Well stop bragging about it then and faux-leaking sound bites. I now suspect this "report" is not what you say and a pure fiction.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
NHS Cyber attack!
Collapse
X
-
-
my 50p is that even if the NHS desktops were running the latest and greatest, they would not have been patched in time anyway.
I expect that many highly funded privately run IT departments were quietly patching their systems over the weekend (cough).
It is great to hear that the NHS back-office systems appear to have been un-scathed, well done there.
Even if the NHS desktops were running Linux and VDI'ing into scratch desktops they would have still been hit however and it would have been easier to contain. The downside is that it is generally hideously expensive to do it this way.
The bigger story here for me is how long Microsoft left the hole un-patched to allow whomever to exploit it.Comment
-
Windows XP is unsupported.Originally posted by Bluenose View Post
The bigger story here for me is how long Microsoft left the hole un-patched to allow whomever to exploit it.
M$ sent patches out in March to stop the issue."You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JRComment
-
It should be illegal for them to just "not support" it for important security patchesOriginally posted by SueEllen View PostWindows XP is unsupported.Comment
-
XP has been unsupported (except embedded) for years. Windows 7 roll out was 6 years ago for most sensible companies.Originally posted by Bluenose View Postmy 50p is that even if the NHS desktops were running the latest and greatest, they would not have been patched in time anyway.
I expect that many highly funded privately run IT departments were quietly patching their systems over the weekend (cough).
It is great to hear that the NHS back-office systems appear to have been un-scathed, well done there.
Even if the NHS desktops were running Linux and VDI'ing into scratch desktops they would have still been hit however and it would have been easier to contain. The downside is that it is generally hideously expensive to do it this way.
The bigger story here for me is how long Microsoft left the hole un-patched to allow whomever to exploit it.
Though probably there were plenty of private organisations updating machines they have to be mad to still run XP.
This is a CIO level issue, they failed to drive the upgrade and prevent risk.
Microsoft tend not to patch EOL O/Ss.Comment
-
You send ex customers up to date reports for free?Originally posted by AtW View PostIt should be illegal for them to just "not support" it for important security patchesComment
-
I know that.Originally posted by SueEllen View PostWindows XP is unsupported.
M$ sent patches out in March to stop the issue.
I am supporter of Microsoft, I think their hearts are generally in the right place even if sometimes the quality of their products lets them down time to time.
My point is the NSA exploit was being used well before March. The exploit may have been in the code since it was released in 2002.
Just because it was Windows XP is missing my point, I would rate the chances of Microsoft only knowing about this hole in February as near to zero.
Taken into this context Microsoft defecting the issue onto companies because their software is out of date is a bit galling because it is actually a distraction tactic.Comment
-
I would have if we sold on the basis of one off fee for a lifetime license - like Microsoft did...Originally posted by vetran View PostYou send ex customers up to date reports for free?
More importantly - our software does not create potentially dangerous situation for critical infrastructure: Microsoft's does, there is a downside to having market dominance and that should be fixing critical security even for "old" software like XP.Comment
-
Microsoft should send an automatic update that deletes XP from any computer running it. Sorted.Originally posted by AtW View PostI would have if we sold on the basis of one off fee for a lifetime license - like Microsoft did...
More importantly - our software does not create potentially dangerous situation for critical infrastructure: Microsoft's does, there is a downside to having market dominance and that should be fixing critical security even for "old" software like XP.
Comment
-
Turning dangerous unpached PCs off the Internet is essential - ISPs should be blocking all access other than to Microsoft patch servers.Originally posted by DimPrawn View PostMicrosoft should send an automatic update that deletes XP from any computer running it. Sorted.
Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Why contractors keep putting off their pension (and why I'm one of them) Today 02:43
- HMRC loan charge settlement offer: 3 things to check before you sign Yesterday 07:41
- HMRC standstill agreements extended to 72 months: why the term's doubled, and what to check before signing Jul 31 05:53
- Who owns the loans? Inside the mystery of the loan charge recall scandal Jul 30 06:20
- Umbrella company winding-up petitions in 2026: the practical guide for contractors Jul 29 05:29
- Payments on Account deadline: what contractors must do before July 31st — maybe for the final few times Jul 28 08:01
- Andy Burnham's first 100 days: five things contractors need from the new PM Jul 27 00:53
- Starmer vs Burnham on housing: What their rival plans mean for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- Burnham's housing vision vs. Starmer's home-buying reforms: what it means for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- In Khalil v Innovate Transport, a limited company contractor wasn’t a worker and was on £2.30 — not £230 Jul 21 07:58

Comment