I've seen comments about MS updates disabling mature systems and even a suggestion that there's a conspiracy at MS to render old XP systems unusable to encourage upgrades. So the following may help.
I recently made a fresh install of XP Home original SP3 slipstreamed and then set about a custom update on MS's site using the supplied IE6 . I selected all but 3 of the critical updates (I didn't want Malicious SRT, IE8, and browser choice) and 3 non-critical (root certs, KB2492386, KB2808679). In due course, I restarted and went into MS updates once more to grab 2 that didn't take first time. All this updating took less than an hour, not closely attended, and the system is stable. I conclude no conspiracy.
So while MS updates are available, I'll continue to update manually and selectively. If something goes wrong I have my system drive backed up.
But how necessary, really, are these updates on a 12 year old OS that you would think by now had had most of the gliches removed?
One of the the lastest is this: "Vulnerabilities in Windows Kernel-Mode Drivers Could Allow Remote Code Execution (2850851)
Published: Tuesday, July 09, 2013".
Problems with the kernel, sounds serious, but digging a little deeper we read: "The most severe vulnerability could allow remote code execution if a user views shared content that embeds TrueType font files..." (my bold)
So if we can prevent remote access of shared content the threat is empty? I hope I'm right, because to me that seems achievable, and should be the basis of security now, and going forward from April 2014.
Edited by Philipitous, 24 July 2013 - 04:28 AM.