mailing list archives
Re: Getting Off the Patch
From: coderman <coderman () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:19:36 -0800
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Thor (Hammer of God)
<thor () hammerofgod com> wrote:
... Any security model that not only advocates non-patching, but that is designed with the intent of not patching is
completely retarded. I defy anyone to provide verifiable evidence to the contrary that is not based on a server and
a couple of workstations.
while the vast majority of this thread has sucked the will to live
from my consciousness, the concept of a non-patch model is
i have used something similar to great success with some specific caveats:
a. you still need to patch sometimes. based on past experience this
can be as infrequent as once or twice a year.
b. you have a compensating control (more below) for your not-patching
preference. If you can't manage testing and deployment of patches,
you are not in good shape no matter the defense in depth.
c. trade-off need for patching by reducing attack surface of
applications and systems by disabling all unnecessary features,
services, and capabilities. this can vastly reduce the scope of
software under test and affected by patching, often by orders of
d. trade-off patching and testing difficulty by virtualizing the
software into a common environment more suited for automation,
expansive testing, rapid deployment, limited scope, and overall
e. trade-off patching induced service interruptions by utilizing a
highly available cluster configuration with distinct pools of software
for on-demand halt, update, and restore with only transient service
interruption. where possible, hot binary patching of kernel and
applications without interruption in processing state is ideal.
f. monitor service availability and vulnerability impact. identify
patches affecting components not in use, and patches incurring a test
and release cycle. confirm that you are actually better off focused
on a hardened, agile, automated process less focused on patching as
security strategy given the man hours used to achieve a, b, c, d and
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/