Security Basics mailing list archives
Re: Which Windows OS is Safest
From: Eystein Roll Aarseth <eystaar () online no>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 13:43:52 +0200
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 12:05:15PM +0000, MARTIN M. Bénoni wrote:
Humm...I cannot understand hom people can still talk about NT when there are at least W2K boxes since a while, and Win2K3!
Two years ago, I visited a factory that was making small electronic components. They still used 386es running Windows 3.x and a PC-NFS network to control many of their machines. Of course, the office PC's were modern, but the machines that helped them to have something to sell were about ten years old. 4mb RAM and 106mb disk, anyone? And those were the *large* disks. Some had 40mb hd's. :-) Why? Well, they worked, it was as stable as Win3.x ever was, and they *could not* change the hardware they used without asking their customers. ISO specs and/or contracts which said that the customer had to know and approve *everything* about the way they made their products. Some of it was parts for medical hardware, other products were made to pass military specifications. You *do not* want to change the production line for those things unless you have to. The bureucracy involved will make you insane and kill a *lot* of trees.
NT has got a lot of bugs (6 SPs!! ), and I think at least a whole which cannot be patched! Why NT is still in admin's minds???
Six SPs spread over what, six years or so? I certainly *hope* that MS will be supporting 2k/XP for that long, but I don't hold my breath. It's still an OS that admins *know* because they've fought the damn beast for *years*. It's not an OS that should be left unprotected on the net in 2004, but it will continue to be used on isolated networks and single-purpose installations. Remember the noise about old mainframes and Y2K? Feh. I'm defending NT. I feel... *dirty*. EAa -- I learned enough about NT internals from coworkers to realize that underneath it all, there's some quite nice stuff. Unfortunately, then they had to bolt Windows on top of it and ruin it. -- Matt Brown --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ethical Hacking at the InfoSec Institute. Mention this ad and get $545 off any course! All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 10 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. Attend a course taught by an expert instructor with years of in-the-field pen testing experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Master the skills of an Ethical Hacker to better assess the security of your organization. Visit us at: http://www.infosecinstitute.com/courses/ethical_hacking_training.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest, (continued)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Allan (Jun 25)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest dave kleiman (Jun 28)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Raj (Jun 29)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest eQ iX (Jun 28)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest dave kleiman (Jun 28)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Michael Carroll (Jun 25)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Tenorio, Leandro (Jun 25)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Michael Carroll (Jun 28)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Randy Williams (Jun 29)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Alvin Packard (Jun 28)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest MARTIN M. Bénoni (Jun 28)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Eystein Roll Aarseth (Jun 29)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Leon North (Jun 29)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Rusty Chiles (Jun 29)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Eoin Fleming (Jun 29)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Cameron Reign (Jun 29)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest MARTIN M. Bénoni (Jun 29)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest GKornblum (Jun 29)
- RE: Which Windows OS is Safest Guybrush Threepwood (Jun 30)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest MARTIN M. Bénoni (Jun 29)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Artturi Lehtiö (Jun 30)
- Re: Which Windows OS is Safest Allan (Jun 25)