Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Articles - Survey Says: Microsoft Migration Isn’t As Easy As It Sounds
Articles

Survey Says: Microsoft Migration Isn’t As Easy As It Sounds

ISBuzz TeamBy ISBuzz TeamMay 13, 20196 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Azure SQL and SQL Server 2016
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

A recent survey-report commissioned by 1E, Getting Your House in Order, was completed by 600 senior IT decision makers in the US and UK, split evenly between IT Operations and IT Security specialists. The intent was to see if, in the wake of so many devastating cyber-attacks in the last few years, lessons had been learned regarding security basics.

One interesting testing ground was the Windows 10 data. Once upon a time, this wouldn’t be an obvious theme for a “security” survey, but times have changed (as WannaCry impact brutally illustrated). Indeed, 83% of respondents said security was a motivating factor for migrating to Windows 10. That is one reason it’s concerning that, on average, only 68% of machines had already been transitioned. Given that Windows 10 was released in 2015, this is a shockingly low, unsettling statistic.

What was interesting is how much of the study correlated with our findings from talking to customers about their Windows migration difficulties, and what we had come to think of as the “hidden costs” around Windows management today.

1. Remote users. How many remote users do organizations have? For most large organizations, this number increased massively in recent years, yet virtually no organizations today budget for them. Of course, Microsoft’s legacy systems management tooling was developed for the office-based, LAN-style workplace of the 1990s. Right now, however, it’s apparent that Modern Management tools are not yet sufficiently developed to cover the gap.  

According to our survey data, until organizations can find a way to effectively reach, patch and secure workers outside the office, remote working will remain a security concern for over three quarters (77%) of respondents. Furthermore, 6 in 10 (62%) identify the migration of remote workers to the latest version of Windows as a challenge.

Think about how this plays out during a Windows upgrade or migration. The last thing a remote worker wants to do is come into the office (wherever that office is) for an IT update. Nor do they want to have to ship the machine in. What they increasingly expect (and unanimously prefer) is the same self-serve functionality they have with their mobile devices: To be able to upgrade the machine, to rebuild it if it’s not functioning properly and to transfer to a new one (when necessary), with all their personalized content and applications intact. Of course, if they do have to come into the office, or have things shipped from the vendor to the office to the user, that increases both costs for the business and IT resource demands.

2. Small offices. Another related cost comes from the number of small offices an organization maintains.

Any organization that is providing a service nationwide, and certainly worldwide, is likely to have a large number of small offices. These have one, standout challenge: If the office is small enough (i.e. ten or twenty users), then it becomes prohibitively expensive to run a server there, or to have local IT support. Multiply these costs by the number of small offices, and you’re looking at significant overhead with minimal returns.

While organizations really don’t want to put servers out at every location, they face all kinds of challenges in terms of managing machines in remote locations if they don’t.

For instance, during a Windows 10 migration, the question of whether or not you have a server in a small office becomes an issue when you go to boot every workstation from a remote machine. If you’re looking to store user data, settings, etc. while a machine is rebuilt and before reinstalling them, having servers simplifies this process. If you don’t have servers, you have to send an engineer to that work location. This drives costs up more because the company is not only paying for the engineer’s time, but also for workers who are unproductive while waiting to have their laptops rebuilt. That’s why the priority should be putting users in charge of their migration themselves, wherever they are, so organizations can improve end-user experience without hurting the bottom line.

3. Applications. Applications pose another Windows migration challenge resulting in additional “hidden costs.” Apps are a huge part of why we use Windows in the first place. While most conversations typically revolve around the OS upgrade process itself, we neglect to draw attention to the fact that users access those applications through the OS,  allowing almost all professionals to do their job.

But if you look at standard systems management tools, they usually involve very little application management automation, which could ensure, for example, that when a machine is upgraded, replaced or rebuilt, all the applications used on an old machine are put on the new machine, upgraded where they need to be, and potentially removed or replaced with alternatives when they are not used. This reduces cost, rather than increasing it.

The lack of native automation capability around these systems management tools means delays and – frequently – (you guessed it!) hidden costs.

None of these factors are a business’s ‘fault’. How can you blame the organization for being successful and having lots of offices? How can you blame a company for having a modern work environment with lots of people that can work while traveling or from home? Or for embracing digital transformation? These are key conditions for almost any successful organization, and yet, as things currently stand, companies are automatically penalised for them.

All of these examples introduce costs that impede upon a completed Windows 10 migration. This not only prolongs and exacerbates vulnerabilities, but it results in more costs due to the “tax” that will impact all organizations not fully migrated when Windows 7 support is cut off January 2020.

Returning to our survey data, however, it isn’t all doom and gloom. Yes, there’s widespread concern that migrations aren’t happening quickly enough (56% of respondents). But there’s also a clear appeal for additional automation capabilities that could enhance traditional and new Microsoft capabilities during this transitional period between legacy infrastructure and future ones. An overwhelming 80% of respondents called for an increase of investment specifically around the automation of the migration process.

Of course, Windows 10 isn’t just a migration challenge – with patches and new releases, “Windows Servicing” is a continual task. The business needs to invest in automation tooling in order to future-proof their operations, increase security and reduce on-going costs.

ISBuzz Team
  • ISBuzz Team
    Air Canada Data Breach: BianLian Extortion Group Claims A Massive Heist Contrary To Airline’s Earlier Statement
  • ISBuzz Team
    Unprecedented DDoS Attack Rocks The Web: Tech Giants Reveal A Digital Tsunami
  • ISBuzz Team
    CISA Flags High-Severity Adobe Acrobat Reader Flaw Amid Active Exploits
  • ISBuzz Team
    Curl Security Alert: Patching A Critical Bug Averting Potential Cyber Catastrophe

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

The Real Cost of Inconsistent Third-Party Access

December 18, 20255 Mins Read

What Happens When Devices Cross Borders? The Role of Geofencing in Global IT

August 7, 20256 Mins Read

The Evolving Importance of Identity Governance in FinTech

July 10, 20258 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

No se ha podido establecer conexión. Error 429

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}