Saturday 13th & Sunday 14th May 2017

[pk1]

All the tech articles I read about the ongoing support refer to the UK deciding not to renew its contract in 2015, which implies there was an option to do so. Which is different to what is being said in the passages which you quote, which suggests there was no option after May 2015. I had thought lots of businesses had been buying ongoing support, but I suppose I may have got that wrong. Even so, the fact Microsoft have released a free patch for this malware in response to the attack, suggests they developed an XP patch at the same time as they developed a patch for their supported systems and I'm not sure why they would do that and only release it for free now, unless they had pay customers they were still supporting. If that makes any sense!

Quite right that the lack of funding for upgrading systems should be a major focus of criticism, though. And there are still questions about how the Welsh NHS dodged this. I'm sure they've still got some XP systems too so what have they done differently? I guess it will all come out eventually!

Ongoing support was not available. Microsoft had made it very clear that XP support was being withdrawn. It was up to govts to protect their systems by upgrading. Failure to do so must rest with them, not Microsoft.

“While many customers have already completed their migrations to a modern OS, some large customers with complex Windows XP deployments may not have their migrations complete by April 8,” a Microsoft spokeswoman said in a statement. “To help those customers, we offer Custom Support for Windows XP as a temporary, last resort to help bridge the gap during a migration process to a modern OS, as the newest technologies provide the optimal chance to be and stay secure. We are sure that our customers are taking the necessary steps to protect their customers.”

But that still provides an out to those who can’t facilitate a change. According to one report, for example, over 400,000 ATMs were running Windows XP earlier this year, owned by a variety of banks who no doubt can afford to pay for a support extension. In March, a month before the deadline, 27.7 percent of all PCs tracked by NetApplications ran Windows XP.

According to Microsoft, Custom Support requires an active Premier Support agreement, and customers should work with their Microsoft Account Representative regarding their Custom Support options for Windows XP. According to the company, Custom Support is designed for customers who need a bit more time to complete their Windows XP migrations, not as a way to extend life to an expired product. Customers must have a migration plan with quarterly deployment milestones and a project completion end date in order to be accepted into the Custom Support program.

And, to be specific,”there is not a consumer equivalent” of Custom Support, Microsoft confirmed.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2139929/ ... r-you.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Temulkar]

From the G:

Rudd later told Sky News: “It is disappointing that they [the NHS] have been running Windows XP - I know that the secretary of state for health has instructed them not to and most have moved off it.”

"instructed"?! How about some direct funding to ensure it happened and continuing XP support until it did!

So Gordon Brown is responsible for a global financial crisis but Jeremy Hunt isn't responsible for ensuring NHS computers in England are up-to-date and/or security protected. That seems fair.

Meanwhile, the NHS in Wales doesn't appear to have been affected. No doubt Amber Rudd thinks they just got lucky or paid attention to Jeremy Hunt's helpful "instructions".

NHS in wales paid a couple of mil to get system upgrades which helped it yesterday, although the reality is we got lucky: the ransomware could have been a lot more sophisticated, and no system is completely safe.

[seeingclearly]

I'd guess most of you are deliberately avoiding the LBC May phone-in, Ferrari is truly ghastly, but it's worth dipping in to just for May's body language when she's not answering questions from the public. Gurning and squirming with embarrassment.

Her megalomania must be off the scale to balance her obvious unsuitability, to make her want to be PM. Dave was at least good at being a smooth, empty bluffer.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/politics/elections ... eresa-may/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She is an introvert. She reminds me a bit of Brown in personality.

Not even a remote similarity.
No diamond heeled shoes for Gordon. Ever.
And no massive ideological u-turns either.

I'll let others make their own minds up on your assertions.

[pk1]

Interesting polling experiment by Lord Ashcroft. Narrowing down to individual constituencies takes some doing I expect.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2017/05/el ... oft-model/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AnatolyKasparov]

Lots of dodgy internals in that, treat with caution. And one thing to always recall with polling is that "bigger" doesn't always equate to "better".

