Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The article I read stated that Eset replied with the exploits and bypasses disclosed were old and had been patched year ago.

On the other hand, a dedicated state actor can "blow through" any conventional security protection if they so wish. Many times via an "inside hack." Remember Stuxnet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, itman said:

The article I read stated that Eset replied with the exploits and bypasses disclosed were old and had been patched year ago.

On the other hand, a dedicated state actor can "blow through" any conventional security protection if they so wish. Many times via an "inside hack." Remember Stuxnet?

Care to share the link to the article that you read

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
2 hours ago, MartinPe said:

Good, I was worried that Eset didn't knew about the security holes.

If anything it shows the importance of newer versions. Yes I know a lot of people aren't always keen on change and dislike when designs change but sometimes it's best just to update. There seems to still be people who think Microsoft should update an old aging os aka xp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ClanceyCliquot said:

Care to share the link to the article that you read

ESET told SecurityWeek that the bugs described in the leak are all "known and very old"; they were patched several years ago.

http://www.securityweek.com/security-firms-assess-impact-cia-leak

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members

itman,

Thanks for the link. Interesting read and a interesting site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...