mailing list archives
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ?
From: "Schmehl, Paul L" <pauls () utdallas edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 10:18:06 -0600
From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 2:17 AM
To: full-disclosure () lists netsys com
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ?
In an corporate environment, you will have SUS or SMS
running. If so, no need for internet access.
I'm seeing statements like this more and more, on this list and others,
and it's really starting to bug me. (Not picking on you personally.)
Most of the attacks on corporate boxes come from the inside. Blocking
internet access does very little to protect you. Don't believe it?
Then explain how Slammer and Sobig and Mydoom and Nachi and Blaster
managed to spread in corporate environments that have very good
Putting up a firewall is one small step in a very large process that
gets you some semblance of security. You are not "safe" simply because
the firewall is up and running. All it take is *one* improperly
maintained box on the inside to be compromised/infected, and the hacker
is off to the races. What will SUS/SMS do for you then?
By all means, automate patching. But for god's sake, don't think that
once you've done that you're done! You've only just begun.
Paul Schmehl (pauls () utdallas edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? John . Airey (Mar 18)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Schmehl, Paul L (Mar 18)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? alwayssecure (Mar 18)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Ng, Kenneth (US) (Mar 18)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Random Letters (Mar 19)