Well, I think it was just blind fear talking. Properly configured, it is less a security issue than newer devices. Pretty impressive from Matthew to have the patience/skills to not simply "reload" that fridge over the years. On 09/20/14 16:25, Keith Medcalf wrote:
And what, exactly, is it vulnerable to?
-----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Sterling Sent: Saturday, 20 September, 2014 12:06 To: Bacon Zombie Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Saying goodnight to my GSR
Again, you're focusing resentment towards someone who did the right thing. Negative reinforcement will discourage others from taking action and will discourage them from encouraging others to take action.
Let's focus on who still has vulnerable equipment and how to help them. Let's not shame people who did the right thing
Thanks, Dan
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Bacon Zombie <baconzombie@gmail.com> wrote:
OK thank you for decommissioning this.*
* Only if you either had authority to do so for max 1 year or had no authority but were fighting to have it patches or replaced for years. On Sep 20, 2014 7:54 PM, "Daniel Sterling" <sterling.daniel@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Bacon Zombie <baconzombie@gmail.com> wrote:
So when was the last time you patched this internet facing device? Isn't the better response, thank you for decommissioning it?
Can someone from cisco set up a poll or release whatever numbers they have about how many of these old devices are still in service?
Thanks, Dan