Its not arrogance. Its intelligence.

I can better manage 100 servers than 1000 client machines for antivirus
protection. It also doesn't matter if I lose 10 client machines, as long as
I don't lose any servers. I lose servers a lot more than 10 people are
sitting on their thumbs.

My former company's network did get hit with Code Red. From a client machine
- none of the production servers were hit. With 60% or more users carrying
laptops, being 100% up to date on client side patches and AV is nearly
impossible, so you focus on what can be reliably controlled and take
calculated risks with the others.

------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
Atlanta, GA


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Granatella Adam J [mailto:Adam.Granatella@;Sentry.com] 
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 9:15 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core Services & Anti-Virus
> 
> 
> That wasn't the point.  The point was that if there was a 
> virus like Code
> Red that was able to infect without a client opening a file 
> or downloading
> something, there will be another virus like that again.  It 
> doesn't matter
> what patches are out for the Code Red vulnerability now.  
> Something like it
> will come along and that will be that.  Arrogance does not a 
> good policy
> make!
> 
> Adam
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Moir [mailto:rim@;LutonSFC.ac.uk] 
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 8:04 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core Services & Anti-Virus
> 
> 
> Given that the patches that stopped the flaws code red relied 
> on were about
> a year old when code red was released, its quite possible that even a
> vaguely competent admin wouldn't see it on their servers.
> 
> Robert Moir MSMVP
> IT Systems Engineer
> Luton Sixth Form College
> Ciderspace: An online 3D virtual reality environment for 
> tramps. Ciderspace
> Cafe: A park Bench.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Granatella Adam J [mailto:Adam.Granatella@;Sentry.com]
> > Sent: 15 November 2002 13:30
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core Services & Anti-Virus
> > 
> > 
> > Two words:  Code Red.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com]
> > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 7:13 AM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core Services & Anti-Virus
> > 
> > 
> > Every virus attack I've seen enters at the client machine
> > level - regardless of how it enters the network, it infects a 
> > client machine. Its rare to have every client machine 100% up 
> > to date on AV signatures, etc, and because of that, they're 
> > always going to be the entry point.
> > 
> > With that in mind, you need to take steps to protect every
> > server, regardless of function. To do otherwise is, in this 
> > day and age, irresponsible.
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> > Atlanta, GA
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Luis Aguilera [mailto:laguilera@;basesix.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 5:52 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core Services & Anti-Virus
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The important thing is to keep in mind were your 
> vulnerabilities to
> > > viruses lie.
> > >  
> > > Most viruses, IME, come through either documents and/or emails. So
> > > setting up a good system that protects your file servers 
> and email 
> > > servers from malicious code will go a long way in protecting your 
> > > network. You also want to think of implementing a system 
> > that protects
> > > the end users, particularly something featuring the
> > "pushing" of virus
> > > definitions from a central location (that an admin manages)
> > > rather than leave the onus of updating the virus defs to 
> end users.
> > >  
> > > Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've yet to see a
> > virus that
> > > directly targets AD, DHCP, DNS or other DNS servers. Does
> > any know of
> > > any?
> > >  
> > > Luis Aguilera
> > > IT Manager
> > > BaseSix
> > > 
> > >   -----Original Message-----
> > >   From: Tim HInes [mailto:nupe009@;carolina.rr.com]
> > >   Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 4:26 PM
> > >   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >   Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core Services &
> > Anti-Virus
> > >   
> > >   
> > >   Although antivirus programs can cause problems I would
> > advise that
> > > you run it on your servers.  The disasters that a virus can cause
> > > outweigh the problems that a virus scanner may cause.  It 
> > may save you
> > > from having to rebuild your boxes.
> > >    
> > >    
> > >   Tim Hines, MCSA, MCSE (2000 & NT4)
> > >   MVP - Active Directory
> > >    
> > >    
> > >    
> > >    
> > > 
> > >           ----- Original Message ----- 
> > >           From: Myrick, Todd (NIH/CIT) 
> <mailto:myrickt@;mail.nih.gov>
> > >           To:
> > > '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' 
> > >           Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 3:53 PM
> > >           Subject: [ActiveDir] AD and Network Core 
> > > Services & Anti-Virus
> > > 
> > > 
> > >           I have a quick question, Our operating
> > > procedures for Core Network Service (AD DCs, WINS, DDNS, CA, 
> > > Exchange (Antigen), DHCP) servers has been not to run with 
> > > Anti-Virus protection on them. We feel that the potential for 
> > > scanner code to conflict with the network service is higher if we 
> > > do, and since we don't execute man applications from the server 
> > > unless they are scanned we don't feel we are at
> > much risk.
> > > 
> > >           What I would like to know is, what does
> > > everyone on this list feel an is a good strategy when it comes to 
> > > these types of services and anti-virus product?
> > > 
> > >           Thanks in Advance, 
> > >           Todd
> > > 
> > > 
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> > List archive:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > This e-mail is confidential.  If you
> > are not the intended recipient, you must not disclose or use 
> > the information contained in it.  If you have received this 
> > mail in error, please tell us immediately by return e-mail 
> > and delete the document.
> > List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> > List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> > List archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> > 
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> 
> 
> 
> This e-mail is confidential.  If you 
> are not the intended recipient, you must
> not disclose or use the information contained in it.  If you 
> have received this
> mail in error, please tell us immediately by return e-mail 
> and delete the
> document.
> List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
> List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
> List archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%> 40mail.activedir.org/
> 
List info   : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm
List FAQ    : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/

Reply via email to