‘Only’ 999 more days left for XP security updates

Yesterday marked an interesting milestone for Windows XP. In 1,000 days (or 999 as of today), Microsoft will stop providing security updates for the OS. XP’s extended support period ends on April 8, 2014, and Redmond is using the countdown milestone as an excuse to trumpet the benefits of Windows 7.

Released on October 25, 2001, XP will have been around for more than a dozen years when official support runs out. That’s an impressive streak, and I’m sure some folks will continue to use the OS long after Microsoft stops offering security updates.

With XP’s support deadline far from looming, I can’t help but wonder if any OS will match its longevity. Few operating systems are as loved, and 12 years is an eternity in the PC world. Back around XP’s initial release, single-core Pentium 4 and Athlon XP processors were cutting-edge technology. If you think those CPUs look old now, just wait until 2014.

Comments closed
    • iq100
    • 8 years ago

    Here are two reasons (for me) to stick with XP.

    Reason 1:
    I have a HP ScanJet 6300C scanner. Very good scanner. But pretty old.
    Works great with XP.
    In Windows 7 it will NOT work at all, because NO Windows 7 DRIVER from HP. Apprarently HP want you to buy a new scanner. And yes, I have tried to use XP compatibilty mode.
    Challenge: is there any software that can allow HP ScanJet 6300C to work in Windows 7.

    Reason 2:
    Like many here, I have both XP and Windows 7 computers on my home network called WORKGROUP.
    Using a XP comuter I can easily search all of WORKGROUP for a filename. I can use * and ? to find filenames, say *beet?oven*.flac. In XP I just go to the search screen, select WORKGROUP as the place to search and key the search string into XP’s search box.
    On a Windows 7 machine this is IMPOSSIBLE!!
    Challenge: What are keystrokes on a Windows 7 machine to search a mixed XP and Windows 7 WORKGROUP for a string like *beet?oven*.flac

    I don’t think any large rich companies like Microsoft should be successful in selling a new “improved” OS unless they provide a 100% backward hardware and software capability. Then the user is not forced into retiring old working scanners, or using a new/bettter GUI unlees the user wants to.

      • Meadows
      • 8 years ago

      So you don’t think Apple should be successful.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 8 years ago

      Don’t blame Microsoft because your previous hardware doesn’t work with your new OS. 100% backwards compatible everything is NOT a good idea. There are plenty of good reasons to ditch previous driver models and software stacks, every large company knows this.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 8 years ago

      You really think it’s Microsoft’s responsibility to make sure that every device ever released has a win7 driver?

    • clone
    • 8 years ago

    998 days left.

    • kvndoom
    • 8 years ago

    I’ll be done with school and free to upgrade by then (2013, actually). PERFECT timing. (have a free Win7 download via school that will be ready for that day!). I’m perfectly content with XP, but only so long as there are security patches out. After almost 10 years, though, I admit it’s about time to move on. I wonder if I can get a decade out of Windows 7?

      • yuhong
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]I wonder if I can get a decade out of Windows 7?[/quote<] Depends on when MS releases Windows 8. FYI, mainstream support end 5 years after this version's release or 2 years after the next version's release, whatever is later. Extended support lasts 5 years afterward. [url<]http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/[/url<]

    • CaptTomato
    • 8 years ago

    I can’t say I have any major gripes with W7 64bit, and I’ve used WMC to run my twin tuner happauge for 18months without a hitch.

    • Auril4
    • 8 years ago

    I type in 998 days as of July 13th into [url<]http://www.wolframalpha.com[/url<] and I Get Sunday April 6th 2014. Where am I going wrong?

    • Rakhmaninov3
    • 8 years ago

    The terminal I use most often in the hospital is a Pentium !!! running XP and IE6. I use Chrome on it if I have to look up anything that doesn’t require Tenet Health’s intranet. It’s otherwise fast enough to use MEDITECH, our ancient telnet-like medical record system.

    I wish I could put a gig of RAM in it, that would probably speed it up quite a bit.

    • ssidbroadcast
    • 8 years ago

    Yeah, but how many red balloons are left?

