Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 25 2018, @02:05PM   Printer-friendly
from the about-time-too dept.

The Reserve Bank of India has given that country's banking sector a hard deadline to get Windows XP out of its ATMs: June 2019. That's more than five years beyond the May 2014 end of support for the OS.

In a notice to the nation's banks, issued last on June 21st, 2018, the Reserve Bank makes it clear that XP “and other unsupported operating systems” have been on its mind since at least April 2017, when it issued a circular outlining its concerns.

In spite of previous advisories instructing banks to put migration plans in place, things have not moved fast enough for the RBI.

“The slow progress on the part of the banks in addressing these issues has been viewed seriously by the RBI,” the notice said, adding that "the vulnerability arising from the banks’ ATMs operating on unsupported version of operating system and non-implementation of other security measures, could potentially affect the interests of the banks’ customers adversely".

The timetable says banks must reach 25 per cent deprecation by September 2018; 50 per cent by December 2018; and 75 per cent by March 2019.

The timetable also requires banks to implement anti-skimming technology, and to use whitelisting on ATMs so only approved software can run on them. Banks have been instructed to file their compliance plans by the end of July 2018.

[Editor's Note: Removed spurious line 1432UTC]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Monday June 25 2018, @03:07PM (2 children)

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 25 2018, @03:07PM (#698149) Journal

    The last paragraph of the article wasn't quoted by the editor. It mentions extended custom support.

    I'll accept what you say is probably true, but it isn't in the article linked in TFS - however, my eyesight is not what it once was. Perhaps I'm just not seeing it. Maybe you are referring to another article linked from the quoted source?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 26 2018, @01:23PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 26 2018, @01:23PM (#698730)

    Your bot quotes entire stories. You may read the entire story by following the Original Submission link in the summary. The last paragraph of the story mentions "extended custom support" which is paid support. You deleted that paragraph when you decided which text to quote in the summary.

    When you submit stories with your bot, there's no clear indication to the casual reader that it's you submitting the story. How about calling your bot "janrinok's bot" or the like? Also, how about letting a different editor approve the stories that you submit via bot, whilst you approve other people's submissions? That way, at least two people would see each story.

    Thanks for your efforts!

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Tuesday June 26 2018, @05:30PM

      by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 26 2018, @05:30PM (#698862) Journal

      Every story needs to be seen by 2 editors to be released now - what you are proposing is exactly what has happened since day one on this site. However as we are all volunteers with lives to lead (and in most cases jobs) even finding 2 editors who can be available to keep the story queue filled 24/7 can be difficult. We are always looking for more editors, particularly from outside the USA as that region is pretty well covered time-wise. But any new editors will be made welcome, no matter where they live.

      The whole point is that the story is collected by a bot - it is not me submitting the stories. We can use the API to submit stories automatically. I cannot release stories that I have submitted and therefore I can do nothing if no-one else is submitting stories suitable for publishing - so sometimes we have to rely on bots . And, without a bot, if we cannot increase the number of stories being submitted by the community then we would have a blank front page from time to time, sometimes for many hours. The problem would be solved if we could receive 24 good quality submissions a day. But remember, just because a story is in the submissions queue does not mean it is a good story.

      Arthur is not just used by me. It is also the method of extracting a story from an IRC submission using MrPlow. So, just because it says it is collected by Arthur does not mean I, or any other editor, has submitted the story. Any editor who has the bot source can use the API to submit a story via the Arthur T Knackerbracket user ID. I have given copies to over 20 people who have asked for it. How they use it is up to them. The 'Collected by Arthur' header is important as it tells the editor the source of the submission and ensures that it is edited correctly and not released in its entirety which would be a breach of copyright.

      The bot has to return the entire source that it is able to extract and a bot cannot tell a good story from a bad one. And being a bot, it sometimes struggles to cope with obfuscated stories which use a lot of javascript. Therefore, it has to go through exactly the same processing as every other submission. It gets no special treatment. In fact, on the contrary, I and other editors go to great efforts to publish other submissions in preference to those found by Arthur. However, as Arthur returns the entire story and sometimes other text that is not even wanted, the bot's submission has to be edited to be suitable for the front page.