Re: security with XP

From	"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	aus.computers
Subject	Re: security with XP
Date	2015-07-15 15:52 +1000
Message-ID	<d0mao8Fo9d1U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<mo0kk9$vcq$1@speranza.aioe.org> <d0ikv9Fqlh5U1@mid.individual.net> <mo203j$vdr$1@speranza.aioe.org> <d0lblhFh9amU1@mid.individual.net> <mo4gm2$gqa$1@speranza.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Max <max@val.morgan> wrote

>>>>> Even with a third party security product (eg. McAfee) XP should not be 
>>>>> used because it doesn't get Windows updates anymore.

>>>>> Is the above correct?

>>>> Nope.

>>> Not according to this: 
>>> http://blogs.microsoft.com/cybertrust/2013/08/15/the-risk-of-running-windows-xp-after-support-ends-april-2014/

>> I wasn't talking about when support ends, I was talking
>> about whether that is a good reason to not use XP. It isn't.

> What about XP not getting updates anymore?

I don't care. I never bothered to update it when I was running it on the
desktop systems, just installed a service pack a long time after it had
been released and it was clear that it didn't have any downsides for me.

I still run it on one of my laptops just because I have been too lazy
to get off my arse and run Win7 on that and have never bothered
to update it and it doesn't run the latest service pack either. Its never
got infected.

> That is a security risk which is not avoided by third party anti-virus 
> products.

It isn't a security risk if you know what you are doing.

> That's what the article talks about.

Whoever wrote it doesn't have a fucking clue
about the basics and doesn't even realise that
you can still get updates for XP if you want them.

And anyone with even half a clue has upgraded
to Win7 anyway because its much better than XP.

And I don't bother to update Win7 either.

>> And that question of when support ends is more
>> complicated than that article states anyway.

>>>> It continues to work fine. But Win7 is much better.

>>> Shame that Win 7 is soon to be an obsolete OS.

>> Irrelevant to whether it is the best to use currently.

Back to aus.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 06:21 +1000
  Re: security with XP "Max" <max@val.morgan> - 2015-07-14 11:36 +0800
    Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-14 14:45 +1000
    Re: security with XP Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-14 19:27 +0000
      Re: security with XP Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 09:59 +1000
        Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 10:58 +1000
    Re: security with XP "Max" <max@val.morgan> - 2015-07-15 10:31 +0800
      Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 15:52 +1000
      Re: security with XP "jonz" <me@there.com> - 2015-07-27 14:50 +1000
        Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-27 14:53 +1000
          Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 15:12 +1000
            Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-27 20:22 +1000
              Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-28 07:23 +1000
                Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 08:28 +1000
                Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-28 09:22 +1000
                Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 09:28 +1000
                Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-28 11:42 +1000
                Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-30 17:35 +1000
                Re: security with XP "SG1" <lost@the.races.com> - 2015-07-30 19:36 +1000
                Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 07:17 +1000
    Re: security with XP "Damian" <damian_andrews75@yahoo.com.au> - 2015-07-15 19:38 +1000
      Re: security with XP Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-15 17:52 +0000
        Re: security with XP not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2015-07-15 23:34 +0000
          Re: security with XP Max <max@val.morgan> - 2015-07-16 18:08 +0800
            Re: security with XP Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-16 19:48 +0000
            Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 06:11 +1000
        Re: security with XP Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-16 19:45 +0000
        Re: security with XP bruce56@topmail.co.nz - 2015-07-30 17:11 -0700
      Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-16 04:41 +1000
        Re: security with XP Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-15 18:52 +0000
          Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-16 10:30 +1000
          Re: security with XP F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-18 20:53 +1000
            Re: security with XP Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2015-07-18 19:40 +0000
              Re: security with XP "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 07:24 +1000

csiph-web