dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
977

vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium Member
join:2005-03-01
Polar Park

vaxvms

Premium Member

XP support has ended

XP support ended a while ago. Has anything happened to actually make people abandon XP?
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

1 recommendation

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

But---it is NEXT month (May 2014) when the XP users won't receive updates. So that starts to be the real test.

This month (April 2014) the XP users DID receive updates. So the focus on April was misdirected.

The possible excitement will be in May and beyond.

siljaline
I'm lovin' that double wide
Premium Member
join:2002-10-12
Montreal, QC

2 recommendations

siljaline to vaxvms

Premium Member

to vaxvms
»Strategies for Keeping XP - When You HAVE To Keep XP

Kilroy
MVM
join:2002-11-21
Saint Paul, MN

1 recommendation

Kilroy to PX Eliezer1

MVM

to PX Eliezer1
As PX Eliezer1 See Profile said next month will be the telling factor. The bad guys are going to reverse engineer the patches that Microsoft releases for Vista, Win7, and Win8 to see if XP is also affected, then exploit. For the bad guys, this will be the best thing since they don't have to look for holes in XP any more, Microsoft will be releasing them once a month.

ltsnow
Premium Member
join:2006-04-08
Valdosta, GA

ltsnow

Premium Member

said by Kilroy:

As PX Eliezer1 See Profile said next month will be the telling factor. The bad guys are going to reverse engineer the patches that Microsoft releases for Vista, Win7, and Win8 to see if XP is also affected, then exploit. For the bad guys, this will be the best thing since they don't have to look for holes in XP any more, Microsoft will be releasing them once a month.

Maybe, but I truly believe that updates will come from one of two sources: 1) Windows 2009 POS which everyone seems to believe has identical patches, and/or 2) leaked updates from companies/governments who will be paying for updates. It's going to be a fun ride.

jaykaykay
4 Ever Young
MVM
join:2000-04-13
USA

jaykaykay to vaxvms

MVM

to vaxvms
Nothing yet, but am on my way to doing so...finally! In order to do so, I have to add memory to my present system and run the Windows 7 that came with my original setup. I realized that in doing so, I can hang on without going to 8 or 8.1 as yet, and 7 will still be updated for a while. If my motherboard doesn't fail me, I am good to go for a while with my present system, before having to go to a new computer/system. Do I have to? No. But I still appreciate the fact that I have 7 and can keep it for a while. I will gain no benefits, whatsoever, from being forced to 8.1, or whatever it will be called by the time I need to, but remaining on XP, even as much as I know it inside and out, didn't seem to make sense.

ltsnow
Premium Member
join:2006-04-08
Valdosta, GA

ltsnow

Premium Member

said by jaykaykay:

Nothing yet, but am on my way to doing so...finally! In order to do so, I have to add memory to my present system and run the Windows 7 that came with my original setup

What I have been thinking of doing is to add another gig of memory and then dual boot XP with Windows 7. Then I can have the best of both worlds. I have run Windows 7 with 1GB of memory, but that was a long time ago. 2GBs I think would now be the bare minimum.

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
·AT&T U-Verse

trparky

Premium Member

I'd say that 4 GBs of RAM is bare minimum, besides... you want to go 64-bit from here on out to make yourself as future-proof as you can get.

No reason to back yourself into another corner, get ready now so as to be ready in the future.

I've been running a 64-bit OS for some time now, I'm ready for the future and whatever it throws at us.

norwegian
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
Outback

norwegian to vaxvms

Premium Member

to vaxvms

So what happens to the code now they will not support it.
Binned or are third parties allowed access now?

ltsnow
Premium Member
join:2006-04-08
Valdosta, GA

1 recommendation

ltsnow to trparky

Premium Member

to trparky
said by trparky:

I'd say that 4 GBs of RAM is bare minimum, besides... you want to go 64-bit from here on out to make yourself as future-proof as you can get.

What you say makes great sense, but I need to update without spending more money. The 64-bit OS requires a new CPU and a new motherboard. I need to run with what I already have.

StuartMW
Premium Member
join:2000-08-06

2 recommendations

StuartMW to jaykaykay

Premium Member

to jaykaykay
said by jaykaykay:

I will gain no benefits, whatsoever, from being forced to 8.1, or whatever it will be called...