    • j1o2h3n4
    • 8 years ago

    Windows 8 is about to be launch next year, with demo this year, for those who r hook on to Windows 7 will have to think again, to upgrade? buy new? do nothing?
    That’s why I agree with Geoff, XP’s lifespan is indeed eternity. Long live XP.

    • Krogoth
    • 8 years ago

    Don’t see the big deal.

    NT 5.x kernel already shows its age in a number of ways, which will keep growing as time pasts.

    There’s no reason to get XP for a new system build. In the event that you would need to use it, there are a number of workarounds and vitalization suites that will work.

    7/Vista are worthy successors to XP throne despite their initial issues. Windows 8 sounds like it is going to be Windows 7: Touchscreen Edition. Because, tablets and smartphones are the current rage now.

      • xeridea
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]7/Vista are worthy successors to XP throne despite their initial issues.[/quote<] More like Vista is barely adequate (though still crappy) now that some of the issues have been fixed, and Win7 was just fine in RC status.

        • Krogoth
        • 8 years ago

        Vista was fine, the problem was immature drivers (namely Geforce 8xxx series) and older applications that were written with the assumption that it always have adminstrative rights. This makes up at least 70% of the teething issues at launch. By the time, SP1 roll around most of the problems were resolved and applications were updated to work under a limited user account.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 8 years ago

          If you ignore:

          Awful network transfer speeds
          Really high ram usage for seemingly no reason as win7 is much more frugal
          Really terrible UI choices that make a simply task like disabling a network adapter take about 30 seconds of digging

          I’m probably forgetting something, but these issues were always a problem for me.

            • Meadows
            • 8 years ago

            RAM usage is very similar between the two, it can’t be said that Windows 7 is “much more” frugal. As for handling network adapter related tasks, I could actually find and do them faster in Vista than in W7.

            Case in point, I still don’t know (to this day) where the “reset adapter” function is in W7, where I could get it in plain sight using Vista. You would start the troubleshoot advisor, and whether it would find a problem or not, you would be given the option to reset the adapter. Helped me a few times. In W7, you don’t get such an option, instead the advisor tries to solve your issue through specific questions over and over again.

            I also think Windows Explorer is a step back compared to Vista’s.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 8 years ago

            Network and Sharing Center -> change adapter settings -> disable and re-enable whichever adapter you are having trouble with

            Edit: on the desktop browsing the internet with the same background apps as Vista, Win7 uses 400-500 less MB of ram for me. I also found certain games stopped thrashing hd cache when I played them most notably Crysis.

            • Krogoth
            • 8 years ago

            1.) Immature drivers, later versions would fix the performance/connection problems.

            2.) Vista/7 consume more memory than XP because they load up more services by default, which can be disabled if memory consumption is such a concern. IMO, it is a moot point. Because memory is dirt cheap these days. There’s little reason not to go with 4GB of memory unless your platform is too old to support DDR2/DDR3.

            3.) A few more clicks is considered to be terrible? I find that 7/Vista’s network management was meant for average joe types not for power users. The die-hard network geeks typically use CLI, which is quicker and more powerful for their needs.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 8 years ago

            [quote<]1.) Immature drivers, later versions would fix the performance/connection problems.[/quote<] Nope, transferring large amounts of data over a network was always way slower in Vista than XP or Win7. [quote<]2.) Vista/7 consume more memory than XP because they load up more services by default, which can be disabled if memory consumption is such a concern. IMO, it is a moot point. Because memory is dirt cheap these days. There's little reason not to go with 4GB of memory unless your platform is too old to support DDR2/DDR3. [/quote<] Which doesn't address the fact that Vista uses more ram than Win7 for no apparent reason. [quote<]3.) A few more clicks is considered to be terrible? I find that 7/Vista's network management was meant for average joe types not for power users. The die-hard network geeks typically use CLI, which is quicker and more powerful for their needs.[/quote<] I like this logic. Me: Program X doesn't do what I want it to Krogoth: Well it wasn't designed with you in mind No shit Krogoth, that's why I'm complaining.

            • Krogoth
            • 8 years ago

            1.) My ethernet connections are running fine here on both Vista and 7. I am getting the expected bandwidth along with TCP/IP and framing overhead. It has been this way since SP1 and later Realtek drivers.

