Re: Patched XP Pro SP1 vs. XP Pro SP2
- From: "Steven L Umbach" <n9rou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:27:56 -0600
XP is definitely more secure particularly in the way it handles RPC calls,
Internet Explorer, and with the plethora of extra Group Policy options.
Having said that only you can make the decision on where to place your
resources and for you SP1 may be perfectly adequate especially if you do not
need the benefits of the extra Group Policy options for Windows Firewall,
Internet Explorer, etc. --- Steve
"JackG62" <JackG62@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:D0E2DC27-5934-4276-B3F4-119DA2ABEE25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
So you have two machines:
one with XP Pro SP2 plus current security and critical patches applied.
one with SP1 plus all currect security and critical patches applied.
which machine is more secure? Assume Windows Firewall is not needed due
to
a corporate firewall.
We are currently including SP2 on newly deployed computers, and have been
for a while. We are trying to decide if we should devote resources to
upgrading SP1 machines, or let SP1 phase out slowly as part of our
hardware
upgrade cycle. All machines have current MS security and critical patches
applied via a patch management application. Just under one third of our
machines are at SP2. Thoughts? Thank you.
Jack.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: domain logon on workgroup XP PC
- Next by Date: Re: how do you check who downloaded something
- Previous by thread: Re: Patched XP Pro SP1 vs. XP Pro SP2
- Next by thread: Re: Remote admin basics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading