"John Waller" <johnw@REMOVETHISpinnacleweb.com.au> wrote in message
news:OhIzhVOEGHA.3148@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> 1) One could also ask what guarantees come with an official Microsoft
>> patch. I have never seen a guarantee associated with any Microsoft
>> patch.
>
> And should my system develop problems from this unauthorised patch, where
> would that leave me?

Restoring the restore point before applying the patch. You do use restore
points....right?

>
> I subscribe to following the manufacturers instructions. Microsoft would
> never endorse this procedure.

Microsoft would not endorse this procedure because thier corporate customers
have forced Microsoft to go through more testing of patches before they are
released. Although, there is nothing keeping Microsoft from issuing a
pre-release patch. Heck, it may even help find and prevent problems in the
final patch release.

>
> I'm not inclined to download and let loose a non-Microsoft .exe file,
> promising to patch my Windows XP, onto my system.

What do you think installing a program does? It usually makes registry
changes, updates DLLs and does God-knows-what else to your system.

>
> That contravenes every anti-spyware, anti-spam, anti-malware,
> good-practice guideline I can think of.

Your decision to install or not should be based on the trustworthiness of
the person writing the application or patch and the trustworthiness of those
advocating the application or patch.

Microsoft has told you that the exploits exist and are increasing.
Anti-virus vendors and watchdog groups like F-Secure and the SANS Institute
are advocating using the patch because of the seriousnes of the
vulnerability that the exploit exposes.

Microsoft has also told you that thier hands are tied because thier
corporate customers demand more testing before a patch is issued (if only
the hackers demanded as much testing before ecpliots were issued).

It is, as always, your choice.

Good luck to you.

Jim