Windows 95 Still On Some Homeland Security Computers

Discussion in 'Green Room' started by tdinc, Dec 16, 2005.

  1. tdinc

    tdinc █▄█ ▀█▄ █ Political User

    Messages:
    3,507
    Location:
    Sterling Heights, MICHIGAN
    :eek: This boggles the mind....:ermm:

    link
     
  2. kcnychief

    kcnychief █▄█ ▀█▄ █ Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    16,948
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Honestly, I'm not too boggled. Places are way behind because of legacy applications, and the lack of gusto to upgrade/adapt and change.
     
  3. Grandmaster

    Grandmaster Electronica Addict Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    10,574
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA
    Yeah but this is the US government. The same one that spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year in the name of Defense. The US really needs to beef up security for their networks, the potential for a "cyberterror" attack isn't that unrealistic to fathom.
     
  4. tdinc

    tdinc █▄█ ▀█▄ █ Political User

    Messages:
    3,507
    Location:
    Sterling Heights, MICHIGAN
    GM is right-on, it very disturbing, Win 95? come on, Goes to show how poorly managed the system is....:crosseyed:
     
  5. j79zlr

    j79zlr Glaanies script monkey Political User

    Messages:
    2,725
    Location:
    Chicago
    Windows 95 only has 3 unpatched vulnerabilities, XP has 27.
     
  6. vern

    vern Dominus Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    ... yet people fail to recognize that the Win2k upgrade failed, not Win95. Would it be safe to say that Win95 worked? OS/2 is still being supported on ATMs for the time being. I bet that in terms of "security" ... Win95 is after 10 years ... pretty secure.
     
  7. madmatt

    madmatt Bow Down to the King Political User

    Messages:
    13,312
    Location:
    New York
    I don't even remember what 95 looks like.
     
  8. vern

    vern Dominus Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    Kinda like this? heh

    [​IMG]

    I still use the classic desktop on my lappy.
     
  9. madmatt

    madmatt Bow Down to the King Political User

    Messages:
    13,312
    Location:
    New York
    That's XP Classic. Stop!
     
  10. mooo

    mooo thecyberninja

    Messages:
    886
    Location:
    earth
    i was watching cnn the other day and they were saying about hong kong hackers (being paid by their government apparently) )were breaking the US government systems but no "classified" info had been stole that they know of.
    As for the government using 95, I don't see why they would upgrade, the government looks as if "if it works use it" for computers because they don't want to put money into something they don't feel is a risk or need.
     
  11. VenomXt

    VenomXt Blame me for the RAZR's Folding Team

    Messages:
    3,453
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    we use it on 3 computers 1 desktop and 2 laptops for applications that are used every day. One of them drives a 9.5 million dollar callibration machine.
     
  12. Tabula Rasa

    Tabula Rasa Stranger Than Kindness Political User

    Messages:
    3,233
    Location:
    Israel
    As long as it gets the work done why not...
     
  13. Johnny

    Johnny .. Commodore .. Political User

    Messages:
    5,015
    Location:
    Happy Valley
    I don't see anything wrong with it. It is a more secure OS than Xp and 2000...
     
  14. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    :eek: This doesn't give me that nice 'n secure feeling. win95, I won't post a link as it is a password harvesting tool; but I had seen one's that would let one grab passwords for win95 for years. And my understanding was that it wasn't too terribly difficult either. I guess the dept. of Homeland Security has a different idea of security then some of us :anglel:

    As to lists of unpatched vulnerabilities, win95 was never designed to be that secure of an OS (just secure enough for what they considered the home user to need). Wasn't held to the same standard... Not to mention that if the data is stored on FAT drives and someone wanted to acquire some of it; they wouldn't even need to hack. A handy DOS disk would do that, as the files themselves wouldn't be secured regardless of how the OS was setup...
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2005
  15. Henyman

    Henyman Secret Goat Fetish Political User

    doesn't suprise me, dos based programs == win :p
     
  16. Tabula Rasa

    Tabula Rasa Stranger Than Kindness Political User

    Messages:
    3,233
    Location:
    Israel
    I hope for the sake of the American people that the people who deal with homeland security have the common sense not to connect any PC containing critical information to the WWW, not even phone socket. And I'm pretty sure they do.

    And as long as those computers are connected to an internal network they can run win 3.1 for all you care :p
     
  17. falconguard

    falconguard Carbon based lifeform Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    3,406
    Location:
    SoCal
    I hope you are right Benny, but this is homeland security we are talking about.:)
     
  18. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    I hope for the security of us all, they have the sense not to store any sensitive data, locally and on those comps as well. And that goes as much for the individual workers and network operators themselves, as much as the peeps who set this up in the first place or set work policy.

    That said, my confidence isn't entirely inspired by any of this. And it isn't just the age of the system either. If the article indicated they were putting winNT 4.0, or even 3.51 back on those boxes I wouldn't be having all the same thoughts...