5 ms·
XP and 2003 have been end-of-life for years. They both were released 14+ years ago. So you can just change what I said to: "because a lot of them have ineffect
by meowface 10y ago
XP and 2003 have been end-of-life for years. They both were released 14+ years ago. So you can just change what I said to:
"because a lot of them have ineffective IT departments/mangement and never applied the MS17-010 patch or are running ancient operating systems."
edit: And in fact, Microsoft did release a special XP hotfix for this vulnerability yesterday: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/msrc/2017/05/12/customer-guidance-for-wannacrypt-attacks/ https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/msrc/2017/05/12/customer...
- stuartd 10y ago> because a lot of them are running ancient operating systems that are the only ones that can interoperate with legacy hardware FTFY
- linkregister 10y agoWhat news reports said anything about legacy hardware? The BBC and Reuters articles claimed the NHS suffered infection of their patient records servers and their reception computers.
- ptaipale 10y agoApparently the impacted XP and 2003 machines were accessing the same disk servers as the patient record systems. Thus an infected CAT scanner controller (or whatever) was able to destroy the patient records. That doesn't tell a story of missing money or maintenance contracts. It tells of poor or even irresponsible and incompetent deployment procedures. You shouldn't allow your CAT scanner to write over your patient records at a server. You shouldn't even have them in the same network segment.
- throwaway049 10y agoAnd on legacy software. My NHS Trust seems to have escaped unscathed, but it has software that won't run on modern systems which is why XP is still seen in most departments.
- smitherfield 10y agoWhat software is that? There is a 32-bit version of Windows 10, which can still run 16-bit Windows/DOS programs, and IE11 still supports ActiveX, Silverlight, Java applets and even (in IE10 compatibility mode) VBScript. So AFAICT 32-bit W10 can run most anything 32-bit XP can (likewise the 64-bit versions, though neither can run 16-bit programs), and IE11 can run most anything IE8 can (with minor configuration). Is it software that relies on undocumented APIs? (I can't imagine why hospital software would require exotic methods of poking at the kernel or hardware).
- vmateixeira 10y agobecause .. drivers?
- smitherfield 10y agoFor what? Surely buying new printers is less expensive in the long or even short run than continuing to use an EOL-ed operating system.
- andy_ppp 10y agoI assume drivers for scanners... but yes, if you underfund a healthcare system (remember half the cost of the US system for better outcomes) and constantly demand "efficiency savings" (and cancel long term Microsoft support contract) managers will cut IT before frontline services.
- smitherfield 10y agoPlaces that cut the IT budget first are also places that raise the IT budget last.
- ptaipale 10y agoWe're not talking about printers. We're talking about medical equipment, such as CAT scanners, dialysis machines, radiation therapy devices, chemical analysators and the like. Stuff where the computer interface could be an afterthought, added to a machine that was designed years ago with a physical knobs-and-dials type of user interface, and implemented and certified for a particular PC hardware generation. Then this interface PC becomes obsolete in 15 years even if the equipment itself would work for a hundred.