Author Topic: Skuzzy... did HTC get hit by... (Read 816 times)

Mini D · « **on:** January 27, 2003, 11:20:48 AM »

The SQL worm virus? Intel is still reeling from it.

MiniD

Skuzzy · « **Reply #1 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:00:30 PM »

We do not use any MS server technology. The worm only exploits a feature(?) of MS SQL 2000.

HP got nailed also.

sling322 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:08:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
HP got nailed also.

Tell me about it. I work for a call center that supports HP parts ordering after-hours and weekends. HP is still struggling with getting all of their systems back up and running correctly.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #3 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:18:24 PM »

It's rather mind boggling, to me, that such large companies would trust a MS server for thier business.

I feel for you guys. Has to be frustrating.

vorticon · « **Reply #4 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:21:19 PM »

im suprised at the amount of people that use ms in there homes (myself included)

Eagler · « **Reply #5 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:24:23 PM »

seems strange Ford can be sued for the tires they use but MS gets off scott free after selling buggy- full of holes software which cause the loss of millions of dollars to major corps .... go figure

Animal · « **Reply #6 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:38:53 PM »

I remember the nights of the attack. The whole web was slow as hell.
And Bill Gates still underestimates what a group of organized hackers can do.

Dennis · « **Reply #7 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:39:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
seems strange Ford can be sued for the tires they use but MS gets off scott free after selling buggy- full of holes software which cause the loss of millions of dollars to major corps .... go figure

mebby cuz ..... nobody died?

Splash1

Skuzzy · « **Reply #8 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:41:15 PM »

Whoa.....I was only stating my surprise. I did not mean for this to be about bashing MS.

I am sure the IT folks at these companies knew about the potential problems as they are pretty well documented, but made the choice based on the feature set and corporate bought off on it.

I just feel for the innocent employees who got caught in the middle of it.

Let's not turn this into a crusade gentlemen. Thank you.

SOB · « **Reply #9 on:** January 27, 2003, 02:43:58 PM »

Unless vandals went out and slashed all of the tires on the Ford autos, your analogy isn't very accurate. On the other hand, screw Microsoft!

SOB

Wlfgng · « **Reply #10 on:** January 27, 2003, 03:19:00 PM »

the reality is that if 'they' got infected, they didn't keep up with the patches. there was a fix available sometime last summer for this.

on the other hand, I'd never trust MS servers on the web.
they are the target of most attacks lately
especially sql

bloom25 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 27, 2003, 07:58:02 PM »

Can you guys believe that Microsoft is rumored to be about to launch an ad campaign touting their superior stability and lower cost of ownership than Linux based products?

If that's true, maybe they should try to run their own Hotmail service using Microsoft software again.

I have to say that Windows 2000 and XP are much better than the DOS based 9x OSes as far as stability, but Microsoft software has never been secure.

Is it just me, or does it seem to others here that the quality of software in general as far as bugs go is MUCH worse now than it was a few years ago?

Vulcan · « **Reply #12 on:** January 27, 2003, 09:25:59 PM »

Would it not be fair to say though...
- MS gets targeted more than Linux/Unix boxes?
- there are more MS boxes to hit?
- the media never jumps on Linux/Unix worms when they hit?

My firewall gets just as many probes for Linux flaws as it does MS security flaws.

Mini D · « **Reply #13 on:** January 27, 2003, 10:38:12 PM »

Apache had to take down their "never been hacked" claim.

Part of MS's problem is that they keep "upgrading" so often that they can't keep up with themselves. One of the nice things about LINUX is the use of time-tested programs.

MiniD

Skuzzy · « **Reply #14 on:** January 28, 2003, 09:12:46 AM »

Vulcan, even MS admits there is no way they can make a Windows OS secure, by the very architecture of the software it cannot nor ever will be secure.

MiniD is right about maturity. Almost all the software running around the UNIX kernels has had the benefit of many more man years of work and exposure than the comparable MS supplied software.

In the server market on the Internet, UNIX and its derivatives still occupy the lion share of the deployments (over 70% if I recall).
If you toss in desktops, then MS is the winner.

There are inherent security problems in MS OS's that are simply not in a UNIX OS.

But, if you just install UNIX and don't bother setting up the security, then you are no more protected than a MS OS.