Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk //

Compliance

6/3/2014
12:00 PM
50%
50%

Compliance: The Surprising Gift Of Windows XP

The end of Windows XP will force organizations to properly reinvest in a modern and compliant desktop infrastructure that will be easier to maintain and secure.

I’ve seen countless articles explaining how the end of Microsoft’s support of Windows XP will make companies non-compliant with numerous regulations and laws, especially HIPAA and various regulations in financial industries.

Apparently, not everyone got the memo that technology alone never makes an organization compliant or non-compliant. Compliance standards almost never state what software or computer hardware is required. Upgrading to a new version of Windows may make the boss feel compliant, but technology alone is never the full problem or solution.

Of course, technology used as the basis for any system needs to meet minimum levels of security capabilities. An operating system that will not be updated as new threats develop is certainly a cause for deep concern. At the same time, running the latest greatest computer software, if not set up and maintained correctly, still won’t provide proper security. More importantly, such software will not solve a  problem created when organizations ignore process and procedural issues.

The end of support for Windows XP did not suddenly make XP unsecure. Windows XP has simply reached the point where it is more difficult to keep it secure in a world of ever changing threats. And Microsoft simply made a business decision to no longer work to address future threats in an old program.

There are even instances where Windows XP will remain an acceptable solution in compliant and secure systems. Although increasingly rare, stand-alone computers and isolated networks likely won’t have compliance issues by continuing to run XP, provided processes and procedures are compliant.

The end of XP support does mean that the cost of using XP to remain compliant and secure increased immediately. Other technical and procedural efforts will be required to offset what is expected to be an ever-increasing risk. As a result, it is easier to claim XP is no longer secure and compliant and should be replaced than it is to deal with all the extra effort (and confusing explanations) of the alternatives.

Now for the gift of XP
In 1998, my company worked with a client to replace an ancient customer software program that no longer even met the department’s business needs. The budget for this replacement project was rejected by the large organization’s capital budget committee as too expensive. The business need of the software was apparently not a major factor in the decision.

In 1999, the client modified the budget proposal with only one minor change: The new software would also resolve the Y2K problems present in the old software. This time the project was instantly approved by the budget committee.

Y2K was the key to solving a much bigger business issue for my client. The new software enabled the organization to move ahead in their market, improve their efficiency, better utilize staff, and more easily quote and bill work. The project has paid for itself, but it needed Y2K to get past the short-sighted bean counters.

Flash forward to 2014 and I see a similar situation. Clients with scores of slow, outdated computers have been rushing to not only replace XP, but to replace the computers running XP. The business need for upgrading these computers has been visible for some time, in some cases, years.

Like Y2K, the end of Windows XP support will prove to be a huge benefit for businesses that are finally moved to replace outdated computers. The new computers from these projects will work faster, be easier to maintain, be easier to secure, and provide a bottom-line benefit.

As much as management, including technical management, like to complain about the headaches of problems like Y2K and XP support, without these problems many organizations would fail to properly reinvest in the necessary infrastructure required for compliance, security, and even business success.

Glenn works with business leaders who want to leverage technology and understand the often hidden risks awaiting them. The Founder and Sr. Consultant of Forte' Incorporated, Glenn and his team work with business leaders to support growth, increase profits, and address ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Marilyn Cohodas
100%
0%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
6/3/2014 | 3:17:51 PM
Interesting Y2K analogy
Hi Glenn. I take your point that Y2k presented a unique opportunity for organizations to spend money and update antiquated computer systems -- and perhaps the same will hold true for the end of life support for XP. Still, if my memory servers me correctly, there was much more of a doomsday sentiment surrounding Y2k. With XP organizations can ignore and keep using, pull off line, or continue with their traditional desktop refresh cycles until they are fully replaced. 
gphillips35101
50%
50%
gphillips35101,
User Rank: Author
6/5/2014 | 9:33:37 AM
Re: Interesting Y2K analogy
Hi Marilyn, I agree with you that Y2K had much more of a doomsday sentiment and for a number of reasons. Still, XP end-of-support is one of the rate "events" similar to Y2K since Y2K. I have small business clients finally updating computers and our large clients have been even more focused on the task.

There is even more focus in organizations with compliance requriements, where waiting until a refesh cycle completes is not an option. And if they have a proper refresch cycle, they should not have hit this deadline with any XP computers. There is not the general public fear of course but it is still one of the rare events that was not ignored. Thanks!! G
Marilyn Cohodas
100%
0%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
6/5/2014 | 9:42:04 AM
Re: Interesting Y2K analogy
Great points all! Plus, there's one other difference, that just occurred to me. In the runup to Y2k (1999-2000), compliance regs like HiPAA and Sarbanes-Oxley weren't even on the drawing board. Those laws came into existence later in the decade. 
Florida Town Pays $600K to Ransomware Operators
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  6/20/2019
Pledges to Not Pay Ransomware Hit Reality
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  6/21/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
New Best Practices for Secure App Development
New Best Practices for Secure App Development
The transition from DevOps to SecDevOps is combining with the move toward cloud computing to create new challenges - and new opportunities - for the information security team. Download this report, to learn about the new best practices for secure application development.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-12280
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-25
PC-Doctor Toolbox before 7.3 has an Uncontrolled Search Path Element.
CVE-2019-3961
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-25
Nessus versions 8.4.0 and earlier were found to contain a reflected XSS vulnerability due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability via a specially crafted request to execute arbitrary script code in a users browse...
CVE-2019-9836
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-25
Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) on Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) Platform Security Processor (PSP; aka AMD Secure Processor or AMD-SP) 0.17 build 11 and earlier has an insecure cryptographic implementation.
CVE-2019-6328
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-25
HP Support Assistant 8.7.50 and earlier allows a user to gain system privilege and allows unauthorized modification of directories or files. Note: A different vulnerability than CVE-2019-6329.
CVE-2019-6329
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-25
HP Support Assistant 8.7.50 and earlier allows a user to gain system privilege and allows unauthorized modification of directories or files. Note: A different vulnerability than CVE-2019-6328.