[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20040924202542.S83135@dekadens.coredump.cx>
From: lcamtuf at ghettot.org (Michal Zalewski)
Subject: Windoze almost managed to 200x repeat 9/11
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, ASB wrote:
> "The servers are timed to shut down after 49.7 days of use in order to
> prevent a data overload, a union official told the LA Times."
>
> How you managed to read "OS failure" into this is rather astounding...
The statement above, even though either cleverly disguised by the
authorities, or mangled by the press, does ring a bell. It is not about
applications eating up too much memory, hence requiring an occassional
reboot, oh no.
Windows 9x had a problem (fixed by Microsoft, by the way) that caused them
to hang or crash after a jiffie counter in the kernel overflowed:
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q216/6/41.asp
It would happen precisely after 49.7 days. Coincidence? Not very likely.
It seems that the system was running on unpatched Windows 95 or 98, and
rather than deploying a patch, they came up with a maintenance procedure
requiring a scheduled reboot every 30 days.
This is one hell of a ridiculous idea, and any attempt to blame a failure
on a technician who failed to reboot the box is really pushing it.
It is not uncommon for telecommunications, medical, flight control,
banking and other mission-critical applications to run on terribly ancient
software (and with a clause that requires them NOT to be updated, because
the software is not certified against those patches).
In the end, the OS and decision-makers that implemented the system and
established ill-conceived workarounds should split the blame.
/mz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists