From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 29 07:02:58 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650CB16A4CE
	for <stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2004 07:02:58 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mandarin.fruitsalad.org (pc117.net160.koping.net
	[81.16.160.117])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D193443D2F
	for <stable@freebsd.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2004 07:02:57 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from matt@fruitsalad.org)
Received: from [192.168.15.6] (helo=[192.168.15.6])
	by mandarin.fruitsalad.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
	id 1BfCds-000BvU-Af; Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:02:56 +0200
From: Matt Douhan <matt@fruitsalad.org>
Organization: fruitsalad.org
To: David Magda <dmagda@ee.ryerson.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 09:02:47 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <200406281403.i5SE3SwS089871@lurza.secnetix.de>
	<200406281706.11188.matt@fruitsalad.org>
	<AF17FF84-C953-11D8-B70B-000A95B96FF8@ee.ryerson.ca>
In-Reply-To: <AF17FF84-C953-11D8-B70B-000A95B96FF8@ee.ryerson.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200406290902.47494.matt@fruitsalad.org>
cc: stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Maximum uptime 497 days?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 07:02:58 -0000

On Tuesday 29 June 2004 00.37, David Magda wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2004, at 11:06, Matt Douhan wrote:
> > why ?
> >
> > they may not be public machines at all and be isolated to an
> > environment where
> > security is not the primary concern
>
> Have you not seen the SSH exploit in "The Matrix Reload"?!?! :> How do
> you know some evil-doer wouldn't use an exploit from an internal
> system? Heck, Slammer nailed a couple of networks (e.g., ATM) that were
> supposedly secure in protected networks. No telling how a worm may jump
> fire/airwalls.

fairly easily, the systems in question is not connected to any firewalls nor 
does it have any outside connectivity, no modems, no serial cables no 
nothing, it is simply connected to a mainline pruction line and runs software 
that controls that system, single machine with no network at all, ssh is even 
disabled.

The point being that sometimes uptime is more important than security in some 
instances.

rgds

Matt