            2.) Vista has more services by default then 7. There’s your answer on why it “uses” more memory. You can disable most of them if you are so stingy about memory usage. Hell, you can forgo the GUI and go with a CLI variant of *nix if memory consumption is such a concern.

            3.) Deal with it. Programers write code with their intended audiance not for each individual user’s needs. You are making mountains out of a holehill. I did admit it was annoying at first, because of old habits. But it isn’t that bad, once you get used to it. To put in prespective, It is just a few more clicks and a few more seconds for a seldomly used tool. “OMFG TWO CLICKS IS TOO MANY! ROAR!!!!!!” .

    • PenGun
    • 8 years ago

    “I can’t help but wonder if any OS will match its longevity.”

    I quit using windose when NT 4.0 came out. I liked 3.51 and going all promiscuous for video reasons seemed dumb. Been using Slackware ever since. For some 3 or 4 years longer than XP has been operating.

    • KeillRandor
    • 8 years ago

    I’d install windows 7 – but all my music apps are currently installed on windows xp, and from what I can tell, it’s not so easy to dual-boot?

      • bthylafh
      • 8 years ago

      Why would you do that? Back your data up, wipe, and reinstall everything, then restore the data.

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      1. Buy a new machine. Install all your apps and programs
      2. Install [url=http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=4503<]this[/url<] on your XP machine. Follow the instructions. 3. Load it on 7 and you are set. I've done this 60+ times for home machines with few issues. (Use different tools for work though.)

        • xeridea
        • 8 years ago

        Does the easy transfer wizard keep your programs? I just find it easier to do a clean install (not format), of new OS, then install all my programs again (with newer versions… high speed internet its not as important to keep originals of all installers… though I do for main programs anyway). I have A LOT of programs, but can be 90% back up within 2 hours.

          • bthylafh
          • 8 years ago

          No. It saves your data, config files, and Registry settings, but you have to reinstall your programs yourself.

        • KeillRandor
        • 8 years ago

        I suppose I should have been clearer – my soundcard (and some of my software – though nothing that major) only supports win xp – and it’ll cost me too much to replace it at this time – (8×8 rackmount). Which is why it’s dual boot or bust…

    • eofpi
    • 8 years ago

    Does this mean 1000 days until 4k-native storage devices hit the market?

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      They already have – advanced format drives are all the rage at higher capacities and in SSDs.

    • trackerben
    • 8 years ago

    Wouldn’t worry too much. When that glorious future arrives I’ll already be using Steam’s cloud services to download and virtualize old XP images as an app on my 2015-model supertablet. Anytime traditional malware creeps into the sandbox via FaceLikeTwitter I’ll just close it and jump to another instance where I keep ancient Battlefield 3 running by itself because its rabid DRM keeps on trying to sequester the remaining four cores.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 8 years ago

    I got 999 problems…

    …but who’s counting?

      • swaaye
      • 8 years ago

      999 bottles of beer….. … on da wall. … …

      • Meadows
      • 8 years ago

      Is a bitch one of them?

        • derFunkenstein
        • 8 years ago

        SHE’S A NICE LADY!!

    • Myrmecophagavir
    • 8 years ago

    There are several things about Vista/7 that I consider backward steps from XP: I’m less productive with Windows Explorer, for one thing. I hope with Windows 8 they listen more carefully to beta testers’ feedback.

      • Chandalen
      • 8 years ago

      Indeed they took a large step back in the functionality of windows explorer in this iteration of windows (don’t know if vista suffered the same fate as 7, I skipped it). There are some work arounds/3rd party software you can install to deal with some of it, but it’s frustrating to say the least.

    • Anarchist
    • 8 years ago

    well … I made my preparation by switching to mint linux.

    • indeego
    • 8 years ago

    We still have an OS/2 box and a W2K box derping along fine. The OS/2 box had a 5.5 year uptime from December 1999 to July 2005, and now 6 years uptime since July 2005. The company I work for is amusing in what is absolutely essential to spend money on and what can be ignored for a decade or more.

      • 5150
      • 8 years ago

      What can you possibly still be running on OS/2 that is useful?

      Radeon driver archives?

        • bthylafh
        • 8 years ago

        I’ve got some scientists who have a PS/2 running OS/2 3.0, attached to three or four instruments. It was still running last I checked.

