> open a case and get access [...] if you reference a vulnerability that’s affecting your current hardware. Ok, but that's bullshit, isn't it? Not all customer

> open a case and get access [...] if you reference a vulnerability that’s affecting your current hardware. Ok, but that's bullshit, isn't it? Not all customers are going to be proactive/attentive enough to know their hardware is vulnerable. Cisco knows there is vulnerable gear in the wild, knows there is a fix, but withholds the fix until people come begging? Almost feels like the sort of thing that should be illegal (or at least on the losing end of a civil suit).