I image it would be a high priority to fix any possible exploits that might expose its total lack of ability to do this - which this attack - ONCE AGAIN PROVES.
I have to repeat: fixing this particular "exploit" is more dangerous than leaving it "as is".
I think the thing I am trying to express is that I am neither for nor against the exploit or the fix or non fix.. the point is Bitcoin is a solution stack and should be provided as such- MT Gox was the first most visible point when malleability became an issue- it should have been addressed conclusively then, why this word remain in our lexicon astonishes and perplexes me.
Credit card companies don't give people credit cards with gay abandon not knowing how it will be settled on the back end. Bitcoin should be no different if it wishes to compete with them (I believe our ideological best use scenario).