[seeingclearly]

Theresa May seems to think (or is at pains to keep saying) that the NHS having not been specifically targeted is some sort of mitigating factor.

For negligence?

We have had, so far, no news from patients caught up in this, or anyone who might have suffered long term damage as a result. I hope there are none, and our hardpressed medical staff have actually pulled off a blinder. But in the eventuality they didn't would it not form the basis for criminal negligence? Or at least the type of negligence that invalidates insurance, as in if you leave your doirs and windows open then you and you alone are responsible for whatever happens to your house, regardless of the intent of those who might get opportunistic...

[Willow904]

All the tech articles I read about the ongoing support refer to the UK deciding not to renew its contract in 2015, which implies there was an option to do so. Which is different to what is being said in the passages which you quote, which suggests there was no option after May 2015. I had thought lots of businesses had been buying ongoing support, but I suppose I may have got that wrong. Even so, the fact Microsoft have released a free patch for this malware in response to the attack, suggests they developed an XP patch at the same time as they developed a patch for their supported systems and I'm not sure why they would do that and only release it for free now, unless they had pay customers they were still supporting. If that makes any sense!

Quite right that the lack of funding for upgrading systems should be a major focus of criticism, though. And there are still questions about how the Welsh NHS dodged this. I'm sure they've still got some XP systems too so what have they done differently? I guess it will all come out eventually!

Ongoing support was not available. Microsoft had made it very clear that XP support was being withdrawn. It was up to govts to protect their systems by upgrading. Failure to do so must rest with them, not Microsoft.

“While many customers have already completed their migrations to a modern OS, some large customers with complex Windows XP deployments may not have their migrations complete by April 8,” a Microsoft spokeswoman said in a statement. “To help those customers, we offer Custom Support for Windows XP as a temporary, last resort to help bridge the gap during a migration process to a modern OS, as the newest technologies provide the optimal chance to be and stay secure. We are sure that our customers are taking the necessary steps to protect their customers.”

But that still provides an out to those who can’t facilitate a change. According to one report, for example, over 400,000 ATMs were running Windows XP earlier this year, owned by a variety of banks who no doubt can afford to pay for a support extension. In March, a month before the deadline, 27.7 percent of all PCs tracked by NetApplications ran Windows XP.

According to Microsoft, Custom Support requires an active Premier Support agreement, and customers should work with their Microsoft Account Representative regarding their Custom Support options for Windows XP. According to the company, Custom Support is designed for customers who need a bit more time to complete their Windows XP migrations, not as a way to extend life to an expired product. Customers must have a migration plan with quarterly deployment milestones and a project completion end date in order to be accepted into the Custom Support program.

And, to be specific,”there is not a consumer equivalent” of Custom Support, Microsoft confirmed.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2139929/ ... r-you.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not exactly. Microsoft understands that large organizations (and governments) that have developed bespoke software that runs alongside XP can't be upgraded as easily as home PCs so although security updates for home XP users have stopped, I see no reason why Microsoft wouldn't continue to develop security patches for XP for as long as they can make them work and as long as large organizations are willing to pay large sums of money for them, which they would be stupid not to - hence the government's stupidity of not renewing XP support while so many government run public services still haven't upgraded. Of course, the government should also have funded hospital trusts adequately to enable them to upgrade as quickly as possible, but it's not an either or. They've been negligent on both counts by not funding upgrades to newer, safer versions of Windows and by ceasing payment for XP security updates before they'd got rid of all XP systems. As I said above, I'd be really surprised if Microsoft had stopped XP support for large organisations willing to pay so soon and the rapid release of a free patch for this particular malware shows they are still developing XP patches for new emerging threats.

https://www.howtogeek.com/186754/micros ... have-them/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edited to add that looking at the article you quoted it's quite possible that the UK government was unwilling to show the necessary commitment to upgrade as quickly as possible required by Microsoft in order to continue with the arrangement. There's also the Labour government's failed NHS IT software project closed down by the Coalition government in 2011 because of cost and development issues (not such a worry over UC, of course). It feels as though, having terminated Labour's ambitious and botched plans, they made no attempt to replace them, leaving hospital trusts to muddle through on their own with what they already had.

