Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ?
From: John.Airey () rnib org uk
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:34:14 -0000
-----Original Message----- From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu] Sent: Wednesday, 17 March 2004 19:52 To: John.Airey () rnib org uk Cc: full-disclosure () lists netsys com Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 16:46:58 GMT, John.Airey () rnib org uk said:From experience, you can't just lock down to that oneserver. You need toallow port 80 and 443 access to different servers. Each daythe list ofservers changes because of the Akamai caching that is used.I spend sometime configuring locked down systems to be able to talk tothem. So yes, itis an unreasonable request. On the other hand, access to Red Hat Network needs only oneport and one IPaddress. No doubt there's some serious load-balancing goingon in thebackground.If RedHat had the same "customers times patch frequency times average patch size" product that Microsoft has, they'd be an Akamai customer too...
Indeed they would, but still that would be one IP address and port per Akamai caching server. Have you ever looked at how many IP addresses you need access to with Windows Update? And please guys, stop cc'ing me. I'm on the list and have been almost since it started! - John Airey, BSc (Jt Hons), CNA, RHCE Internet systems support officer, ITCSD, Royal National Institute of the Blind, Bakewell Road, Peterborough PE2 6XU, Tel.: +44 (0) 1733 375299 Fax: +44 (0) 1733 370848 John.Airey () rnib org uk Shameless movie plug - go see the Passion of the Christ! - DISCLAIMER: NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it and any attachments from your system. RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RNIB. RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ?, (continued)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Geo. (Mar 17)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Nick FitzGerald (Mar 17)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Geo. (Mar 17)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? John . Airey (Mar 17)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Geo. (Mar 17)
- Re: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 17)
- Re: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Random Letters (Mar 17)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Full-Disclosure (Mar 18)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Nick FitzGerald (Mar 18)
- Re: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Jo Doe (Mar 18)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Random Letters (Mar 18)
- RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? John . Airey (Mar 18)
- Administrivia (was: RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? ) Nick FitzGerald (Mar 18)
- Re: Administrivia (was: RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? ) madsaxon (Mar 18)
- Re: Administrivia (was: RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? ) Nick FitzGerald (Mar 18)
- Re: Administrivia (was: RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? ) madsaxon (Mar 18)
- Administrivia (was: RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? ) Nick FitzGerald (Mar 18)
- Re: Administrivia Jason (Mar 18)
- Re: Re: Administrivia Frank Knobbe (Mar 18)
- Re: Re: Administrivia Spiro Trikaliotis (Mar 19)
- Re: Administrivia (very OT, but should be addressed) Cael Abal (Mar 19)
- Re: Administrivia (very OT, but should be addressed) Bruno Wolff III (Mar 19)
- Re: Administrivia (very OT, but should be addressed) Cael Abal (Mar 19)