Red-faced Vole apologises for unwanted WDS

If i mistakenly drive at 40mph in a 30mph zone, i still get a fine and points. Just cos it is a mistake doesn't mean it should go unpunished. Not that anybody believes it was a mistake, i know i don't, seems like a very Volish tactic to fill up other peeps machines with crap.

Of all the 'accidentally' installed software, it had to be indexing and searching Windows Desktop Search. Wonder who'll want to be sifting through my desktop, in the near future...

Guess what, everyones' sorry...

You would think that a company that has zillions of dollars for anything it could think of, that serves the vast majority of computers and thus users in the world, would manage NOT to make these "mistakes"

I hope they never get control of missile launch systems...god only knows what kind of mistakes may arise.

Is the fact that even with wuauclt.exe turned off, they shunted DRM as well. Has no one else noticed this? I run a radeon GPU (let the laughter ensue) for my gaming monitor and when I went to play a DVD (bought and paid for material mind you) I wasn't even allowed to view it on my system because of "driver issues". Oddly enough, no such issues were there before the "update" came down the pipe.

Frankly it couldn't have been anything but intentional. They were trying something sneaky and now are tell falshoods to cover it up.

Here's why. First, they have to put the files into the location where the updates occur. So it wasn't just the update being flagged by mistake, they had to actually put the files in the correct location. Second, they put them there then they flagged it to be downloaded.

They may be saying that they did the flagging by mistake but nonetheless it was still intentional to put them in the windows update.

They probably made the choice knowing they could pull it back and claim plausible deniability. But the two factors are there. The files were *put* into the windows update section by someone and they flagged it to begin happening.

That means it was intentional.

I had no problem denying this update through WSUS. Did this happen with an older version of the program or something?

... from all those millions of desktops. Fortuitous accident indeed. :)

"Honesty pays, but it doesn't seem to pay enough to suit some people - F.M. Hubbard"

the above quote was the one that came with my instance of the article. Ironic, isn't it?

Really...so the conspiracy is that there's a company that has people working around the clock, collecting wages, making updates, to sneak them onto our machine (mistake or not)? Come on, get real. What good does M$ get if that was their intention at all? 

I see no tactic in something that has no pay off. It's not paying off, as geeks are watching nothing go out. So far. Yell when you actually see a problem instead of making one up. 

You can avoid updating. You can avoid this one as well. You can also choose to not use them.

Here's an idea, if you run a server do NOT enable automatic updates, and block the MS IP's when you aren't manually updating.
Seems an obvious thing to not trust blindly on 'magic' from MS when you are a serious system administrator.

http://roddotnet.blogspot.com/2007/10/how-to-stop-wds-301-indexing-via-group.html 

I've worked out how to stop indexing via GPO for all you sysadmins who are pulling your hair out!

"We are also working on improving our internal publishing processes to ensure . . " that we won't notice it again before it's way too late.
I mean, if they decide to do an update to IE that makes that stupid Desktop thing mandatory because it becomes "part of the kernel", then it's game over, right ? Right.
I've disabled the Windows Update service ong ago, and I've never had a reason to regret it yet.