[gilsey]

Interesting column by Matthew Parris in which he slams the govt for their insipid election campaign & refusal to counter the points Corbyn is making. His final paragraph:

Imagine a pugnacious, funny, moderate-sounding Ed Balls as Labour leader; imagine Mrs May without the Brexit wind in her sails; imagine a Tory government tripping a bit as the novelty wears off, as it will: as she will. Then read that manifesto again. And tremble.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comm ... 18_1852023" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ha ha ha.
It could be said that we are where we are because Balls would never countenance such a manifesto. Parris' scenario does not compute.

[citizenJA]

The heart sinks whenever Amber Rudd, the home secretary, talks about anything to do with computers. On Saturday, in the wake of the malware attack that has crippled hospital IT systems, she was on Radio 4’s Today programme: “We are ahead of this [attack] with the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), the advice is available,” she pronounced proudly, as though putting “national” and “cyber” on something automatically granted it authority.

“Patients have been inconvenienced,” she conceded, “but no patient data has been accessed and the NHS is brilliantly managing through this.”

...a survey by Sky News’s Nick Stylianou of NHS trusts’ spending on securing data found that seven of them, serving more than two million people, spent nothing, and the average spend across 92 trusts that replied was just £22,000 annually. (Another 43 trusts couldn’t specify their costs.)

All that made the events of the past few days a disaster waiting to happen. For all the Tories’ droning on about not wanting a coalition of chaos, they’ve overseen exactly that in the health service, where computing departments are fragmented nationally due to the franchised nature of health trusts and underinvestment is rife.

- Charles Arthur
The ransomware attack is all about the insufficient funding of the NHS

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... nt-funding" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[pk1]

All the tech articles I read about the ongoing support refer to the UK deciding not to renew its contract in 2015, which implies there was an option to do so. Which is different to what is being said in the passages which you quote, which suggests there was no option after May 2015. I had thought lots of businesses had been buying ongoing support, but I suppose I may have got that wrong. Even so, the fact Microsoft have released a free patch for this malware in response to the attack, suggests they developed an XP patch at the same time as they developed a patch for their supported systems and I'm not sure why they would do that and only release it for free now, unless they had pay customers they were still supporting. If that makes any sense!

Quite right that the lack of funding for upgrading systems should be a major focus of criticism, though. And there are still questions about how the Welsh NHS dodged this. I'm sure they've still got some XP systems too so what have they done differently? I guess it will all come out eventually!

Ongoing support was not available. Microsoft had made it very clear that XP support was being withdrawn. It was up to govts to protect their systems by upgrading. Failure to do so must rest with them, not Microsoft.

“While many customers have already completed their migrations to a modern OS, some large customers with complex Windows XP deployments may not have their migrations complete by April 8,” a Microsoft spokeswoman said in a statement. “To help those customers, we offer Custom Support for Windows XP as a temporary, last resort to help bridge the gap during a migration process to a modern OS, as the newest technologies provide the optimal chance to be and stay secure. We are sure that our customers are taking the necessary steps to protect their customers.”

But that still provides an out to those who can’t facilitate a change. According to one report, for example, over 400,000 ATMs were running Windows XP earlier this year, owned by a variety of banks who no doubt can afford to pay for a support extension. In March, a month before the deadline, 27.7 percent of all PCs tracked by NetApplications ran Windows XP.

According to Microsoft, Custom Support requires an active Premier Support agreement, and customers should work with their Microsoft Account Representative regarding their Custom Support options for Windows XP. According to the company, Custom Support is designed for customers who need a bit more time to complete their Windows XP migrations, not as a way to extend life to an expired product. Customers must have a migration plan with quarterly deployment milestones and a project completion end date in order to be accepted into the Custom Support program.