        • PeterD
        • 8 years ago

        Why always picking on people who are happy with what they have?

          • 5150
          • 8 years ago

          My apologies, I didn’t realize I was consistently picking on content people.

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        os/2 was good. plus, it has a SWEET LOOKING GUI

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        Voicemail. And don’t get me started on how many VoIP presentations/replacements I’ve given and been denied.

        PBX(apart from OS/2) is damn solid though, gotta admit. Same “uptime.”

    • albundy
    • 8 years ago

    great news for celery 500mhz owners and below!

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      500MHz Celerons are still slow on XP. I didn’t feel “comfortable” with XP until I had a Radeon 7500 and a Duron 800 MHz with 384MB of memory (previously it was a 450MHz K6-2 with 192MB of RAM and a Savage 4).

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 8 years ago

        My dad still has a Pentium 2 with 226 mb of RAM running WinXP. It’s pretty painful doing anything with it.

          • clone
          • 8 years ago

          I set up a 333mhz P2 with 256mb ram and yeah it was pretty weak, kinda funny because at first it’s like “check it out it works” then you wait…. and wait…. and wait…. “this blows chunks”, set comp aside never to be used again.

            • bthylafh
            • 8 years ago

            Once a laptop with a 266 MHz PII and 192 MB of RAM came in, running WinXP SP2. It was /fast/. The only thing on it besides Windows was Office 2003, which was also /fast/. Word launched from a fresh reboot in 3 seconds.

            I’m morally certain it was this fast because there was no anti-virus installed, nor any of that vendor crap that wants to run every time you boot.

    • jstern
    • 8 years ago

    I don’t care. Windows XP will be my main OS 20 years from now. Just have to be careful, that’s all.

      • tanker27
      • 8 years ago

      The question is why? Sure it was a good OS. And pretty Stable. But why not jump to 7 and its added benefits?

        • OneArmedScissor
        • 8 years ago

        Added benefits…of paying money for something you don’t need? MURICAAAAAAAA!

          • sweatshopking
          • 8 years ago

          i think it’s worth the money, and chances are, he will likely have a new computer in the next 20 years, and if he buys anything OEM, it’ll likely come with a license.

      • danny e.
      • 8 years ago

      i guarantee it wont be.

        • ClickClick5
        • 8 years ago

        Sounds like the old Win98SE and Netscape users.

        MSDOS OS FOREVER!!!!

      • albundy
      • 8 years ago

      you obviously dont game at all, so why not use Ubuntu? you’ll have the stability you’ve always dreamed of! and for free!

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        as well as 100x the command line usage! for the constant F up’s that ubuntu brings!

        Don’t get me wrong, i love linux, but todays linux is BARELY as usable as 2001’s xp.

          • Clutch Pedal
          • 8 years ago

          Two of the most usable OSs on the market today are nix based (Android/iOS).

          I find that my Ubuntu 11.04 rig is way more usable than my Windows 7 rig. I’ve been running OS X Lion (another nix based OS) for the past month and it is light years beyond Windows 7.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            Unix is not linux. they’re not the same. and to say that you’re going to have the same level of usability using an EXTREMELY polished OSX/iOS vs Ubuntu is silly. Android has all kinds of issues, so I won’t both with that one.

            Having used lion, i’d also say i don’t see what’s “light years” beyond windows 7… in many ways, i find it more painful to use.

            • Clutch Pedal
            • 8 years ago

            “Unix is not linux.”

            Whatever. Unix-like if you prefer.

            I’m running 11.04 on an Asus 1201N and a dual 24″ workstation. It comes very close to Lion in outright polish. I love using 11.04.

            I’m iOS through and through but even I can acknowledge that Android is a kick-ass OS.

            To say that today’s Linux distros are barely as usable as XP is just fracking redonculous!

      • bthylafh
      • 8 years ago

      Are you one of those people who carried on about Windows 2000 being the best ever?

        • sircharles32
        • 8 years ago

        You called?

        Seriously though, I still run 2K and XP. I don’t see the need to pay money for something that will absolutely kill my productivity (as in, they’ve moved everything on me).

        And yes, I’m forced to use 7 on one system at work. I’m not impressed.

