the general operating system.

A Microsoft spokesperson said: "Windows Update automatically updates itself from time to time to ensure that it is running the most current technology, so that it can check for updates and notify customers that new updates are available."

In a blog, Nate Clinton, program manager for Windows Update, said that Microsoft "should have been clearer on how Windows Update behaves when it updates itself."

However, users have been critical of the so-called "stealth" update and numerous comments posted on Clinton's blog indicate that many Windows users are dissatisfied with the company's response.

"There is absolutely no excuse for updating executable code on a customer's machine when the customer has selected a choice of "but let me choose whether to install them". Period. Full stop. No exceptions," commented one user.

Another agreed: "If I have the setting enabled to be notified of updates I expect to be notified of all updates ... I'm a paying customer -- well, maybe not in the future as you've violated my trust -- and I expect to be treated with respect."

One other user questioned the consequences if the "stealth" updating mechanism was ever compromised by attackers: "A false Windows Update patch could ... install a rootkit, erase hard drives. When the 'don't install without asking' option is selected, it should not have the capability to install anything without asking."

• Related stories

• Alerts

Add your opinion

There is a solution to all this stuff Nigel C -- 14/09/07

Install one of the many versions on Linux. And than most of the problems will just disappear.

• Reply to comment
• Reply to story
• Report offensive content

EULA David Martin -- 15/09/07

Have you read your EULA, do you agree when installing windows to allow microsoft access to the executable code on your machine?

• Reply to comment
• Reply to story
• Report offensive content

Correct Jay Godfrey -- 15/09/07

David Martin is correct they have full right over what happens on your computer once you have ticked the box and said that you agree, so no body can complain as they have agreed to it.

• Reply to comment
• Reply to story
• Report offensive content

subject to scrutinasation Anonymous -- 15/09/07

I am not sure that that would hold up in court, no matter what the EULA says. I don't know any other organisation that has the right to modify another's property without permission. Of course, it would be difficult and drawn out but would give MS something to think about.
PS. would hate to think what some high security systems managers think about this - can only mean that WGA (more like disadvantage) can be hacked

• Reply to comment
• Reply to story
• Report offensive content

Gets a bit tricky there... Anonymous -- 16/09/07 (in reply to #320086227)

"I am not sure that that would hold up in court, no matter what the EULA says. I don't know any other organisation that has the right to modify another's property without permission."

This kind of contradicts itself - when you click I Agree, you technically do give permission to Microsoft. For the record - I think the theory is disgusting that they can get away with it. I'm not surprised though that this is *still* happening.

• Reply to comment
• Report offensive content

ubject to scrutinasation Anonymous -- 17/09/07 (in reply to #320086227)

The EULA makes it clear that you do NOT own the code, it is NOT your property. You are licenced to use it by Microsoft but you do not own it. Therefore they can do pretty much anything they like with it. And "it" is your computer which is running their code, as that's what you have agreed to.

Take the first commenter's advice and install Linux! I haven't looked back once since doing that :-)

• Reply to comment
• Report offensive content

you have a point, but... Anonymous -- 18/09/07 (in reply to #320086254)

When you 'buy' the OS you have bought it in its current form so I doubt that the argeument of the code being allowed to be updated without consent is valid. MS do not own the right to modify that code without consent from the end user.

And by the way, I only use MS stuff cause I have to at work. At home I use Linux and MacOS, will never use MS stuff again there.

• Reply to comment
• Report offensive content

Microsoft Simon Jones -- 16/09/07

This is Microsoft, why is anyone even surprised? Given their history it should be expected, as should the idea that soon the update will check the validity of your license and if deemed (not proven) to be invalid you will be locked out of your computer.

You buy from a crooked company expect dodgy dealings.

• Reply to comment
• Reply to story
• Report offensive content

you joking right? Max McKenzie -- 18/09/07 (in reply to #320086244)

So the consumer should blame themselves if a company does something dodgy? People are entitled to prefer to use MS os and software, that doesn't mean they therefore have to put up with MS dodgy practices. It's MS who should put up or shut up, not the consumer, who have a legitimate need for MS product, what ever reason - compatibility, ease of use, whatever it is they decide they want MS software for. It's not up to you to decide what software end user's should or shouldn't use. And it's not up to MS to decide they can install something on your computer anytime they like.

• Reply to comment
• Report offensive content

• Just In

• Most Popular

• Most Discussed

Reader Services

Popular Topics

Essentials