And, to be specific,”there is not a consumer equivalent” of Custom Support, Microsoft confirmed.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2139929/ ... r-you.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not exactly. Microsoft understands that large organizations (and governments) that have developed bespoke software that runs alongside XP can't be upgraded as easily as home PCs so although security updates for home XP users have stopped, I see no reason why Microsoft wouldn't continue to develop security patches for XP for as long as they can make them work and as long as large organizations are willing to pay large sums of money for them, which they would be stupid not to - hence the government's stupidity of not renewing XP support while so many government run public services still haven't upgraded. Of course, the government should also have funded hospital trusts adequately to enable them to upgrade as quickly as possible, but it's not an either or. They've been negligent on both counts by not funding upgrades to newer, safer versions of Windows and by ceasing payment for XP security updates before they'd got rid of all XP systems. As I said above, I'd be really surprised if Microsoft had stopped XP support for large organisations willing to pay so soon and the rapid release of a free patch for this particular malware shows they are still developing XP patches for new emerging threats.

https://www.howtogeek.com/186754/micros ... have-them/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wish there was a way to find out which version is true. Either Microsoft are still making updates available, albeit very expensive updates or they aren't & the one they've released to deal with this attack is purely a single-issue.

[citizenJA]

Of course patient data isn't accessed
It's how the malware attack works, all data is put into an encrypted lock-down

[Willow904]

@pk1

I'd like to know for sure too, but I'm guessing it's not something the organizations or Microsoft would be keen to share as even when kept up to date with security patches old operating systems like XP are still much more vulnerable to malware and hacking than newer ones.

I'm basing my assumption on the following:

1) Does Microsoft have the ability to provide this security support = yes

2) Can Microsoft make money from providing this security support = yes

Why wouldn't they?

But still, Microsoft did give plenty of warning XP would no longer be supported, as you say. I'd like to see more of the government's upgrade plans for the last couple of years. Our local library, where I volunteer, upgraded to Windows 10 shortly before the cut off, so the deadline was well known within publically run services. Why wasn't the NHS a priority?

[citizenJA]

Team May is shopping for a strong and stable healthcare system

[PorFavor]

If there isn't a large investment in NHS security (almost overnight) what's to stop this happening again (this time deliberately) once the back-up files are uploaded? It might not be the same people who do it (it seems, this time, like happenstance and "amateur" - the amount of money they've demanded, and made, seems small) but now that the cat is out of the bag on the vulnerability of the NHS and probably much else, national government computer infrastructure-wise) isn't there the risk that other, more focused, attacks will occur?

Disclaimer - I know nothing.





Edited to tidy up. The André Preview option seems to have done a disappearing act on me.


You never know - my ignorance in these matters might make me more able to see the wood by dint of not being able to see the trees.

[seeingclearly]

Of course patient data isn't accessed
It's how the malware attack works, all data is put into an encrypted lock-down

Email is regularly used to exchange patient data, scans test results, interdepartmental communication etc., isn't it a matter of what data was gathered before the encrypted lock down was invoked?

I cannot see that in terms of ransomware it would be lucrative in otherwise.

As the malware has $300 demand I hardly think anyone would pay tuppence for daily running info. Surely it is volume of harvested addresses or contacts that would garner a reward. A single US hospital said to have paid out $17,000.

But as you say patient data itself likely to be not of interest. What is being paid for is the lifting of the malware. So that day to day running can resume.

I have read a suggestion that the widescale of this attack globally may mean the attack itself could have been to install something more malicious into datasets. That is out of my paygrade so would like to know whether a pinch of salt is needed. My feeling is as this is likely not to be true as OS is likely to change as a result?

[HindleA]

To be fair,I am sure someone whose syringe driver has stopped working at home prioritises the fact that someone finds out they had their tonsils out when they were seven over any inconvenience over any pain/sickness caused by informational/contact delays.

