Actually, beta 3 was Oct 1999 but I never but /that/ build into
production :)). Started with RC1 in my "production lab" [1].

However, Exchange 2000 runs fine so far. It's already getting boring
messing always with this old stuff. Can't wait until the next beta comes
out in the future [2].
 
<Siegfried />

[1] "Production lab" because the license agreement didn't allow full
production usage ;-)
[2] No, I do not have any details when this will happen. So even don't
bother to ask ;-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 3:05 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> 
> ::runs screaming from room:: :)
> 
> But some of us know you are the man. I wouldn't trust some folks with
> that!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 5:53 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> 
> 
> ACK. Problem is that smaller companies sometimes can't afford to buy a
new
> machine. Hence they must do in place. But in my world in place doesn't
> exist
> either ;-)
> 
> Actually, I remember back in Exchange 2000 RC1 times in Feb 2000 I
started
> with each new beta build from scratch: Beta 3 => RC1 => RC2 => RTM.
> 
> I today celebrated two year Exchange 2000 production usage :-)
> 
> <Siegfried />
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 2:47 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> >
> > Ewwww In place upgrade :)
> >
> > I did say you could have both. With tweaking just as you explained.
> > But in place upgrades don't exist in my world, so that is why I do
it
> the
> > MS
> > way.
> >
> > Just different ways of doing things. Right?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 5:40 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> >
> >
> > If you look close to both, MS02-011 & MS02-012, you'll see that they
> both
> > point to the same patch for Windows 2000.
> >
> > Only MS02-011 includes a patch for the Exchange 5.5 IMS, not
MS02-012.
> >
> > You can have both, Exchange 5.5 IMS & Windows 2000 SMTP, on the same
> > machine. All you need to do is either:
> >
> > a) Change the Windows 2000 SMTP port from 25 to whatever you like
> > a) Or disable the Windows 2000 SMTP service
> >
> > I'd recommend always installing the Windows 2000 SMTP service and
> apply
> > any
> > patches related to it, because a possible inplace upgrade to
Exchange
> 2000
> > will be easier to accomplish.
> >
> > I'd also recommend to install Windows 2000 IIS and NNTP on such a
> machine
> > for the same reasons.
> >
> > <Siegfried />
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 2:33 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> > >
> > > Here is how I see it. You cant have both (well you can, but with
> > tweaking)
> > > on the same box.
> > > You either have the IMS, or the SMTP service. Unless you have a
> > separate
> > > IMS
> > > server, you should probably use 011.
> > > Remember, one specific task in the white paper for installing
Exch55
> > on a
> > > W2K server was to remove or not install the SMTP service.
> > >
> > > Customers who need the Windows 2000 SMTP services should apply the
> > Windows
> > > patch; all others should disable the SMTP service. Customers using
> the
> > > Exchange Server 5.5 IMC should apply the Exchange Server 5.5 IMC
> > patch.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 4:22 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> > >
> > >
> > > This one is giving me a headache -- I have Exch 5.5 running on a
> Win2k
> > > server. I'm looking for the fine print that tells me which patch
to
> > apply
> > > first, or at all, if any, or both. Your mileage may vary. Sigh.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:16 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: FW: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 6:05 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Alert:Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-012
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS02-012.asp
> > >
> > > Malformed Data Transfer Request can Cause Windows SMTP Service to
> Fail
> > >
> > > Originally posted: February 27, 2002
> > >
> > > Summary
> > >
> > > Who should read this bulletin: Customers using Microsoft(r)
> Windows(r)
> > > 2000 Server and Professional, Windows XP Professional and Exchange
> > > Server
> > 2000
> > >
> > > Impact of vulnerability:Denial of Service
> > >
> > > Maximum Severity Rating:Low
> > >
> > > Recommendation:Customers who need the Windows 2000 SMTP services
> > should
> > > apply the patch; all others should disable the SMTP service.
> > >
> > > Affected Software:
> > > - Microsoft Windows 2000
> > > - Microsoft Windows XP Professional
> > > - Microsoft Exchange 2000
> > >
> > > Technical description:
> > >
> > > An SMTP service installs by default as part of Windows 2000 server
> > > products. Exchange 2000, which can only be installed on Windows
> 2000,
> > > uses the native
> > > Windows 2000 SMTP service rather than providing its own.  In
> addition,
> > > Windows 2000 and Windows XP workstation products provide an SMTP
> > service
> > > that is not installed by default.  All of these implementations
> > contain a
> > > flaw that could enable denial of service attacks to be mounted
> against
> > the
> > > service.
> > >
> > > The flaw involves how the service handles a particular type of
SMTP
> > > command used to transfer the data that constitutes an incoming
mail.
> > > By
> > sending a
> > > malformed version of this command, an attacker could cause the
SMTP
> > > service to fail. This would have the effect of disrupting mail
> > > services on the affected system, but would not cause the operating
> > > system itself to
> > fail.
> > >
> > > Mitigating factors:
> > > - Windows XP Home Edition does not provide an SMTP service, and is
> not
> > > affected by the vulnerability.
> > > - Windows 2000 Professional and Windows XP Professional do provide
> an
> > SMTP
> > > service, but it is not installed by default.
> > > - Windows 2000 server products do install the SMTP service by
> default.
> > > However, best practices recommend disabling any unneeded services,
> and
> > > systems on which the SMTP service had been disabled would not be
at
> > risk.
> > > - Exchange 5.5, even if installed on a Windows 2000 server, is not
> > > affected by the vulnerability.
> > > - The result of an attack would be limited to disrupting the SMTP
> > service
> > > and, depending on the system configuration, potentially IIS and
> other
> > > internet services as well.  However, it would not disrupt any
other
> > system
> > > functions.
> > > - The vulnerability would not enable an attacker to gain any
> > privileges on
> > > the affected system or to access users' email or data.
> > >
> > > Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2002-0055
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This email is sent to NTBugtraq automatically as a service to my
> > > subscribers. Since its programmatically created, and since its
been
> a
> > long
> > > time since anyone paid actual money for my programming skills, it
> may
> > or
> > > may
> > > not look that good...;-]
> > >
> > > I can only hope that the information it does contain can be read
> well
> > > enough to serve its purpose.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Russ - Surgeon General of TruSecure Corporation/NTBugtraq Editor
> > >
> > >
> >
>
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> > oo
> > > oo
> > > Delivery co-sponsored by Qualys - Make Your Network Secure
> > >
> >
>
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> > oo
> > > oo
> > > Go Beyond PARTIAL Security: FREE White Paper
> > >
> > > Stop hassling with half-baked ENTERPRISE SECURITY.
> > > FREE White Paper shows you how to ensure TOTAL security for your
> > Internet
> > > perimeter with the most current and most complete PROACTIVE
> > Vulnerability
> > > Assessment solution. Get your FREE White Paper now. Click here!
> > > https://www.qualys.com/forms/techwhite_86.html
> > >
> >
>
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> > oo
> > > oo
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to