Dan wrote:
Yes, some updates can be problematic. But in this case, surely,
there were updates during the year that worked just fine. In most
cases, tho, I'm thinking the people complaining slacked off
completely - unlike you, they didn't even bother to test the
releases.
And cf todays thread (LibClamAV Error: Can't load), which can be
summararised as :
It was working fine
You broke it for me
I've installed an update to try and fix it and now it's even more broke
The only difference had the user done the update last week would be -
he had a working system, he upgraded it, it's now broken and he has
downtime as a direct result of the upgrade.
Those two lines look fairly clear to me. Essentially they're
telling you to get moving, get the update onto your to-be-done list.
OK, so it suggests an upgrade would be a good idea. I've yet to see
any explanation of where in that message (or the page referenced) it
sets a deadline, where it says anything will die, and that this will
be a deliberate act of sabotage.
Yea, I agree, the Clam team probably could have done things better.
But would more announcements or warnings have really made a
difference? Why would the people, that regularly ignore the
Freshclam warnings, pay attention?
Actually, I believe at least some of those complaining here would
have done. **HAD I KNOWN** about this killer update, then I would
have applied pressure on management to give me the resources to roll
out the new build I have - that's all I'm waiting on in order to be
running completely up to date versions of everything - and because
it's more than one server, in future I'll be able to update (one at a
time) with less risk.
OTOH, I wonder how many of these upset admins have taken even
partial responsibility - by admitting to their bosses that they
failed to apply any updates to a critical piece of software, for
over a YEAR?
I have - that probably surprises you. Can't speak for anyone else.
Dan wrote:
They do not have any right to deliberately mess with a running system...
Please explain this "right" that makes thy system so sacrosanct.
I've never heard of that.
May I suggest that you'd change your tune if your house was ransacked
and the burglar defended his action on the basis that he'd kept a key
from before you bought the house and he's left a note (somewhere you
probably wouldn't see it) telling you to upgrade your locks or else ?
My servers are my property (or that of those I manage them for). No
third party has the right (legal or moral) to interfere with that
unless there is a contractual agreement that they can do so - and
then only in ways allowed by that arrangement.
In this case, there's an implicit agreement between admins/operators
and the ClamAV team that allows the ClamAV team to apply AV signature
updates - this being implicit by the admin running Freshclam. In no
way can pushing a poison pill designed to stop the service be
considered a "normal AV signature" update.
The Clam team had one and only one responsible choice: to remove
the aged product from service before it became a road hazard, er a
liability around their necks.
No, that is NOT their responsibility, nor their right.
Not only that, it's inconsistent with the attitude expressed here
towards people running old software.
Contrast :
1) No-one should be running old software, they deserve all they've got.
2) We can't allow people to run old software, our only option is to
kill it to protect people from themselves.
OK, lets suppose that a car manufacturer finds out that one of their
old models, of which there are many still in use, has a defect that
could potentially expose the user to a higher risk of <something>. In
this country, and in the US I believe, there is a system for a recall
if it's serious enough - or the manufacturer can put adverts in
appropriate places to warn the user.
Have you ever heard of the manufacturer deciding that the only
responsible way is to go round with a fleet of lorries (trucks), lift
the old vehicles off the owners drives without even ringing the
doorbell, and take them off to the crusher ?
They have a right, and a responsibility to try and make as many
owners/users aware of the risks - but it is still the owner/users
decision on whether that risk is acceptable TO THEM.
They were even nice enough to give months of warnings.
The efficacy of such is subject to a certain amount of debate.
--
Simon Hobson
Visit http://www.magpiesnestpublishing.co.uk/ for books by acclaimed
author Gladys Hobson. Novels - poetry - short stories - ideal as
Christmas stocking fillers. Some available as e-books.
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