[seeingclearly]

Willow IIRC the rationale for keeping XP was that a lot of very expensive hardware that was otherwise still serviceable would need to go if XP was ditched. It is the failure to patch that is the issue. I am assuming that Microsoft does still have a team they use for various international large IT consumers, government contracts etc., but have not advertised it for commercial reasons.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Interesting column by Matthew Parris in which he slams the govt for their insipid election campaign & refusal to counter the points Corbyn is making. His final paragraph:

Imagine a pugnacious, funny, moderate-sounding Ed Balls as Labour leader; imagine Mrs May without the Brexit wind in her sails; imagine a Tory government tripping a bit as the novelty wears off, as it will: as she will. Then read that manifesto again. And tremble.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comm ... 18_1852023" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ha ha ha.
It could be said that we are where we are because Balls would never countenance such a manifesto. Parris' scenario does not compute.

Can still remember Balls making that almost shamelessly pro-austerity speech at the 2014 Labour conference.

The collective depression it engendered in the hall, and amongst Labour supporters more widely, was palpable.

[PorFavor]

The NHS "must learn" from Friday's cyber-attack and upgrade its IT systems, the home secretary has said. (BBC News website - my emphasis)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39906019


Edited to tidy up

[seeingclearly]

To be fair,I am sure someone whose syringe driver has stopped working at home prioritises the fact that someone finds out they had their tonsils out when they were seven over any inconvenience over any pain/sickness caused by informational/contact delays.

A, there has been almost no info on patient end view of this attack. If I had just spent 40 mins in a scanner and a switch off meant my data never got reviewed, and I would have to go back in the queue for another, and I was in a critical state, infection say or blood clot, then its even more than informational/contact delay, though have to appreciate both could be critical and life threatening. Many more instances no doubt possible. It is, one way or another, woefully negligent.

Have to say on another matter entirely it doesn't up confidence in trident either. (Personally I am happy to dispense with that.)

Aside. * In my protracted tour around the nhs last year encountered another form of costcutting, the full as opposed to partial scan. The latter with no injection. And very basic. A made up on the spot decision by hard pressed radiographers doing scans more or less around the clock. But not one without patient and NHS costs. To be brief, an extended stay in hospital because of failure to capture right data can be very expensive, personally and for the state.

[discordantharmony]

Good Afternoon One et al........

Whilst not having posted for a while (years??) I have pretty much enjoyed lurking and reading posts here on an almost daily basis. I knew that eventually another topic may well come up that I might be able to make comment on, that I actually have a little knowledge on.

And today it has come to pass.........

WRT Windows XP. Etended support finished Apr 2014, however as has been mentioned upstream UK government splashed the cash and got an extension to provide support from Microsoft for an extra period of time.

Microsoft also sells (sold) another product - Windows PosReady2009 - a spin off from Windows Embedded 2009.

Windows Embedded Standard 2009. This product is an updated release of the toolkit and componentized version of Windows XP. It was originally released in 2008; and Extended Support will end on Jan. 8, 2019.
Windows Embedded POSReady 2009. This product for point-of-sale devices reflects the updates available in Windows Embedded Standard 2009. It was originally released in 2009, and extended support will end on April 9, 2019.

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/window ... -embedded/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It has been possible and well documented how editing the registry in WinXP will gain xp users the posready critical updates till April 9th 2019.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/registry-h ... indows-xp/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thogh to be fair just because people out there have applied this to the registry and have been recieving updates, as Microsoft says these updates were never tested on Win XP machines only embedded XP systems.

This would suggest to me that the Wiondows XP architecture and Posready 2009 are if not identical then fairly similar enough to have allowed Microsoft to lump xp and xp embedded into the same security patch they released earlier today, as they say:-

Customers can now download security updates for Windows Server 2003 SP2 x64, Windows Server 2003 SP2 x86, Windows XP SP2 x64, Windows XP SP3 x86, Windows XP Embedded SP3 x86, Windows 8 x86, and Windows 8 x64.

