Again, another wonderful thing about life - intelligent people can prove
such by doing one simple thing - agree to disagree, and get on with the work
at hand.

However, idiots have a tendency to want to prove, by whatever ill-conceived
means or use of force (invasion or simply beating the crap out of someone
who has 'dissed you'), that "I'm right - deal with it."

William - I'm glad to find that you and I are in the intelligent group.  I
don't like having to look over my shoulder wondering when I'm going to be
get jumped....

;o)

Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 6:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] SUS does SPs now

Point taken.  And thanks.

I don't really consider IIS all that insecure, anymore.  
There are a lot of Small Business Servers out there, for example.

I'm only saying there are better reasons not to put SUS on a DC other than
the use of IIS.

I mean, Windows is a 'known problem'.

Carry on.

William Lefkovics
eEye Digital Security
http://www.eeye.com/html/Products/SecureIIS/index.html



 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 6:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] SUS does SPs now

William,

Let me clarify myself:

I don't FEAR IIS on a DC.  Just from a security perspective, I don't think
it's smart.  I don't see any reason to put a known problem on my domain's
authentication source, among other things.

Now, I might change my mind if we're talking about IIS 6.0, but likely not.
Least privilege access.  IIS is not needed on a DC, and is not part of what
a DC needs to do what it is designed for.

But, that's just me.  Wonderful thing about freedom - each is free to do
whatever he wants.  As long as it doesn't impede on the freedom of others,
have at it.

Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 8:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] SUS does SPs now

I agree with that premise of no SUS on a DC, though I have no fear of IIS on
a DC.

Domain controllers are special and should not get auto-anything in terms of
updates or other changes.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 11:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] SUS does SPs now

Raymond, 

Good question - I hope that I can provide a good answer.

I would NOT suggest or recommend deploying SUS to a DC for one simple
reason: It requires IIS, and for security purposes, I will not deploy IIS
onto a domain controller - which clearly dismisses a DC from hosting SUS
IMHO.

Rick Kingslan  MCSE, MCSA, MCT
Microsoft MVP - Active Directory
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
 

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