Banks running outdated ATMs to pay Microsoft to support old versions of Windows
chicagotribune.com
chicagotribune.com
"<BigCorp> running outdated <some_software> to pay <BigVendor> to support old versions..." And this will apply to a lot of the Big Cos. Lot.
It is painful, bureaucratic and an absolute nightmare to change things at this level. But to be fair to big companies, change is not always easy and the cost of making an "incorrect" change can be very expensive and further more expensive to rollback.
I work for a very big I-bank and most of the projects I am involved with are multi-year. They take 1+ year to implement and pretty much most of the times, we hardly have solid rollback plan. Yes, I said it. It is more like "we have to put this in production after this many years and this much dollars spent. Let's roll this shit out and we will have a SWAT team ready to handle any fallouts"
So, I suspect that the system designer had a choice of "Windows, and bank the money in 12-18 months" or "Anything else, and spend 12 months and a lot of money possibly getting certified and spend 12-18 months developing".
We call that decision a no-brainer, my friend.
You can never be sure you're secure, no matter what a company that you pay a lot of money tells you. Even moreso, considering that in case your certified system blows up, you will probably not get any money in damages, because the certifying company could well go heads up if the attack is wide-spread enough.
Sweet fancy moses. Shameless plug: if you want to do something about the state of tech in the financial industry, join us - https://jobs.lever.co/standardtreasury.