Windows with no Patches

Hi, There are some people out there who consiously dont patch their machines with microsoft patches,there are some reasons behind,can explain these people why they take this huge risks ?

 

It is not such a great risk, if they can configure their Windows properly, according to missing patches.
About 25% updates patch NetBIOS, which can be simply disabled, the same applies to vulnerable services.
There are actually very few updates, which are really needed then, but there could be a workaround as well.

 

i cant remember when i last did a windows update.

 

Its not a great security risk imo. I use custom versions of windows that have a lot of crap removed or disabled so a majority of patches are not needed for me.

 

I personally will keep my windows updated and patched. If you prefer to think that you can do it better than the software developer that is your choice. But you are just deluding your self if you think a non patched windows OS is as secure as a fully updated and patched one.

 

I just got thru working on a computer that had never been updated. Finally had to reload Windows. The trojans ,viruses,and assorted bugs had Windows messed up. It is up to date now.

 

i think it's best to install all patches from microsoft because they'll often hide patches for things they want to keep quiet along with other patches.

i haven't re-read this, but i think this explains it -
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1951186,00.asp
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1949279,00.asp

 

At the SWI forum, where I was a member before Wilders, the qualified helpers always insisted to keep Windows fully patched and they were very serious about this and these helpers do nothing but solving HijackThis Logs all day long.

 

From my personal experience, you certainly don't need "all updates" (remember critical update called WGA?), especially amongst "recommended". But Windows with "no patches" is definitely not a good idea.

 

Well, people who need others to analyze their HT logs, should not be even thinking about using unpatched Windows at all.

Anyway, what is the big deal, a few MB on the HDD? I did not include WinUpdates on my nLited WinXP to keep setup CD as small as possible, I had SP2 version, but when I added all updates, its size increased by 4 MB! Wow, that really hurts to have 120 MB setup CD instead of 116 MB, when its is security, that matters.

 

Since nothing is perfect at the start,i will wait a week after release or so to update to get Microsoft to manage to sort the bugs.

 

I got to do this... I am not good enough and like BigC says who am I to think I know Windows better then the developer.

PC graveyards are full of systems where average everyday Joe (not like some here at Wilders who are real experts) owners who thought they could do better and then didn't even know how to reformat or use a rescue disk.

 

I agree! I usually update sometime within the one month period of their release. I should really pay more attention to what the updates specifically fix. Most of the time they fix programs that I don't use. I'll be honest, I usually follow the advice of askwoody.com. If there is an immediate threat, he usually advises on patching. Otherwise he recommends waiting a while to see if there is a problem. I usually wait a while after any release to see if there is a problem. I'm very pessimistic .

 

For years now he (initial scan looking for updates),each time after completing he throws up updates for MS app that i never had or ages ago already had uninstalled !!