Should OS be upgraded or Harderned?

[augustine]

What are your views on this?
Should the OS lets say RH and FC be continuously upgraded on the same hardware or should we wait until the hardware or software go bust before shifting to the newest?

[ultan]

Why waste the effort? They upgrade so often that I lose track... Hardware don't last long anyway so why not wait?

[cristobal]

A harderned server or one behind a dedicated firewall will beat an unconfigured and unmodified but very new OS version anytime hands down.

[daren]

Originally Posted by cristobal

A harderned server or one behind a dedicated firewall will beat an unconfigured and unmodified but very new OS version anytime hands down.

I totally agree. New OS beats the rest.

[allon]

Originally Posted by daren

I totally agree. New OS beats the rest.

I think he was referring to the stand that a hardern machine would out do a new version anytime and not that a new version is better.

I will also go for the hardened OS instead of just mindlessly installing a new one and open yourself to more and new threats....

[Alex]

Yes, a hardened server is always better than a fresh install of the latest OS. However, you should be proactively administrating the server in that once the OS has a stable upgrade, I'd jump on the bandwagon and re-harden the server after the kernel update.

Security should be on the top of your list and updating the kernel is an essential piece of the puzzle.

Just my $.02.

[allon]

Yes upgrading is important, but doing a total conversion from one to another is rather senseless. Things like if you are using a RH9 server and since FC4 is out, there is not really much of a need to upgrade the OS if you have already engaged in your regular updates ( of patches that work )