Will continue to keep reading and who knows maybe comment again soon........

Kind Regards.

[GetYou]

Has Amber Rudd found the people who understand the necessary hashtags yet?

[PorFavor]

Has Amber Rudd found the people who understand the necessary hashtags yet?

Well, if she hasn't, rest assured it will be somebody else's fault.

[citizenJA]

The NHS "must learn" from Friday's cyber-attack and upgrade its IT systems, the home secretary has said. (BBC News website - my emphasis)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39906019
Edited to tidy up

don't vote Tory/UKIP

[citizenJA]

Of course patient data isn't accessed
It's how the malware attack works, all data is put into an encrypted lock-down

Email is regularly used to exchange patient data, scans test results, interdepartmental communication etc., isn't it a matter of what data was gathered before the encrypted lock down was invoked?

I cannot see that in terms of ransomware it would be lucrative in otherwise.

As the malware has $300 demand I hardly think anyone would pay tuppence for daily running info. Surely it is volume of harvested addresses or contacts that would garner a reward. A single US hospital said to have paid out $17,000.

But as you say patient data itself likely to be not of interest. What is being paid for is the lifting of the malware. So that day to day running can resume.

I have read a suggestion that the widescale of this attack globally may mean the attack itself could have been to install something more malicious into datasets. That is out of my paygrade so would like to know whether a pinch of salt is needed. My feeling is as this is likely not to be true as OS is likely to change as a result?

It's information taken hostage, that's my understanding. I'm uncertain interlopers are able to access the data without compromising their hold on the information. I don't know if they're able to do more than just lock it up, making it inaccessible. I'm an amateur on computer software/hardware matters, Mr citizen knows a great deal more than I do.

[citizenJA]

Willow IIRC the rationale for keeping XP was that a lot of very expensive hardware that was otherwise still serviceable would need to go if XP was ditched. It is the failure to patch that is the issue. I am assuming that Microsoft does still have a team they use for various international large IT consumers, government contracts etc., but have not advertised it for commercial reasons.

I use Linux
I dislike the monopoly-like control that comes with using Microsoft.
They can tell everyone using their stuff, pay up, we've made a change, here's your bill.

[citizenJA]

@PorFavor

The British Medical Association says the cyber attack has forced some doctors to “resort to pen and paper” rather than update patient records digitally.

Weren't we discussing this last night?

[PorFavor]

Sky TV News is looking for Jeremy Hunt . . .

Have you seen this man?

[citizenJA]

Microsoft is a lovely operating system, the elegance and ease of it is luxurious after using a Linux system
I leave Microsoft alone, too much temptation
Mr citizen uses both systems

[citizenJA]

Sky TV News is looking for Jeremy Hunt . . .

Have you seen this man?

Mr citizen and I reckon T May has him locked in closet, partially for punishment, maybe for his protection
I wouldn't holler too loud in there, if I were him, you know?

[citizenJA]

@PorFavor
You're right about the vulnerabilities exposed means a world of potential further hurt

[RogerOThornhill]

Sky TV News is looking for Jeremy Hunt . . .

Have you seen this man?

Mr citizen and I reckon T May has him locked in closet, partially for punishment, maybe for his protection
I wouldn't holler too loud in there, if I were him, you know?

Pssst...behind that tree!

[SpinningHugo]

Opinium/Observer:

CON 47 (-1)
LAB 32 (+2)
LD 8 (-1)
UKIP 5 (-2)
GRN 2 (=)
SNP 5 (+1)

9th-12th May
N=2,003

ORB/Telegraph:

CON 46 (=)
LAB 32 (+1)
LD 8 (-1)
UKIP 7 (-1)

N=1,508

ComRes/Sunday Mirror/Independent:

CON 48 (-2)
LAB 30 (+5)
LD 10 (-2)
UKIP 5 (-2)
GRN 3 (=)
SNP 4 (=)

10th-12th
N=2,007

Definite uptick in Labour. Still a Tory landslids, but Corbyn will definitely stay if he can match Ed's 30%.

