Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 14:59:31 +0100 From: Ceri <ceri@techsupport.co.uk> To: Adyas@twowaytv.com Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: uptime limits Message-ID: <20010521145931.A11873@cartman.techsupport.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20010521160524.I60364@everest.wananchi.com>; from wash@wananchi.com on Mon, May 21, 2001 at 04:05:24PM %2B0300 References: <911D8F660DF6D411B61F00500462BA01775914@exchange.twowaytv.co.uk> <20010521160524.I60364@everest.wananchi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 04:05:24PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington said:
> * Alex Dyas <ADyas@twowaytv.com> [20010521 15:36]: writing on the subject 'RE: uptime limits'
> > If you have an uptime of 497 days then you basically have a system riddled
> with security holes.
>
> This assumes that a reboot is necessary to apply a security patch. Is this
> necessarily the case? For instance, an upgrade of Bind to patch a hole
> wouldn't mean powering the system down would it?
No, but fixing anyone of the 10 exploits in the kernel category since Jan 10th
2000 (497 days ago) would. Yes, I have a list ;^)
Admittedly, I wasn't aware that there was a marketing spin to all this.
I can imagine the marketing department's spin on that already :
``Yeah well Apache's been fux0red for months and we can't get that sendmail
thing working properly but at least we didn't reboot yet.''
However, at the end of the day it's just an opinion.
Ceri
--
I probably wouldn't like you. Really.
I really probably wouldn't like you.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010521145931.A11873>