          • Palek
          • 8 years ago

          The search feature of windows 7 is very, very versatile and handy. Try and use it.

            • iq100
            • 8 years ago

            Palek wrote>”The search feature of windows 7 is very, verry versatile and handy. Try and use it.”

            How can you say that?

            In XP if I want to search all my networked computers (some XP some Windows 7), I can simply key <filename> into XP search box, after selecting my WORKGROUP home network. I can use * and ? for partial matches. I can specify file type like .avi or .doc

            In Windows 7, this is impossible. Palek, what are the keystrokes in Windows 7 to search WORKGROUP for say all file names containg: *palek*.*
            I don’t think there is a direct easy way like in XP.

            • Palek
            • 8 years ago

            [quote<]How can you say that?[/quote<] Errr, with style/panache/great humility (choose one)? I don't know the answer to your question. I tend to remember where I put my documents so I have never come across a situation where I had to search across multiple computers on a network. (Isn't that what NAS drives are for, anyway?) I was merely pointing out that when I'm at a loss as to where to find a feature or setting in Windows 7 (this happens very rarely, though) the Search field in the start menu often proves quite helpful. Also, the search feature in File Explorer is far better implemented than in Windows XP. No need to press F3, the search field is right there in the top right, you punch in a file name, and right away you get a list of results that are much easier to view than in XP. Somehow I suspect there is a solution to your problem but I'll let you do your own googling.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 8 years ago

        hey, at the time, Windows 2000 WAS the best ever. I moved to Win 2000 when SP1 came out and moved to XP in November, 2001. In between, my hardware was fast enough to use Win 2K and be pretty speedy. XP with its Luna theme slowed things down a bit, and I had to upgrade as a result, but I tend to jump on the newest version of Windows and ride it for all its worth (with an affair with OS X during the Vista years)

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      Chances are that it will become more safe as more users move away from XP. Crackers have less of a reason to go after XP, since they will be targeting the new mainstream platforms (7, 8, newest OS X and *nix versions.

      This what happened with 9x users when it officially retired.

    • Ryu Connor
    • 8 years ago

    Also marks the remaining support lifespan of IE6.

      • bthylafh
      • 8 years ago

      Care to make a wager about how long it’ll hang on in corporate intranets?

      • xeridea
      • 8 years ago

      That is great, but my company (and many others) have already dropped support for sites needing to support IE6, as its users are small enough now, its not quite worth the extra time, and limiting website usefulness to support people who refuse to update their crappy browser for 10 years. It will be great when IE7 and IE8 are phased out, but that might be 2025.

      • yuhong
      • 8 years ago

      IE 5.01 on Win2000 was “supported” until 2010 for pretty much the same reason. BTW, not only IE, but now the .NET Framework is considered part of Windows, which means it will also be tied to the support lifespan of Windows.

    • Arclight
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]With XP's support deadline far from looming, I can't help but wonder if any OS will match its longevity. Few operating systems are as loved, and 12 years is an eternity in the PC world. Back around XP's initial release, single-core Pentium 4 and Athlon XP processors were cutting-edge technology. If you think those CPUs look old now, just wait until 2014.[/quote<] True, true. I like XP, loved in the past, but imo this is the right time to move to W7. The reason i say this -> RAM prices have never been so low imo. 4 Gb DDR3 modules are so affordable that i can't find a reason not to buy. All modern CPUs can handle W7, the only limitation being RAM, as i'm sure anyone has bigger HDD than 40 Gb by now.

      • Corrado
      • 8 years ago

      And if you don’t, a 1TB drive is ~ $55

        • xeridea
        • 8 years ago

        Even better than that Newegg currently has a 1.5TB drive for $55 + free shipping. This seems almost a staple of their plethoratic email promotions.

    • Duck
    • 8 years ago

    If you are behind a firewall and are not forwarding ports or using uPNP, then it should be secure. I don’t see any problems with no official support.

      • bthylafh
      • 8 years ago

      …and don’t ever install any programs, or use the Internet.

      That’s quite naive.

        • Farting Bob
        • 8 years ago

        Dont install any applications?? If you are smart and only install from trusted places there is no reason to presume you need security updates. Remove the things XP has by default that are more insecure. Keep everything else (flash etc) updated and theres no reason why your in trouble.

