Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Getting Off the Patch
From: Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:45:56 +0100

I'm getting a bit annoyed reading over and over arguments which I've
highlighted some time ago anyway (
http://www.mail-archive.com/full-disclosure () lists grok org uk/msg44454.html
).

The real question, what is the *direct* alternative to patching?

Don't say "sandboxing" because it doesn't always work.
And don't tell me about only installing the system critical issues only -
that's called "update by priority".
Also, please remember that we are talking against patching, not discussing
where patching works(/ is better) or not so I would expect any serious
arguments to completely exclude patching.

Regards,
Chris.





On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:05 PM, coderman <coderman () gmail com> wrote:

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:43 AM, phocean <0x90 () phocean net> wrote:
... how is this new ? It has been the best
practice of good system/security administrators for years.

And it doesn't look like a "no patching" policy yet...


sure, .. though you've made me sad considering how few organizations
do "best practice, good system/security administration".

not new, still difficult?   (~_~;)


 that leaves consensus:
   "no patching" elusive, yet to be observed in real-world. (e.g.
yeti or bigfeets)

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]