Re: [Full-disclosure] Getting Off the Patch

["Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]" <cal.leeming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

If the IOS has a remote exp vuln, then hell yes. That is, until the client
tells us to go f*ck ourselves as the downtime would affect their SLAs and
they don't have fall overs in place. lol.

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Pete Smith <seclists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> All,
>
> I agree with most of the stuff that Thor has been saying and from what I
> have read this has mostly been centred around patching software on servers.
> However most large companies take the don't patch or patch infrequently
> stance when it comes to network infrastructure, Cisco, Juniper, 3COM, HP and
> other large network infrastructure companies by no means have a clean record
> when it comes to vulnerabilities in their software but yet businesses will
> often not patch even in environments that are highly redundant and can be
> rebooted with no or little impact.
>
> Can anyone seriously say that they patch every time Cisco releases a new
> version of IOS?
>
> ...
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/