[refitman]

Sky TV News is looking for Jeremy Hunt . . .

Have you seen this man?

Mr citizen and I reckon T May has him locked in closet, partially for punishment, maybe for his protection
I wouldn't holler too loud in there, if I were him, you know?

Pssst...behind that tree!

He might be in a bush with Shaun Spicer?

[AnatolyKasparov]

Labour gaining despite UKIP dropping further may be the interesting take from those polls?

LibDems not having a great campaign thus far are they......

[SpinningHugo]

Labour gaining despite UKIP dropping further may be the interesting take from those polls?

LibDems not having a great campaign thus far are they......

Clear LD dip. Becoming Tory v Labour. Whacking great big Tory majority, bit the Corbyn narrative is now clear. No way he is resigning come 9th June.

[AnatolyKasparov]

As you know, I have claimed for some time that he maybe had 2018 pencilled in as his handover time. That could yet be the case

[SpinningHugo]

As you know, I have claimed for some time that he maybe had 2018 pencilled in as his handover time. That could yet be the case

You claimed that before the election was called. After it was called you claimed he would quit after Labour lost. I denied that.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Its not mandatory for a leader to resign IMMEDIATELY after losing an election, both Foot and Kinnock carried on for a bit.

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... nuded-life" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TechnicalEphemera]

Its not mandatory for a leader to resign IMMEDIATELY after losing an election, both Foot and Kinnock carried on for a bit.

He will be challenged immediately, even if he tries to hang on.

The size of the defeat is going to be immense, and the anger and fury palpable. Pointing to a few percentage points isn't going to help him. Labour now trails the Tory party in every social class, surely the first time that has ever happened.

It is less clear to me that he will try and stay on, with a huge majority of Labour members already expressing a clear preference that he should resign if he loses. I suspect even Corbyn will bow to the utter and total rejection by the electorate.

[citizenJA]

http://upgrade.withlabour.com/

[TechnicalEphemera]

Microsoft is a lovely operating system, the elegance and ease of it is luxurious after using a Linux system
I leave Microsoft alone, too much temptation
Mr citizen uses both systems

Linux itself has vulnerabilities that need constant patching, DirtyCow being the most recent I noticed (but probably not the most recent). Generally businesses running Linux will be paying for support, this is not necessarily cheap.

While the current ransomeware attack is about extortion, they only bolted that on to the NSA hacking kit. The kit could equally be used to execute code aimed at retrieving patient records. In fact combining the two would be an excellent way to cover your tracks. Steal stuff, encrypt all the logs.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Its not mandatory for a leader to resign IMMEDIATELY after losing an election, both Foot and Kinnock carried on for a bit.

Losing might mean a lot of different things this time.

Corbyn could easily lose but win, if you see what I mean.

My best hope (I still don't think Labour can win outright) is that May loses her majority and has to lead a minority government with Corbyn as a pugnacious Leader of the Opposition.

This is actually quite an appealing prospect IMHO and in such a case Corbyn would surely not resign.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Further on the hacking, it is clear that the NSA and GCHQ need to have their missions changed. Right now they seem to view identifying vulnerabilities and launching attack tools as a legitimate weapon, but they are not.

The west is hugely more vulnerable to IT attacks than its opponents. Therefore it makes no sense to create tools to attack IT when these tools are simply turned round and used on us, or parallel research by the bad guys uncovers the same vulnerability.

The NSA and GCHQ should cease developing offensive weapons for use. They should still develop attacks and exploits, but on validating them they should immediately release details to OS vendors so that these vulnerabilities are patched. That way IT will be much more secure and risk controlled.

The current method of leaving the west wide open so they can play at hacking other countries is indefensible.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Further on the hacking, it is clear that the NSA and GCHQ need to have their missions changed. Right now they seem to view identifying vulnerabilities and launching attack tools as a legitimate weapon, but they are not.

