Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack
From: Denis Dimick <denis () dimick net>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
LMAO.. I see it now, your makeing a joke out of it.. On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Frank Knobbe wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 22:05, Denis Dimick wrote:They pretty much do. That is if the application is one that users have found worth supporting.Exactly. The responsible parties are doing their job. Now contrast that with commercial software.So can I assume that you would allow a vendor to remotely patch your system?Not remotely, but...Like I said, Do you REALLY want a vendor to install patches for you?Absolutely. Have them send a technician ON SITE. Have them STAY and fix the product until it is working. (Free of charge mind you... just like the free repair of a recalled water pump for your car). If applied patches crash the system further, it is the responsibility of that technician (representing the vendor) to get it back in working order. If he can't do that.... well.. since he is there, you can hold him accountable in any way you see fit. :) If we were able to mandate such a response, how long do you think it would take before out-of-the-box software quality improves suddenly?I think Frank that your starting to point out a problem for M$ and other vendors. They don't have the money to support there products any longer. M$ has somewhere like 20,000 payed programers, How many programers are working on open source products? 100,000 plus, maybe more. How do you expect a company like M$ to compete? I don't think they can.There are a lot of healthy, smaller commercial software shops out there that produce usable (and often surprisingly good quality) code. They typically also have good support and decent business ethics. Some larger vendors these days are more concerned with increasing their own wealth rather than producing good quality software. That's unfortunate. In case of Microsoft, I think that this company has grown to such proportions that it is starting to collapse on itself, much like the operating system they produce. If that is going to happen as quietly as a cheese soufle or as loud as a supernova remains to be seen (although it will be spectacular either way). The next 5-10 years will be interesting. Anyhow. my main gripe is the sale of broken products. I don't remember if that was NT4.0 or some other product, but the box came with the CD for the software, and a CD with patches. "Here, your purchase. It's broken. Fix it yourself while you install it." Regards, Frank
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack, (continued)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Maarten (Jul 03)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 06)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Ron DuFresne (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Maarten (Jul 03)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Nick FitzGerald (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Frank Knobbe (Jul 01)
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack joe (Jul 01)
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack joe (Jul 03)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Ron DuFresne (Jul 03)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Jason Coombs (Jul 04)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 08)