March 2016 Microsoft Patch Tuesday

Published: 2016-03-08. Last Updated: 2016-03-08 18:52:03 UTC
by Alex Stanford (Version: 1)
22 comment(s)

https://isc.sans.edu/mspatchdays.html?viewday=2016-03-08

-- 
Alex Stanford - GIAC GWEB & GSEC,
Research Operations Manager,
SANS Internet Storm Center
/in/alexstanford

Keywords:
22 comment(s)

Comments

Typo in the summary table? MS16-029 summary lists CVE2016-0021 three times, with two different severities.

Anonymous

Mar 8th 2016
9 years ago

[quote=comment#36585]Typo in the summary table? MS16-029 summary lists CVE2016-0021 three times, with two different severities.[/quote]
Thank you for pointing that out. We'll have it corrected shortly.

Anonymous

Mar 8th 2016
9 years ago

Hi Alex,
I had always used the previous format which Dr. J did whereas everything was listed in one table rather than 26 different table blocks. That makes it quite difficult to copy it in Excel and then put comments against each one of them. Could we get it into the previous format?
Thanks
Jo

Anonymous

Mar 8th 2016
9 years ago

Does MS16-033 (CVE-2016-0133) require logon rights AND physical access to the USB port, or just physical access? Going from "elevation of privilege", I assume the former?

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

I like the new layout.

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

I have question regarding MS16-024 Update for Microsfot Edge, what's the reason of the rating for servers being high? Is there any possibility that Edge may also affect servers? Because as far as I know, Edge doesn't exist on servers yet. Thanks

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

Hi - I agree with Jo that the old format table was much better - just a couple of pages full. Easier to read and take in.
Another item is the 'Replaces' field. Before, it showed the MS bulletin number, eg "Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (Replaces MS16-001)". Now it only shows the KB number. Again, the older format was better. If you want to show the KB number, then why not add this rather than replace the MS bulletin?

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

Same here unfortunately, good thing I didn't get to invest time writing a parser for the previous format after all. Could we get an idea of long this one is staying for?
Needless to say that if there was a choice, I would definitely go for the previous one.

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

I appreciate the work to try new ways of presenting the information - in this case, I have to say I miss the old layout - it just seemed easier to view and quickly assess all the pertinent information.

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

I also like the new format. I find it easier to read. Wish you would add whether it applies to servers or clients, like you used to do.

Anonymous

Mar 9th 2016
9 years ago

Login here to join the discussion.


Top of page
Diary Archives