Really, for such a relatively small project and the nature of the
software, backporting patches to older versions has no clear benefit.
It creates problems for support people with having to support two
majorly different versions at the same time. And is there any true
benefit to not upgrading? Unlike some major projects, like the linux
kernel, supporting two branches is not worth it, because the upgrade
path is not hard or time consuming.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/20/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">David Eads</b> <<a href="mailto:eads@invisibleinstitute.com">eads@invisibleinstitute.com</a>> wrote:
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> If your hardening guide consists of telling people to upgrade to the<br>> latest version, then that'd be great.
<br><br>Well, that's why I wanted to know if any older stable branches had<br>backported patches and all. I didn't think there was anybody doing that,<br>so in the draft I've written that there users should run the most current
<br>version available, absolutely no excuses.<br><br>I do say that if someone had the time and resources to actually handle<br>security upgrades for older stable WordPress branches, they could start<br>such a project.<br>
<br>The hardening guide has other advice (about passwords, encryption, file<br>permissions, etc) and describes some common classes of attack that a<br>WordPress user could face.<br><br>David<br><br>_______________________________________________
<br>wp-docs mailing list<br><a href="mailto:wp-docs@lists.automattic.com">wp-docs@lists.automattic.com</a><br><a href="http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-docs">http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-docs
</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br><br>-- <br>--Robert Deaton<br><a href="http://somethingunpredictable.com">http://somethingunpredictable.com</a>