Of course, this is not a bug, but bad admin/dbadmin practise, for which there are no patches available.
thanks, Ron DuFresne On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, lsi wrote: > platforms affected: all > distribution of threat: wide > severity of threat: potentially serious > leadtime: 6.3 years :) > > I noticed one of my customers using the "special" date of 11/11/11 in > their database. > > I've since realised this practice might be quite widespread, and > indeed warrants an alert than on or around the 11th of November 2011, > some crazy things might happen, as folks' "special" dates collide > with the real date of 11/11/11. > > For this customer 11/11/11 in the date field means, don't process > this record, which will obviously cause problems with legitimate > transactions on that date. > > I suspect using a new field to flag a state, instead of "special" > data, would have been more appropriate. > > Apologies if this is old news for you. > > Stu > > --- > Stuart Udall > stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED] net - http://www.cyberdelix.net/ > > --- > * Origin: lsi: revolution through evolution (192:168/0.2) > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ > -- "Sometimes you get the blues because your baby leaves you. Sometimes you get'em 'cause she comes back." --B.B. King ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!*** OK, so you're a Ph.D. Just don't touch anything. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