The west is hugely more vulnerable to IT attacks than its opponents. Therefore it makes no sense to create tools to attack IT when these tools are simply turned round and used on us, or parallel research by the bad guys uncovers the same vulnerability.

The NSA and GCHQ should cease developing offensive weapons for use. They should still develop attacks and exploits, but on validating them they should immediately release details to OS vendors so that these vulnerabilities are patched. That way IT will be much more secure and risk controlled.

The current method of leaving the west wide open so they can play at hacking other countries is indefensible.

"The west"?

[TechnicalEphemera]

Its not mandatory for a leader to resign IMMEDIATELY after losing an election, both Foot and Kinnock carried on for a bit.

Losing might mean a lot of different things this time.

Corbyn could easily lose but win, if you see what I mean.

My best hope (I still don't think Labour can win outright) is that May loses her majority and has to lead a minority government with Corbyn as a pugnacious Leader of the Opposition.

This is actually quite an appealing prospect IMHO and in such a case Corbyn would surely not resign.

Actually in the scenario you outline he won't resign, he won't be challenged and everything we know about polling (including the actual local elections result) will clearly have been utterly wrong.

The current suggestions are a Tory majority of 100-160. In which case things look different.

To survive he has to show potential to win next time. But he has appalling personal ratings especially with Labours core voters. Even loyalists like Burgon and Long-Bailey are airbrushing him from their campaigns. They aren't doing that because he is popular on the doorstep.

Were this to change then things would be different, but there is zero evidence in the polls that it is. One dynamic likely to change is people like Burgon and Long-Bailey will be sitting in marginal seats. That will concentrate the mind.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Further on the hacking, it is clear that the NSA and GCHQ need to have their missions changed. Right now they seem to view identifying vulnerabilities and launching attack tools as a legitimate weapon, but they are not.

The west is hugely more vulnerable to IT attacks than its opponents. Therefore it makes no sense to create tools to attack IT when these tools are simply turned round and used on us, or parallel research by the bad guys uncovers the same vulnerability.

The NSA and GCHQ should cease developing offensive weapons for use. They should still develop attacks and exploits, but on validating them they should immediately release details to OS vendors so that these vulnerabilities are patched. That way IT will be much more secure and risk controlled.

The current method of leaving the west wide open so they can play at hacking other countries is indefensible.

"The west"?

By which I mean the liberal democracies (gloss over Trump here) and their allies, which includes Japan, Australia and New Zealand (so west was always a nebulous concept). As opposed to the hostile powers, who are also engaged in hacking, primarily Russia and China.

[citizenJA]

Microsoft is a lovely operating system, the elegance and ease of it is luxurious after using a Linux system
I leave Microsoft alone, too much temptation
Mr citizen uses both systems

Linux itself has vulnerabilities that need constant patching, DirtyCow being the most recent I noticed (but probably not the most recent). Generally businesses running Linux will be paying for support, this is not necessarily cheap.

Yep, you're right about Linux vulnerabilities, I wasn't clear. I use Linux for ideological reasons. I'll be goddamned paying Microsoft my own self. It's personal.

While the current ransomeware attack is about extortion, they only bolted that on to the NSA hacking kit. The kit could equally be used to execute code aimed at retrieving patient records. In fact combining the two would be an excellent way to cover your tracks. Steal stuff, encrypt all the logs.

Mr citizen had to explain it to me
terrifying, absolutely terrifying

[PorFavor]

Its not mandatory for a leader to resign IMMEDIATELY after losing an election, both Foot and Kinnock carried on for a bit.

Losing might mean a lot of different things this time.

Corbyn could easily lose but win, if you see what I mean.

My best hope (I still don't think Labour can win outright) is that May loses her majority and has to lead a minority government with Corbyn as a pugnacious Leader of the Opposition.

This is actually quite an appealing prospect IMHO and in such a case Corbyn would surely not resign.

If your best hope came about, I wouldn't expect him to resign. However . . .