Security Basics mailing list archives
Re: Third Party Patch Management
From: krymson () gmail com
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:36:34 -0600
Oh, I agree, not patching for hardware lifetime is a bad idea, especially for things with long lifetimes! I'm just giving options and ideas, even if they are extreme, to allow the OP to make his own risk decisions. Another aspect would be, do you want to update someone's WinDVD version that came with a system from the dsitributor? It is probably not worth bothering with for the lifetime of the hardware. Some apps are far riskier than others. But you are both fully in the right to express trepidation on that approach. Absolutely! I certainly should have made a note that while an option, it may not be a very good option at all without proper assessment and specific circumstances. Cheers! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This list is sponsored by: InfoSec Institute Learn all of the latest penetration testing techniques in InfoSec Institute's Ethical Hacking class. Totally hands-on course with evening Capture The Flag (CTF) exercises, Certified Ethical Hacker and Certified Penetration Tester exams, taught by an expert with years of real pen testing experience. http://www.infosecinstitute.com/courses/ethical_hacking_training.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current thread:
- Re: Third Party Patch Management, (continued)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management Noah . Lance (Mar 25)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management badz (Mar 25)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management fac51 (Mar 25)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management τ∂υƒιφ * (Mar 25)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management chmod1777 (Mar 24)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management Phil Bieber (Mar 25)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management krymson (Mar 25)
- Re: Re: Third Party Patch Management chmod1777 (Mar 26)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management aaaa (Mar 26)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management Phil Bieber (Mar 27)
- Re: Third Party Patch Management krymson (Mar 27)