[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fw: [Full-Disclosure] Sasser author
- To: full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Fw: [Full-Disclosure] Sasser author
- From: Nick FitzGerald <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 14:36:22 +1200
William Warren to Paolo Mattiangeli's grizzle about being Sasser'ed at
home:
> any firewall even the one inside xp would have stopped sasser and you
> would have been able to patch at your leisure.
And, depending on your network architecture, it can be even easier than
that. Why would any vaguely competent system admin even have the
services that Sasser depends on bound to their Inernet-facing network
interface in the first place??
Yeah -- I know, ethernet to DSL/cable/satellite/etc which doubles as
the "house LAN" interface. So far all the SOHO users I've helped clean
up Sasser have been on dial-up so why does MS still insist on binding
MS client (and F&P ??) to dial-up interfaces by default?
--
Nick FitzGerald
Computer Virus Consulting Ltd.
Ph/FAX: +64 3 3529854
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html