mailing list archives
Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack
From: Denis Dimick <denis () dimick net>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:51:55 -0700 (PDT)
I think your barking up the wrong tree here. Any admin worth his/her
would at least keep up with security, and try to keep current on all the
required patches. There's very little reason to expect, let alone blame M$
for acting they way they have always acted.
As long as acting this way will make them money, then there going to keep
acting this way. If your really mad, then go after the retarded CIO's that
don't see antthing wrong with giving money to companies that act this way.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Frank Knobbe wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 15:58, TIERNAN RAY, BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM: wrote:
[...] Sites running Microsoft server software, such as the
Kelley Blue Book, were infected with malicious code.
``Our site was infected,'' said Robyn Eckard, a spokeswoman
for Kelley Blue Book, an automotive pricing site at
http://www.kbb.com. Users tipped off the site Wednesday that one
of 15 Web servers running Microsoft's IIS was infected, she said.
If this email is real (and the headers do look legit), I have to applaud
Kelley Blue Book for coming forward with this information. It takes a
bit of guts to make an announcement like this. But I don't think
Kelley's Admins are to blame.
Administrators should spend their time on keeping systems operating,
setting up jobs, and satisfying business requirements. They should not
have to spend their time fixing broken products.
No. The blame squarely falls on the manufacturers of broken products.
They should produce software that works. That includes QA, product
testing, due diligence etc. (Insert your favorite car analogy here)
I think we all have tolerated broken software products for too long. It
is high time to demand better products, or to select alternative
products. We need to stop accepting software riddled with flaws and
instead demand better quality software. No other products besides
software is purchased with flaws -- knowingly at least, and consumer
oriented organizations are making sure that consumers know about
defects. Why should software be different? Because it is more convenient
for the manufacturer and not the consumer to fix it after the sale? We
should start treating software like any other products. If it's broken,
the producer is required to fix it, not the consumer.
No, I do not blame the companies of compromised servers, nor their
admins. I blame the manufacturer of the product. So, with sympathy to
Kelley Blue Book, and all other companies that had been affected, I say
"Shame on you, Microsoft."
Instead of requiring the consumer to install patches, Microsoft should
be required to fix their own, broken products. That means that they
should send their army of engineers (a lot of which are now carrying the
CISSP certification) to the consumers and have their engineers correct
the flaws in their products. They sold flawed products, they should fix
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)