Just curious, but, has anyone ever heard of a firewall? I typically
defense in depth. security is multi-layered like an onion, or so people
have been touting for the last decade, so you keep systems up to date
and pay attention to host security as part of defense in depth... even
when you have a firewall.
bridges pass packets. if you assume a device passing packets (even when
the device is "inaccessable" as defined in this thread) never needs
patched... you are probably relatively safe, but you are not really
"correct". bugs may occur and patches may be necessary that affect the
bridging code itself, no? of course. again, the best way to make this
issue moot is to get a working patch mechanism that doesn't require a
reboot. talk about a HA pipe dream!
> I just think that "large uptime = bad admin" is a pretty shallow and
close minded way to stereotype people based on how long a machine has
been powered on without a reboot. Nobody said "1200 days without a
security patch! woohoo!"..
stereotypes never work. if you have good technical reasoning for what
you're doing, great. i think some people are just a little more "anal"
about security -- probably the same people getting paid to do security
stuff where they work. ;)