WannaCry [OT]

Mike Kerner MikeKerner at roadrunner.com
Mon May 15 12:11:38 EDT 2017

Unfortunately, there are very expensive pieces of gear that have controls
on them that for one reason or another cannot be controlled by OS's newer
than XP.  I happen to have one, here.  It cost $750,000.  There is no
dealing with the OS issue without replacing the control, and that is also
extremely expensive, on the order of $400,000, so you would not replace the
control without replacing the whole unit.  M$, when they decided to dump
the XP paradigm, just like when they got rid of DOS, broke upgradability
for ATM's, machine tools and CMM's, X-Ray and MRI machines, PBX's, etc.

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> David V Glasgow wrote:
> > I recently finished a fixed term contract working for a pretty IT
> > savvy NHS Trust.  The NHS has been forced by central government to
> > reallocate IT (and other infrastructure) monies to front line
> > services.  They are also trapped by legacy software with dependencies
> > on old (and proprietary) Windows systems and software. Now obviously
> > stupid, but actually historic stupidity which was in the 1990s
> > disguised  as good business and standard practice.
> >
> > Not to mention the Clinical Information Systems which look and behave
> > as if it is still the 1990’s.
> >
> > Apart from that, everything is fine.
> That's the sad reality of so many security budgets: they don't become
> adequate until after it's too late.
> The dependency on older unsafe software versions is one that's always
> mystified me.  I once worked for a vendor whose clients included several
> large hospital networks, and one of them required us to deliver our app in
> a way that would maintain compatibility with IE 6, years after Microsoft
> warned customers to stop using it.
> Subsequent versions of a software are generally supersets of features
> found in earlier versions, with the only things missing as we go forward
> being bugs.
> When written to spec, it should move forward gracefully.  Microsoft has
> done a better job of maintaining backward compatibility than most.
> So if someone writes an app that doesn't work going forward, dependent on
> things specific to an outdated system, in effect their app is dependent on
> bugs.
> For any org to consider bug-dependent software "mission critical" should
> raise eyebrows.  For a hospital it seems even more serious.
> But I understand how budgets tend to gloss over things like this.  And
> this week, even the most reluctant orgs do too.
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Systems
>  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>  ____________________________________________________________________
>  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God created the oceans.
On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
   and did a little diving.
And God said, "This is good."

More information about the use-livecode mailing list