From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 15 21:15:40 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8E916AC37 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 21:15:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from pi.codefab.com (pi.codefab.com [199.103.21.227]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB6143D81 for ; Mon, 15 May 2006 21:15:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pi.codefab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F525E28; Mon, 15 May 2006 17:15:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at codefab.com Received: from pi.codefab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pi.codefab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uaAVHXK08+Sc; Mon, 15 May 2006 17:15:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.103.21.238] (pan.codefab.com [199.103.21.238]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pi.codefab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C823B5DF3; Mon, 15 May 2006 17:15:33 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20060515145152.V46728@server1.ultratrends.com> References: <20060515145152.V46728@server1.ultratrends.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <4D0ECFC4-7168-4CB8-A9EB-54C9A51D9EB3@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Swiger Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 17:15:32 -0400 To: TRODAT X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.750) Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List Subject: Re: Security Testing on Production Systems X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 21:15:42 -0000 On May 15, 2006, at 4:54 PM, TRODAT wrote: > This is a hot topic as of late where I work: > > Once a system has gone into 'production' should testing, > specifically security, be done on it if the system could be broken > by the test itself? > > What is your take on this issue and why? Yes, although you should schedule possible intrusive or disruptive security/pentesting for an appropriate time where you can afford to recover from any problems which occur. Most systems which fail under testing have sufficient issues that they fail under some naturally-occurring load conditions. Backups are your friends. -- -Chuck