← Back to context

Comment by dwedge

4 hours ago

> Is it more expensive to keep your systems upgraded and maintained or to have all your product get destroyed one arbitrary day and then have to pay to do the upgrade anyways so that the arbitrary property destruction doesn't keep happening?

It happened once. Did you do the maths here? Can you tell us which one was Kore expensive and what percentage chance there was of this hack happening?

Someone did the math. Cost of continual maintenance, versus cost of product loss. They determined it wasnt worth the maintenance cost, and accepted that risk. And that risk manifested.

This happens all the time. Unfortunately, in my experience, most of the risk acceptance happens without even really believing in the cost of the risk, and people just accept everything. it is highly likely someone like that accepted this.

  • The polite term is 'self-insurance', and it's often the right move.