16 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-advocacyuptime 4.0| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Steve Bertrand | Dec 2, 2003 12:26 pm | |
| Tom Rhodes | Dec 2, 2003 12:30 pm | |
| Eric Anderson | Dec 2, 2003 12:30 pm | |
| Steve Bertrand | Dec 2, 2003 12:33 pm | |
| Eric Anderson | Dec 2, 2003 12:35 pm | |
| Steve Bertrand | Dec 2, 2003 12:41 pm | |
| Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg | Dec 2, 2003 12:53 pm | |
| twig les | Dec 2, 2003 1:47 pm | |
| Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg | Dec 3, 2003 1:48 am | |
| Paul Robinson | Dec 3, 2003 5:10 am | |
| Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg | Dec 3, 2003 5:48 am | |
| Dan Langille | Dec 3, 2003 5:51 am | |
| Eric Anderson | Dec 3, 2003 6:03 am | |
| Mike Hoskins | Dec 3, 2003 4:15 pm | |
| Mike Hoskins | Dec 3, 2003 4:24 pm | |
| Daniela | Dec 4, 2003 10:52 am |
| Subject: | uptime 4.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Mike Hoskins (mi...@adept.org) | |
| Date: | Dec 3, 2003 4:24:55 pm | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-advocacy | |
Eric Anderson wrote:
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. ;)
peace.