FAQ   Search   Memberlist  
Profile    Log in to check your private messages    Register    Log in
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BLAG Forum Index -> politics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jason
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 2:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

noldrin wrote:
Actually Windows server 2003 is probably the best they'll ever be. That OS has some pretense of security on a default install.

MS has actually done this before on sound cards to disable people being able to rip audio stream from their PC. So far no one has gone for it.


No way. Windows Server 2003 is only secure when not networked to any other machine, no keyboard or mouse plugged in and no power cable. Of all the IT support stuff I do Windows 2003 is always the culprit. Weird those people with Windows NT only have 1/10th of the problem. Those with Linux I never actually see because their systems don't break and thus I don't get called out lol. Once I install BLAG for someone, I never see them again as it just works.

noldrin
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Windows 2003 is way more secure than the Window servers that came before it. Keep in mind it still sucks in many ways, especially when compared to any other internet operating system. The biggest problem is IIS which is total crap. Linux is more secure, although there are still things you can do to it to make it more secure after most default installs. In general it has 1/10 the problems of Window servers.
Jason
PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

noldrin wrote:
Windows 2003 is way more secure than the Window servers that came before it. Keep in mind it still sucks in many ways, especially when compared to any other internet operating system. The biggest problem is IIS which is total crap. Linux is more secure, although there are still things you can do to it to make it more secure after most default installs. In general it has 1/10 the problems of Window servers.


Well I would still go with NT or 2000 over 2003 if I had to. I never ran IIS on a Windows server after a few early incidents so maybe my experience comes from removing IIS which to me is useless. I mean if I can break into it, then imagine what a real hacker who knows what he is doing could do. so I always stuck with Apache on Windows if I HAD to use Windows and getting asp pages to work with Apache isn't the easiest but once configured works fine. Given the choice I always went OpenBSD (with A LOT of help) or Slackware and most of my work places have used AIX. Now I use BLAG and try to get workplaces to do the same. I found that since I got myself a MacBook Pro I haven't had the need to use Windows at all. The 1% of times I need to check IE renders a page properly I boot up Windows inside OS X. I can do that with BLAG too :)

stevo32
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jason wrote:
Well I would still go with NT or 2000 over 2003 if I had to.


Why? Microsoft stopped providing updates for NT ages ago, 2000/2003 are a continuation of NT and in all likelihood are more secure. The reason you probably see so few problems with NT is that all installations have been around for a while so any issues they've been having have been straightened out.

Thanks,
Stephen Clement


_________________
E-mail me at s.clement@localhost (replace localhost with sympatico.ca) or stevo32@localhost (replace localhost with blagblagblag.org).
noldrin
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jason wrote:

Well I would still go with NT or 2000 over 2003 if I had to.


One issue is that NT and 2000 are no longer getting updates. But the bigger issue is that by default, they are installed with no real security. Everything is open and flapping in the breeze. With 2003, everything is installed closed, and you run wizards to open up the needed bits to run stuff. There are still some horrible security problems, such as if you turn on IIS ftp, you also turn on a brute force password checking service. Although these days you do get some security

Jason
PostPosted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jason wrote:
Windows Server 2003 is only secure when not networked to any other machine, no keyboard or mouse plugged in and no power cable.


People still try to exploit Windows 2003. Who tries to exploit NT nowadays? Security through obscurity is never the answer to any security problem but neither is a dodgy OS people still try to compromise more than any other. Any Windows server attached to the net is screwed. I would still rather stck NT behind a corporate firewall, turn off all services and run Apache than touch IIS ever. We will beg to differ on this but I have had more than enough crap with Windows 2003 to not want to touch it again. Of course we could all just BLAG which we do anyways :)

Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BLAG Forum Index -> politics Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Protected by Anti-Spam ACP