lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <EB97064208FCE64688AB6167895157E42EDED5@wnt1.weeversweb.nl> From: fd at weevers.net (Full-Disclosure) Subject: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? > "Geo." <geoincidents@...info.org> wrote: > > > ... Even the stupid check tools assume you have the thing > on the net > > before it's patched. > > Yep, yet there are still MS apologists who refuse to open > their eyes so > as to understand that "Microsoft still shows little hint that > it 'gets' > security". > > > Regards, > > Nick FitzGerald In an corporate environment, you will have SUS or SMS running. If so, no need for internet access. If you don't have this, just place a firewall on the box, or before the box. How hard can this be ? You do it the same way, as you would do before you would patch debian/*bsd/gentoo/ect/ect/ect. There is no real problem here. Don't blame microsoft if you can't come up with solutions to simple security "problems". Niek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists