dinke:
Kupusara nije opšte prihvaćen termin za Linux, već ga degojs [...] tako zove. :)

degojs: Vala, nešto se češće vidi kod tebe "OS: Windows XP", nego "OS: Kupusara" kod mene :)

Inače, po duhu u kom se razvija kupusara, više bi baš njoj pristajao naziv "Trabant" nego Windowsu. Čisto da se setimo DDR-a i ostalih lepih stvari koje nam je svojevremeno darovao propali sistem..

Nego, da se vratimo na temu: Deki, još samo da isključimo firewall, pa da pričamo o sigurnosti sistema.. Samo firewall, ništa više :)

degojs: Ma piše i u ovom članku to što piše, a onda piše da treba isključiti firewall da bi to radilo :))) Samo firewall Deki, ništa drugo.. hehe.

Bojim se da od svega ostaje priča kojom se Linuxovci teše kako su pametni što koriste kupusaru.

In short, MOM 2005 delivers enterprise-class operations management to improve the efficiency of IT operations. Now you can spend less time managing crises and more time delivering new services to your business.

The Microsoft Operations Manager 2005 agent does not install on computers that are running Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2) and Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 1 (SP1)
CAUSE
This issue can occur if Windows Firewall is running on the destination computer or on the MOM server computer. If Windows Firewall is running on a MOM server computer, MOM agents cannot communicate with the MOM Server. If Windows Firewall is running on a destination computer, or a potential MOM agent, the MOM server cannot perform a push installation of the agent.

By default, Windows XP with SP2 turns on Windows Firewall. By default, Windows Firewall is not turned on in Windows Server 2003 with SP1.
WORKAROUND
Warning This workaround may make your computer or your network more vulnerable to attack by malicious users or by malicious software such as viruses. We do not recommend this workaround but are providing this information so that you can implement this workaround at your own discretion. Use this workaround at your own risk.

Neko radio sa Microsoft Operations Manager 2005?

Need to get 48.2MB of archives.

but the reality is this vulnerability happened after SP2 was released.

Actually no, this vulnerability showed up 8 years ago and was patched in Windows 98 I believe. So this isn't something new that Microsoft is just now learning about and need to fix, it's something quite old. Since the vulnerability came out ME, 2000 and XP all were released.

Perhaps they setup a firewall to allow them to fix things underneath without totally destroying everyone's networks?

If you're trying to say that MS feels that having the firewall on by default in XP SP2 is a shortcut for fixing problems, well, I certainly HOPE they're not taking that attitude. Yes the firewall needs to be on by default for better security, but they should have tested the OS against known vulnerabilities with the firewall off to be certain they wouldn't work. Failure to do so shows some serious problems in MS land.

When you have as large of an installbase as MS does you can't shift things right away or you will lose customers, you have to make changes slowly and incrimentally so that users don't get confused.

You seem royally confused about what this actually is. Land is a DOS attack that is caused by sending a SYN packet to an open port on a machine with the source and destination addresses the same. This isn't something that is _needed_ by any app, it's a TCP/IP oddity, a packet that would normally never occur. Back 8 years ago it was understandable that MS and others didn't anticipate this attack, but after 8 years there's not any excuse.

Simply this is not something users are going to notice the lack of. They'll certainly notice it's there if their machines gets hit with a Land attack though. It is NOT a case of MS trying to make changes slowly to not confuse customers, it's a big blunder.

MS has been working a lot on connectivity over the last year or so with some protocol enhancements and increased IPv6 support. I imagine things are going to get worse before they get better, but don't kid yourself, they are working on fixing it.

Frankly if their "working on fixing it" involves re-introducing exploits first identified and fixed 8 YEARS ago then I'm certainly not going to hold my breath that they'll ever fix anything.

Ultimately though your defense of MS is unwarranted. They publically declared a while back (1-2 years now I think) that security was going to be a primary focus for them. This was pre-SP2 days. That they re-introduced a vulnerability from eight years ago speaks great volumes about that focus. If MS wants to claim they're security-focused now they deserve the lumps they get for foolish mistakes like this.

A box running no services should be not vulnerable of any dos except brute force even without a firewall. A firewall shouldn't be a solution to poor design/implementation problems and code bugs. That is simply not working. What if someone gets through the firewall?

Anybody with a web server must accept incoming syn packets. If they are "protected" by something like:

permit tcp any host 1.2.3.4 eq 80

Then they are probably vulnerable.

Hvala bogu pa si ti radio. Ma šta radio, držao u ruci..

zato moraš i da kopaš po MSDN-u ne bi li našao nešto izgleda. Usput, malo si promašio i temu - nije baš da ovde pričamo o testiranju..

Vidi, malo su neukusni ovakvi komentari.

U MS bi trebalo da se zna red.

Kakav to finalni proizvod izlazi na trziste?
U MS bi trebalo da se zna red. Softverski proizvodi iz ove kuce postaju sve obimniji i kompleksniji, vrlo je moguce da se stvari ortgnu kontroli. Prethodni post to pokazuje. Za sve a pogotovo za sigurnost je potreban pedantan i pazljiv rad, izuzetno poznavanje materije, odlicna metodologija rada i modeli testiranja.. itd itb.

The following packages have been kept back:
libgtkmm-2.4-1

...and 1 not upgraded.

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libgtkmm-2.4-1: Depends: libatk1.0-0 (>= 1.9.0) but 1.8.0-4 is to be installed

E: Broken packages

degojs:
Dobro, od ovoga možemo da odbijemo 7 MB od zadnji put, jer sam u međuvremenu vratio "sliku" bez tog zadnjeg apdejta. Dakle, još 40 MB. Nije loše :) Ili će biti da ja izmišljam :))

cuj od tih 40 mb updajtea mozda nesto i bude

Kako tako olako "trebao bi da se zna red" - da nisi ex-MS zaposlen, ili imas podatke iz industrijske spijunaze pa znas da tamo vlada haos a ne red?

Da li neka kompanija sa dinamikom razvoja kao MS i sa takvim trzistem ima vidno bolje Q&A rezultate i manji broj bagova po liniji koda? Voleo bih da znam primere, posto mi to sve nekako nestvarno deluje.

MS ima odlican/komentarisan kod.

Sundance:
I zato linux sux :)