Sure you will. You'll get a warm fuzzy feeling for having handed over hard earned cash to Microsoft so they can develop a newer version of Windows that'll require even more RAM, HD etc (and your cash to get it)
Fickey
Terrorists target your backbone
join:2004-05-31

Fickey to ltsnow

Member

to ltsnow
said by ltsnow:

Maybe, but I truly believe that updates will come from one of two sources: 1) Windows 2009 POS which everyone seems to believe has identical patches, and/or 2) leaked updates from companies/governments who will be paying for updates. It's going to be a fun ride.

I've been thinking the same thing, but wonder if MS will do some sort of license/key restriction on their expensive government patches. However, I have no doubt there will be countless fake/hacked "patches" hoping to compromise vulnerable systems.

ltsnow
Premium Member
join:2006-04-08
Valdosta, GA

ltsnow

Premium Member

said by Fickey:

I've been thinking the same thing, but wonder if MS will do some sort of license/key restriction on their expensive government patches. However, I have no doubt there will be countless fake/hacked "patches" hoping to compromise vulnerable systems.

And that's going to be the big problem, finding patches that are legitimate. It's going to be a field day for nefarious hackers, but there are enough websites that I trust to ferret out the legitimate ones. But it will require some degree of trust and thorough investigation to trust your OS updates to third parties.

EUS
Kill cancer
Premium Member
join:2002-09-10
canada

2 recommendations

EUS to jaykaykay

Premium Member

to jaykaykay
Didn't you hear? 8.x makes you waaaay more productive!!!11!1!!!!!
gnome84
join:2014-04-12
Saint Paul, MN

gnome84 to vaxvms

Member

to vaxvms
Will future active directories support XP?

If not a product that does might sell well especially in europe.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

bbbc to ltsnow

Member

to ltsnow
said by ltsnow :

And that's going to be the big problem, finding patches that are legitimate. It's going to be a field day for nefarious hackers, but there are enough websites that I trust to ferret out the legitimate ones. But it will require some degree of trust and thorough investigation to trust your OS updates to third parties.

I'm hoping a site like Maher's Digital World will host such updates / patches. This guy makes clean slipstreamed versions of Windows for the masses. He's got a pretty good reputation.

ltsnow
Premium Member
join:2006-04-08
Valdosta, GA

ltsnow

Premium Member

Cool site bbbc. Thanks for mentioning it.

angussf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-11
Tucson, AZ

angussf to vaxvms

Premium Member

to vaxvms
I suspect that the 0-day IE6-11 bug which was announced this week will NOT be fixed in XP's versions of IE. Would be nice if MS rolled out XP patches.

Just disable vector graphics on XP by unregistering the VGX DLL. I'm going to run this line on all my systems, but since I almost never use IE anyway I won't be at serious risk from this....
"%SystemRoot%\System32\regsvr32.exe" -u "%CommonProgramFiles%\Microsoft Shared\VGX\vgx.dll"
 
Seen here:
Symantec Provides a Simple Batch File to Mitigate Internet Explorer Zero-Day | Security content from Windows IT Pro
»windowsitpro.com/securit ··· zero-day
Frodo
join:2006-05-05

Frodo

Member

said by angussf:

Just disable vector graphics on XP by unregistering the VGX DLL.

That's what I've been doing. And I figured I was done. Then I reread a Sophos story again.
quote:
Microsoft sent an email to state that unregistering VGX.DLL inhibits the attacks seen so far, rather than preventing all possible CVE-2014-1776 exploits. The bug is not, apparently, in VGX.DLL itself. (Updated 2014-04-29T22:25Z)
So, like Flash, apparently, VGX.dll is another attack surface, as opposed to being the root cause. So, at some point, I'll have to see what else needs to be dealt with on XP.
Frodo

Frodo to vaxvms

Member

to vaxvms
Just watched this video about how the exploit works. While not getting too complicated, it did clearly lay out the broadbrush approach this exploit takes.

»info.elastica.net/2014/0 ··· chanics/

Essentially, Flash is used to perform a heap spray, and then some object is allocated, freed, and then the attack uses the object that has been freed, which executes the heap spray. I'm wondering if VGX.dll is the object currently being exploited, which would account for the reason why unregistering it mitigates the exploit at present.

trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH

trparky

Premium Member

It's always been known that having Flash drastically reduces the security of a system on which it's installed.

Anyone know if Microsoft is going to rush out a fix for this?