Helge Hafting <[email protected]> writes:
> .. but at least fixes appear a lot faster for linux. That alone
> don't usually leave enough timespan for a large-scale exploit.
I wouldn't count on time, regardless of the OS. How about 15 minutes
to infect all vulnerable hosts on the Internet? See:
<http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/warhol.html>
--
Manfred Bartz
> Helge Hafting <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > .. but at least fixes appear a lot faster for linux. That alone
> > don't usually leave enough timespan for a large-scale exploit.
Someone forget bind and rpc.statd worms of about 6 months ago?
Or, the exploitability of ntp?
--
-- John E. Jasen ([email protected])
-- In theory, theory and practise are the same. In practise, they aren't.
> > > .. but at least fixes appear a lot faster for linux. That alone
> > > don't usually leave enough timespan for a large-scale exploit.
>
> Someone forget bind and rpc.statd worms of about 6 months ago?
With bind, the admin could have patched his bind before the worms came
alive, he could have upgraded to a new major release, he could have run
bind not as root, and he could have run bind chrooted. (for 'he' you can
also read 'she').
This for sure was not the fault of the os.
Ookhoi