DR
this is a worldwide attack.

http://e3.365dm.com/17/05/536x302/6d...20170512204600

http://news.sky.com/story/biggest-ra...tries-10874647

Spot on!

This is not Microsoft's fault. You can't blame them for this. If Microsoft have decided that they are not supporting this version of the software any more its because there are newer less volatile versions of windows that their customers should be using.

The vulnerability is nothing to do with the system stability. That doesn't mean its not vulnerable to attack. An outmoded but stable system can still be vulnerable.

Usually computer systems in very large organisations are put out to Tender and can (unwisely, in my opinion) be linked to long-standing contracts which prevent changes. Of course, that's a stupid system when it comes to technology. But, it's still common in a lot of government organisations.

The Navy's most tenacious enemy may be windows XP http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles...-be-windows-xp.

Using XP, now it's completely out of support, is stupid.

Really?!?!

Lets hear why?

Em yes, I know!

I'm not saying this is a lone strike on the NHS. I'm saying the NHS was left vulnerable to such an attack.

XP vulnerabilities were published by the Shadow Brokers or the CIA only last month and cybercriminals have now incorporated those vulnerabilities to make lots of money.

£10 billion system upgrade and they don't pay £5 million for the security?....

You are right there again.

My local surgery uses XP... and they're recently spend a fortune on a refurb. You should see the seats the receptionists have, they're like space captain seats. They didn't think that money would be better spent on a new system. So, who's going to be accountable for that? The government?

Also... and this is a cutting edge, radical idea... have a paper system as a backup. They need it. Obviously.

This is my way of thinking Livia,but people don't want to listen as it doesn't suit their thinking of how the Tories are 'ruining' the country,God forbid those IN the NHS are not spending the money they have properly,so lets blame someone else.

Whether or not they use XP is irrelevant, it's the security upgrade for XP that was lacking as reported and explained by Mr Hunt himself.

What is the point of spending 1 billion on an upgrade if you are going to have to back up with paper files anyway?...

Thanks Kaz... thought I was on my own here. My mother has district nurses visit... the last time I said on here that maybe one nurse could do more than one thing and save the others a visit, it was suggested by a forum member that my family should maybe look at doing more. This place is insane sometimes.

Aint that the truth Livia, I was pulled up because I said my mother looked after an elderly gent for years and was treated very well ,she , got a pittance ,but he had the help he needed,like a special bed and things to make life better for him,but I was shot down,for that,so sometimes I just don't bother,you have to agree with the majority then you can coast along quite happily,well that's just not me ,I do believe that is why lots of members just go from here, Why do people want stuff for nowt ? those that are able,should get off thier arses and work for it I say.

Unsurprisingly that would be me...

You said 'she'll be visited by a district nurse in the morning to do one procedure and another in the afternoon to do something else.'

I stated that was a fantastic level of care and suggested that if you were concerned and wished to free up a visit for someone else you could perhaps arrange between the family to check on her.

It had been assessed that she required assistance in the morning and again in the afternoon, how then can all of her care needs be delivered in one visit?

What's wrong with that? :/

On a happy note, neither my local GP surgeries or the two Hospitals have been affected.
Pleased to see the local area keeps their computers updated.

I watched the news smudgie and most of it is dying down now,so fingers crossed your results will be available to you soon.

I'll tell you what's wrong with that.

You don't know anything about my mother's problems and yet your comment suggests her family are not doing enough. My father was a paramedic and already does loads for her. If it was something her family could do we wouldn't need a nurse. Like it may be your business.

So despite knowing next to nothing about it and yet you felt compelled stick your oar into it and suggest we were a drain on the NHS by not doing our bit.

My comment suggests nothing of the kind, you chose to include your experience in the thread therefore it becomes part of the wider debate.

If you feel that sending a nurse twice a day a drain on resources as you previously stated then that would be one solution wouldn't it?

Like you say if it was something that family could do they wouldn't send a nurse, and similarly if it was something that only needed tending to once they would only send her once.

Try thinking outsideof the box Kizzy, some patients have multi illnesses and need two or even more things doing.
One nurses visit would save time and money if all the treatment was administered at the same time, different altogether than a patient needing the same thing doing twice.

Updating systems and retraining staff is a massive task and never easy (the retraining actually comes first). There is however, no excuse when IT department managers are not listened to about security which can affect life.

That said, from what I'm reading, it looks like this can be at least partially blamed on Jeremy Hunt doing everything on the cheap.

We can't back up with paper files. There's no room in the small spaces provided!

At least our medical data should be ok and not affected. What is affected are computers that access those records and the scheduling systems e.g. appointments, ambulances and so on.

I have thank you, I don't want to pry into the specifics here but there are many things that can't be done in one visit. One may be a nurse and the other a nurse practitioner?

Honestly I have never heard of anyone complain their ill relative gets too much care.. :/

You don't need the specifics and even if you had them you'd still try to spin it so you're right and I'm wrong. The nurses themselves get fed up with it because they're sent to do stuff that the nurse who attended that morning could have done. Anyhoo it was one comment I made that you latched on to as usual and here we are still.... I won't be explaining this again, even when you reply. And you will....

I wouldn't.

Again if her doctor had felt 1 visit sufficient that is what she would get, it was you who brought this anecdote from another thread btw.
' I said on here that maybe one nurse could do more than one thing and save the others a visit'

I note it has now changed from I said to they said, no matter as you say the issue has been discussed to death.

This is scary. Like something out of War Games. I still remember that movie :worry: