Why Cisco Should Make Old Firmware Software Accessible Again - SG500X

[Prometheus22]

I came across this thread while searching for the latest firmware for retired, end-of-life products like the SG500X series, etc... Every post references a link to the download page, yet ironically, nothing is available on Cisco's website anymore.

When trying to troubleshoot, upgrade, or even downgrade an older product, you're greeted with this lovely message:

"Note: For security purposes, upon retirement of a product, Cisco Systems purposely removes documentation, downloads, and product pages from the Cisco.com website."

How helpful.

I find it deeply disappointing that I can't access the final software versions needed to keep fully functional equipment in service—especially in a time when sustainability and reducing electronic waste should be a global priority. Sure, I understand that security on legacy products can't be guaranteed—but that’s the user’s informed choice, not a reason to erase history.

It's odd that a company so proud of its legacy won't let that legacy live on. If the intent is to prevent analysis of old code for vulnerabilities—well, news flash: there will always be new vulnerabilities. Meanwhile, perfectly capable hardware is being scrapped because official firmware is no longer available.

Fortunately, like any diligent admin, I kept the latest updates. For example, the most recent firmware for the SG500X is version 1.4.11.5, with the filename sx500_fw-14115.ros.

Should I start a business distributing them? (Kidding. Mostly.)

Seriously, Cisco—would you consider reinstating firmware downloads for retired products, without warranty or support, purely for those of us who still believe in maintaining great hardware? Supporting your own legacy could help support the planet.

[Leo Laohoo]

This is a simple case of if-everyone-else-is-doing-it-then-why-can't-we.  This is an industry-wide "standard".   No law in any country can/will stop this.  

It is simply marketing "encouraging" people to buy the newer (and more expensive) replacement than holding on to old relics no matter how reliable and/or stable they have been.  

The main difference I see between Cisco and competitors is the lifespan of Cisco's product before they hit end-of-life milestone.  

[Joseph W. Doherty]

. . . I can't access the final software versions needed to keep fully functional equipment in service . . .

Well, if you're diligent in maintaining your equipment, when it was actively Cisco supported, you could have a copy of every IOS.

Fortunately, like any diligent admin, I kept the latest updates.

Ah, so it's not a problem, at least for you, correct?

Usually the problem isn't ". . . purely for those of us who still believe in maintaining great hardware . . .", but it often is for those acquiring Cisco devices second hand.  Although you own the hardware, the software is licensed and isn't transferable.  Which usually means, a second hand purchase cannot legally run any Cisco software, so no need to download software for an EoL platform, agree?