          • bthylafh
          • 8 years ago

          *snort* What makes you think Adobe will continue supporting WinXP once it’s EOL?

            • maxxcool
            • 8 years ago

            simple : money

            as long as there is a 20% user base there will be updates. ergo cash…

            • bthylafh
            • 8 years ago

            There’s no money in Flash Player or Adobe Reader, nor is there money in trying to figure out why $FEATURE won’t work on an EOL operating system.

            Just try installing CS5.5 on Windows 2000. Go on, I’ll wait.

            • maxxcool
            • 8 years ago

            /scoff/ and who cares about adobe ? windows xp wont dry up just because of one overpriced useless tool.

            • bthylafh
            • 8 years ago

            Now you’re moving the goalposts. Nice try, but I’m not playing that game.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 8 years ago

            Windows 2000 doesn’t have anything close to a 20% install base, probably not even .2%

          • aceuk
          • 8 years ago

          Ever heard of drive-by downloads? The user doesn’t have to do anything for this type of malware to be installed.

          When the updates stop, malware writers are going to have a field-day. 🙂

            • destroy.all.monsters
            • 8 years ago

            That’s mostly because javascript isn’t blocked though, which especially if you’re running an old system, is advised.

            • Duck
            • 8 years ago

            No… when updates stop, nothing will change.

            You can be protected from attack by a firewall. Just use some sort of antivirus program if you are worried about malware getting into your computer.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 8 years ago

      Continue to install it on existing hardware. At some point, the hardware will change enough to make XP the legacy OS that won’t boot the latest toys.

        • Duck
        • 8 years ago

        I don’t think that will be the case.

        The main problem is being happy with having 4GB or less of memory.

          • StashTheVampede
          • 8 years ago

          You’ll be wrong. 4GB is definitely one issue (you can get 64bit XP, its very sparse with driver support), but the changes to PCIe, SATA, USB and other lack of drivers will really hamper its use.

          EFI is also coming, making XP much more difficult to support.

            • destroy.all.monsters
            • 8 years ago

            You realize that windows 98 is still used, and on new equipment right? Sometimes an old os is the best, or only, tool for the job.

            There’s an entire forum on msfn all about running 98. The same will happen with XP eventually. And who knows – Reactos might even be finished by then…

            • StashTheVampede
            • 8 years ago

            Reactos is dead. I’d rather run Wine than attempt Reactos.

            Do I know there are installs of DOS/95/98/NT3.51/NT4 around? Hell yes I do and I always warn users of those OSes that they better have a good contingency plan before their hardware takes a dump. Supporting those OSes is a niche thing and you’ll pay for it.

          • xeridea
          • 8 years ago

          Eventually no hardware manufacturers will make drivers for XP because it is to old…

        • aceuk
        • 8 years ago

        There are already laptops which lack XP drivers.

        HPs Proliant MicroServer doesn’t officially support XP/2003 either.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      Don’t visit porn sites.
      Don’t download illegal stuff
      And you’re very safe.

        • Meadows
        • 8 years ago

        And still you’re not.

        • aceuk
        • 8 years ago

        No you’re not!

        • Krogoth
        • 8 years ago

        Don’t know why you got downvoted.

        This is very sound advice for majority of computer users. The most common way of getting malware is via trojans and zero-day exploits. ZDEs typically affect high-profile targets ie companies and agencies. Trojans depends entirely on the user stupidity in opening up questionable material. Crackers don’t waste their time on mainstream targets except for some cheap lulz or have some kind of vendetta with the target in question.

        The most certain way of being safe is to isolate the system from the internet and limit physical access. This only matters to parties with very sensitive information (insurance companies, financials, defense etc.)

          • derFunkenstein
          • 8 years ago

          It’s “sound advice” so to speak, but if you stupidly assume that you’re completely safe (which is what PeterD is getting down-voted for), you’ll find soon enough that you’re still likely to get attacked somehow.

            • Krogoth
            • 8 years ago

            Nothing connected to the net is completely immune to an attack, but if you were to take the aforementioned measures.

            It is very unlikely you will come across trouble.

    • dpaus
    • 8 years ago

    Promise?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This