| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A look at the MS-SQL wormA look at the MS-SQL wormPosted Jan 30, 2003 20:59 UTC (Thu) by dbhost (guest, #3461)Parent article: A look at the MS-SQL worm This brings to mind the Sysadmin's mantra, security, security, security. When a weakness is found, and a patch released that can be trusted, apply that patch. GNU/Linux and other nixes aren't immune to attack and we certainly cannot afford to be smug thinking we are above this insanity.
(Log in to post comments)
Which conflicts with... Posted Jan 31, 2003 14:07 UTC (Fri) by sphealey (guest, #1028) [Link] "Security security security" unfortunately conflicts with "test test test". The cannonical example being Windows NT 4 Service Pack 6, which (i) contained numerous critical security patches (b) broke Lotus Notes servers. Microsoft patches are notorious for breaking existing apps, but it happens with other vendors' software/patches as well. Now what does the diligent sysadmin do?sPh
Which conflicts with... Posted Feb 3, 2003 23:30 UTC (Mon) by sphealey (guest, #1028) [Link] Oops - Microsoft have just withdrawn a critical security patch because it "may cause Windows NT to fail". Hope you didn't install it. But wait: if you didn't install it, you were vulnerable... But if you did install it...sPh
|
|
||||||||||||