Re: [RRG] What does incremental deployment mean

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> By the way, Wikipedia says about Windows 2000
>
> "More than eight years after its release, it continues to receive patches for 
> security vulnerabilities on a near-monthly basis."
>
> So, there may be hope there after all. Still, my experience is that people 
> who are running old versions of code are
> likely to also not be regularly updating them.

Isn't this whole discussion irrelevant?

Even if all Windows 2000 or XP users were applying security patches 
(which they aren't), making a fundamental change as this cannot be 
deployed as a security fix.  By definition it is going to break a lot 
of applications or at least change their communication patterns in 
such a way that in the deployed base of O(million) various kinds of 
bizarre apps and O(100 million) hosts the result would be a chaos.

There is no way any vendor could unilaterally deploy significant host 
changes in a channel meant only for critical software updates for a 
product well beyond its end-of-life cycle.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg