This sounds like an excellent topic for a presentation. Anyone want to
tackle it next month? We do not have a presentation scheduled and as such it
would be nice of someone came forward.

Trevor, interested?

Jarrod Major
CLUG Treasurer
Registered Linux User

----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor Lauder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: (clug-talk) Linux gets a worm!


> Even if you are running only services you want, those services still may
> require updating and monitoring.  If someone isn't keeping up on updates,
> etc and they get hacked because of it then they get what they deserve and
> I feel no sympathy for them.  Just because Linux/Netware are stable OSes
> doesn't mean they don't need babysitting (By this I mean: watching the
> logs, monitoring the network they are on).  The problem with the average
> NT/2000 or MCSE administrator is that Microsoft is promoting lazy/cheap
> administration.  A lot of those administrators that come over to linux
> bring those bad habits with them, and when something bad happens they
> blame it on the OS when the blame should in fact lie with themselves.
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> > One of the benefits of Linux is that it doesn't need to be babysat.
> >
> > I know this is an arguable thing, but I like that I set up a machine at
> > one of our remote locations, and it hasn't been signed into in well over
> > a year.
> >
> > It's fine to say "be on top of things", but I want a server that runs
> > like this...  http://www.networkcomputing.com/1119/1119f1products_2.html
> >
> > And I'll argue that exploit or not, this basically offers that ability.
> >
> > Unlike NT, Linux and Netware both run only services that you want them
> > to, rather than needing repeated security patches for things like MEDIA
> > PLAYER on a server.
> >
> > I wonder if anyone would notice if I used a Database server for watching
> > DVDs throughout the day.  Maybe, but then they do have GL screensavers
> > too.
> >
> > Kev.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Trevor Lauder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 12:22 PM
> > Subject: Re: (clug-talk) Linux gets a worm!
> >
> >
> >> Actually, worms under linux have existed for a while now... and even
> >> longer under unix.  As for this exploit, I really hope anyone here
> >> running SSL had that patched a while ago because the patch for that
> >> exploit came out about a month ago.  This exploit is targeting servers
> >> that haven't been updated in a at least a month and it's actually
> >> hitting lots of people, pretty sad when patches have been available
> >> for a while now.
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> > Hash: SHA1
> >> >
> >> > Finally Linux is worth the time for someone to make a worm. Easy to
> >> detect,  easy to defeat, and dose not affect my server but still a
> >> worm.
> >> >
> >> >
> >
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/security/Content/2002.09.13.ht
> > ml
> >> >
> >> > Yes I run Apache but I don't use SSL. If you run SSL you must read
> >> this. - --
> >> > Roy Souther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > http://www.SiliconTao.com
> >> >
> >> > Live to code, code to live!
> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >> > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
> >> > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
> >> >
> >> > iEYEARECAAYFAj2F83YACgkQCbnxcmEBt434oACgqPHbAWIcOBX6m7jOUZ2rsLJR
> >> 1YoAnRkdLTB42p8mS+WlaDuB5L7nV39+
> >> > =YkE6
> >> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to