[olug] OT: security through antiquity

[DYNATRON tech]

i think it's better to find a balance.


code that's been around for a few days has many more bugs than code that's
been around a few months.

code that's been around for a few months has many more exploits than code
that's been around a few days.



side note:
i put a win98 (FE) on the internet once with no patches or protections. it
was just a standard install. i left the house to go jogging in the park, and
i got back to a desktop full of porn links, and a start menu full of the
same. when i say full, i mean full.       elapsed time: 2hrs.

i would suggest not using legacy OS's. everyone knows how to crack them,
including the zillions of zombie-bots out there.



On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Will Langford <unfies at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Phil Brutsche <phil at brutsche.us> wrote:
>
> > Will Langford wrote:
> > > I suppose ya could make an argument that 'through antiquity' is just a
> > > special case of 'through obscurity' ...
> >
> > Is it?
> >
>
> Antiquity vs obscurity could possibly be viewed as square vs rectangle --
> one is a special case of the other :)
>
>
> >
> > This particular article talks about IE5 running on... wait for it...
> > Windows 3.1!
> >
>
> Article talks about that as well (no malware would understand 3.1).
>  Malware
> understanding IE5 is likely, but as article mentions - IPC and similar
> technologies is not prevalent in 3.1 so typical overflows might not be
> possible... or at least be more meaningless.  If Win32S is installed, it
> might be more dangerous.
>
> I also wonder how many W311 installations actually have a live or
> unshielded
> connection to the internet - being undoubtedly embedded targets, I'd
> imagine
> a mostly closed network :)
>
> -Will
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>



-- 
dynatron digital services
box 191 - 68037
www.dynatron.org
dynatron at gmail.com