Skip to main content

Really Unhelpful Advice...


A quick summary of the following article - http://www.neowin.net/news/from-my-cold-dead-hands-living-without-updates - would be: Updates are bad, don't do updates.

That unhelpful advice isn't from me and is not recommended by me, nor endorsed by me. You should run from the advice this author posits.
It is is really unhelpful and a disservice to many. As such I was compelled to comment. 
To wit:
I'm sorry, but I think this article and the point of view it puts forward are irresponsible.
As a software engineer, I know (and hate to admit) there are bugs in every released piece of software. Updates to patch these problems (whether or not they are problems visible to users or IT) need to take place. An un-patched bug translates to a vulnerability. Why would you promote vulnerable systems? For instance, would you recommend leaving an Android system un-patched that is vulnerable to the StageFright security hole?
I have used known vulnerabilities in Windows XP (missing some up-to-date patches) and easy to find tools, to crack an administrator's password and create my own administrators account. Or in other words to own the system. The weak spots are where you hack and you count on people and systems having some weak spot, somewhere. You look for the easy ones first. Just because you don't know about it happening, doesn't mean it hasn't, can't or won't.
Many of the me-too comments assume threats will be on the other-side of the network, or there are Antivirus & malware protections in place on targets, or that other security measures will protect them. Defense in depth should be mantra, a guiding principle for anyone responsible for the care and feeding of a system that runs software. Why give away any level of defense?
I'll give the author "the out" to separate updates that fix problems from updates that include additional functionality. Additional functionality is usually adding bugs and is mostly related to revenue generation or market share and competitiveness. I would call the former "patches" and the later "upgrades" and I would say that they should be separate.
But a blanket "no updates"? No thanks.
Labels:

Comments

Unknown said…
I totally agree, but this requires reading on the users part and some understanding of the nomenclature used by the vendors.
10:41 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Let's Not Mess Around with Security on our Personal Systems Either!

Essential Security Practices for Your Personal Systems Ensuring a minimal level of cybersecurity, privacy, and availability on your personal systems means you need to manage the following essential practices. This is a brief overview of recommendations from sources like CISA, NSA, etc., focused on personal laptop, phone, and other systems' security. Anti-virus  I've found you'll get the best anti-virus protection and usability from a paid product - I've always had good luck with Norton labeled products. If you are looking for current vendor offerings see:  https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-antivirus-protection Regardless of whether you choose to use a commercial product or open-source anti-virus tool, it is absolutely something you need to use. This is the minimally needed level of system security. Once installed, ideally, it should be invisible until there's a security problem it can't prevent or solve.   Backups You need to have at least a minimal level of ...
Post a Comment
Read more

RACI, Cybersecurity and NICE Framework

The NICE framework from a RACI point of view The NICE framework ( NIST SP 800-181 rev. 1) established a standard approach for describing cybersecurity work, in order to help stakeholders share a common language and ideally improve how to identify, recruit, develop and retain talent. It breaks down cybersecurity work role categories into: Oversight and Governance; Design and Development; Implementation and Operation; Protection and Defense; Investigation.  Which is very cybersecurity-centric and not related to common tools for project management within companies. Especially smaller enterprises that do not have dedicated people to mange and coordinate cybersecurity needs. A  RACI chart  is   a project management tool used to define and clarify roles and responsibilities within a project team.   It stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed, and visually represents who is responsible for what, who is accountable for the outcome, who needs to be c...
Post a Comment
Read more

Typescript - It might not be easier, but but it's surely different

Typescript is a statically typed language, that is a superset of JavaScript. I've had the discussions and debates about that aspect of the language. I am all for static typing. Any way my tools can help me be better is alright by me. So I avoid the ' any ' type designation and make sure I have guards on ' unknown ' types, as much as I can.  Any  does not carry any useful type information, while unknown does, and allows it to enforce type checking.  Anything can be assigned to a variable of type unknown , but an unknown value cannot be assigned to variables of other types without explicit type assertion or narrowing. Similarly, no operations are permitted on an unknown value until its type is refined. This behavior ensures type safety and prevents runtime errors. (Refined with help from google). I bring this up because I was arguing with the compiler recently because I'd assumed both made no use on any type information in any circumstance - because I haven't ...
Post a Comment
Read more