Worm Attack

Discussion in 'Trading' started by candletrader, Jan 25, 2003.

  1. Loosen up my friend... its just our old, friend TradeRX, dropping in for a chat...
     
    #41     Jan 26, 2003
  2. Your right brother candle, after I sent the post, I immediately thought of TraderX-- he has what one might call a definitive style.
     
    #42     Jan 26, 2003
  3. sunnie

    sunnie

  4. igsi

    igsi

    That story is just another bullshit.

    "The attack was detected by the FBI shortly after it was launched on Saturday, limiting the damage."
    "At least five of the internet's 13 major hubs were targeted in Saturday's attack."
    "the attack also disabled some trans-Atlantic internet and phone service"

    Disgusting baloney...
     
    #44     Jan 26, 2003
  5. sunnie

    sunnie


    "Whatever....":) :) :) You know the saying:

    "Don't believe anything you hear and half of what you see":D
     
    #45     Jan 27, 2003
  6. Why would it be bullshit? How do you know so much about this worm?
     
    #46     Jan 27, 2003
  7. igsi

    igsi

    Those three quotes clearly indicate that the author does not know what he is talking about and is making pitiful attempt to squeeze another story out of rumors and his own ignorance.

    My area of expertise is system administration and networking.
     
    #47     Jan 27, 2003
  8. igsi

    igsi

    That article is much more decent than the BBC's one. The exception is that it says "Experts fear Monday could bring new outbreaks" without providing references to experts who fear that. Then, it says "Monday could bring more problems as businesses boot up their computers for the week". Anyone with little IT operations understanding would laugh at that statement. SQL servers which were affected by that worm is "always-on" type of equipment. That's why so many of them were hit on Saturday. A few small shops that turn their servers off for a weekend and turning them on this Monday will have virtually no effect. Yes, such servers will go online but no expert would fear that because the effect is too insignificant.
     
    #49     Jan 27, 2003
  9. CalTrader

    CalTrader Guest

    look, this is no big deal .... except to point out that system admins often do not execute their job responsibilities correctly. If a company or individual has an internet facing system that opens the sql server ports and that allows any kind of direct, unfiltered access to a database server then there is a need to get the system admin trained on how to secure the companies systems - or get another system admin.

    It is remarkable how many people and even companies do not recognize that they need to use hardware and software firewalls on internet systems, and that for applications they need to secure access: this includes sql servers, oracle etc etc etc.

    There is no excuse to allow a poorly written internet facing application in production: a properly written application would not be vulnerable to this problem and the application of the patch for buffer overruns would not be neccesary ....
     
    #50     Jan 27, 2003