Microsoft’s First Windows XP Patch in Years Is a Bad Sign
wired.com
wired.com
XP is almost 18 years old. If you were running an 18 year old operating system in 2010, you'd have been running Windows 3.11 while everyone else is on Windows 7.
Running XP now is like running Linux Kernel 2.4 today.
If the computer in question is connected to any network, to keep it so out-of-date is simply irresponsible.
The cost and logistics involved in replacing legacy systems trumps the need/inability of highly skilled engineers to protect an old OS.
Other layers might save you, you hope, sometimes. It is still irresponsible. Most actively developed and diligently patched software is bad enough; after EOL it is beyond the pale.
The cost needs to be properly internalized so that getting owned really is more expensive than migrating legacy; today I’d have to agree with you that it isn’t.
1. Microsoft is releasing a patch for Windows XP, which is odd because they no longer support it. This could indicate that a very serious vulnerability is about to be revealed - one which likely goes beyond XP itself.
2. There are still far too many computers running Windows XP. Doing so is a dangerous practice - especially if the device is networked - and keeps getting harder to justify.
Burying the lede? The implication here is that all unpatched Windows 7 computers will be utterly pwned within 24-48 hours of that announcement - i.e. a week ago. That's way more serious than a Windows XP problem. Tons of people are still on Windows 7 - justifiably.
Windows 7 is only 10 years old at this point.