Re:Maybe you shouldn't install new software for a bit
by emodendroket on Friday May 08, 2026 @03:16AM
(#48059747)
Really? You think the alternate mode where you're running 5-year-old versions of stuff with tons of known security flaws is better?
Re:Maybe you shouldn't install new software for a bit
by coldtea on Friday May 08, 2026 @03:34AM
(#48059888)
What part of "We reviewed all relevant CVEs as they came out to make a call on if they apply to us or not and how we mitigate or address them" gave you that impression?
Re:Maybe you shouldn't install new software for a bit
by emodendroket on Saturday May 09, 2026 @03:26PM
(#48077508)
My experience with how such a strategy typically plays out in reality.
Re:Maybe you shouldn't install new software for a bit
by HeatrayEnjoyer on Friday May 08, 2026 @03:34AM
(#48059886)
>running 5-year-old versions of stuff with tons of known security flaws
No one in this thread proposed that, or anything that could be reasonably assumed to have meant that.
Re:Maybe you shouldn't install new software for a bit
by KronisLV on Friday May 08, 2026 @04:32AM
(#48060320)
> if they saw the risk as large enough.
If you expose people to the true risks instead of allowing them to be ignorant, the conclusion that they might come to is that they shouldn’t develop software at all.
Re:Maybe you shouldn't install new software for a bit
by dataflow on Friday May 08, 2026 @10:19PM
(#48071112)
The assumption was obviously that they have a compelling need to develop the software. For the sake of illustration: you imagine exposing them to whatever the highest level of risk is that still makes them wiling to develop software.
I like to think people would agree more on the appropriate method if they saw the risk as large enough.
If you could convince everyone that a nuclear bomb would get dropped on their heads (or a comparably devastating event) if a vulnerability gets in, I highly doubt a company like #2 would still believe they're doing things optimally, for example.