Hello,

There's really no additional cost for including exploits for old
vulnerabilities that have long since been patched in an attacker's code.

There may always be machine in which the patch for the vulnerability
was not installed, or maybe it gets attacked before the patch has been
applied and so forth.  Even if it is only fraction of a percent, that's
likely to be a sizeable enough number to make it worthwhile to include
an attack.

It is possible one of the free anti-malware vendors has a program which
runs within the hardware specifications for a 600.  You might have to
do some searching around, though.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky


At 11:54 AM 2/16/2010, you wrote:
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:26:12 -0600
From: "Rob Bell" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Thinkpad] 600 Running 2000
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:01 -0500, "STeve Andre'" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Windows 2000 is my favorite: faster, less memory consumptive, and
> more stable, I think.
>
> Sadly, unless this machine will be off the net you will have to abandon
> Win2K I think this year, because MS will no longer be supporting it.
> At that point you'll have to move, or risk getting nailed.  No amount
> of firewalling, etc will properly protect you.
>
> --STeve Andre'

I'm certainly no security expert, but it seems to me if an OS is that
old the likelihood of it being targeted for exploits is pretty low.
Most slimeballs trying to craft exploits are looking for the most
bang-for-the-buck (i.e. lazy and greedy) and that means they  going to
be against the OS/software combinations that are in highest use.

Rob

_______________________________________________
Thinkpad mailing list
[email protected]
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/thinkpad

Reply via email to