On Jul 9, 2004, at 7:28 PM, Dave Watts wrote:
>> I think I'll be able to come up with some good reasons, e.g.
>> we wouldn't have been hacked in April if we weren't using
>> IIS (!).
>
> If you were hacked in April, it might have been because you didn't
> configure
> IIS properly, not just because you were using IIS.
We were hacked because of a vulnerability that wasn't patched until the
day _after_ we were hacked. Of course we didn't discover it for a
while...
--
Damien McKenna - Web Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014
"Nothing endures but change." - Heraclitus
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
[Donations and Support]
- RE: IIS considers "blah.com" directories to be... Dave Watts
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" directories ... Damien McKenna
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" director... Jochem van Dieten
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" dire... Damien McKenna
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" ... Jochem van Dieten
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com&q... Damien McKenna
- RE: IIS considers "blah.c... Mark W. Breneman
- RE: IIS considers "blah.com" directories ... Dave Watts
- RE: IIS considers "blah.com" directories ... Dave Watts
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" director... Damien McKenna
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" directories ... Dan Farmer
- Re: IIS considers "blah.com" directories ... dmckenna