Most reached EOL in may of this year.
Because they won’t support routers that were EOL a decade ago?
Corr@lemm.ee 1 hour ago
Dran_Arcana@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
Because that bug was so egregious, it demonstrates a rare level of incompetence.
NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 12 hours ago
that bug was so egregious, it demonstrates a rare level of incompetence
I wish so much this was true, but it super isn’t. Some of the recent Cisco security flaws are just so brain-dead stupid you wonder if they have any internal quality control at all… and, well, there was the Crowdstrike thing…
Dran_Arcana@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Idk, this was kind of a rare combination of “write secure function; proceed to ignore secure function and rawdog strings instead” + “it can be exploited by entering a string with a semicolon”. Neither of those are anything near as egregious as a use after free or buffer overflow. I get programming is hard but like, yikes.
BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 3 hours ago
Some of the recent Cisco security flaws are just so brain-dead stupid you wonder if they have any internal quality control at all
At the super budget prices Cisco charges, do you really expect quality control to be included? You’ve got to buy a quality control subscription for that. /s
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 7 hours ago
Companies should be forced to release all source code for products that are “EOL”. I will never change my mind on this.