Worm shuts down ALL Windows 2000 computers across the US?

[Fritzo]

It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Fritzo
It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

Never worked in a big shop have we?

Thank you Mr. Sarbane and Mr. Oxley. Where it is mandatory for a change to go through umpteen million reviews (as dictated by the SOX) before it can be implemented.

I'm sick of folks saying "their IT sucks" without any real world experience. Patching a few thousand machines is one thing. Patching tens of thousands of machines, guarding the 100s of other companies you are connected with all while following change control as mandated by auditing companies or else face full disclosure is another.

Cowboys aren't allowed in a large enterprise.

 

[Anubis]

nubw atill works

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo
It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

Never worked in a big shop have we?

Thank you Mr. Sarbane and Mr. Oxley. Where it is mandatory for a change to go through umpteen million reviews (as dictated by the SOX) before it can be implemented.

I'm sick of folks saying "their IT sucks" without any real world experience. Patching a few thousand machines is one thing. Patching tens of thousands of machines, guarding the 100s of other companies you are connected with all while following change control as mandated by auditing companies or else face full disclosure is another.

Cowboys aren't allowed in a large enterprise.

Systems Administator for Eaton Corp. for 4 years. Critical patches like this were to be tested and implemented within 48 hours.

I know the type "Oh...another patch came out. I'll get to it after we have a meeting about having a meeting about how many meetings we have." It's that type of work environment that slows things down, and I see it a lot on my current job. I'm sure CNN fell victim.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo
It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

Never worked in a big shop have we?

Thank you Mr. Sarbane and Mr. Oxley. Where it is mandatory for a change to go through umpteen million reviews (as dictated by the SOX) before it can be implemented.

I'm sick of folks saying "their IT sucks" without any real world experience. Patching a few thousand machines is one thing. Patching tens of thousands of machines, guarding the 100s of other companies you are connected with all while following change control as mandated by auditing companies or else face full disclosure is another.

Cowboys aren't allowed in a large enterprise.

Systems Administator for Eaton Corp. for 4 years. Critical patches like this were to be tested and implemented within 48 hours.

I know the type "Oh...another patch came out. I'll get to it after we have a meeting about having a meeting about how many meetings we have." It's that type of work environment that slows things down, and I see it a lot on my current job. I'm sure CNN fell victim.

guess you guys aren't public. If you are then name the auditors....I'd like to hire them so my group doesn't have to be handcuffed by SOX.

 

[thirdlegstump]

Overview

Apple has released Security Update 2005-007 to address multiple
vulnerabilities affecting Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, Safari web
browser, and other products. The most serious of these vulnerabilities
may allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. Impacts of
other vulnerabilities include bypassing security restrictions and
denial of service.

Yea OK, and how many Macs actually were affected to the point where a company went down? Zero. Ignore this troll.

 

[djheater]

Originally posted by: So
this win2k box is holding up fine

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: deathkoba

Overview

Apple has released Security Update 2005-007 to address multiple
vulnerabilities affecting Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, Safari web
browser, and other products. The most serious of these vulnerabilities
may allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. Impacts of
other vulnerabilities include bypassing security restrictions and
denial of service.

Yea OK, and how many Macs actually were affected to the point where a company went down? Zero. Ignore this troll.

you know, the funny part about that post of yours?

the fact that the companies werent running mac. hence why they didnt go down.

hence the "ZERO"

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo
It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

Never worked in a big shop have we?

Thank you Mr. Sarbane and Mr. Oxley. Where it is mandatory for a change to go through umpteen million reviews (as dictated by the SOX) before it can be implemented.

I'm sick of folks saying "their IT sucks" without any real world experience. Patching a few thousand machines is one thing. Patching tens of thousands of machines, guarding the 100s of other companies you are connected with all while following change control as mandated by auditing companies or else face full disclosure is another.

Cowboys aren't allowed in a large enterprise.

Systems Administator for Eaton Corp. for 4 years. Critical patches like this were to be tested and implemented within 48 hours.

I know the type "Oh...another patch came out. I'll get to it after we have a meeting about having a meeting about how many meetings we have." It's that type of work environment that slows things down, and I see it a lot on my current job. I'm sure CNN fell victim.

guess you guys aren't public. If you are then name the auditors....I'd like to hire them so my group doesn't have to be handcuffed by SOX.

Filling out paperwork just to request approvals to install security patches really bites. SOX SUCKS :|

 

[thirdlegstump]

Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1

Originally posted by: deathkoba

Overview

Apple has released Security Update 2005-007 to address multiple
vulnerabilities affecting Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server, Safari web
browser, and other products. The most serious of these vulnerabilities
may allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. Impacts of
other vulnerabilities include bypassing security restrictions and
denial of service.

Yea OK, and how many Macs actually were affected to the point where a company went down? Zero. Ignore this troll.

you know, the funny part about that post of yours?

the fact that the companies werent running mac. hence why they didnt go down.

hence the "ZERO"

Plenty of companies that rely on dependability run Macintosh. The Leader says so.

 

[EKKC]

it is pretty bad.

good story:
i left my previous employer 2 weeks ago. my current employer, a consulting firm has sent someone (basically a coworker now) in to resume my previous position so i work with her regularly to tell her the mess i left for her there. long story short, they were hit with this worm yesterday and whole network was down. the only one left running was my old IBM, which is running Windows XP because I reinstall it myself.

i had them thinking i was the one who set us up of a time bomb. all their base are belong to me

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo
It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

Never worked in a big shop have we?

Thank you Mr. Sarbane and Mr. Oxley. Where it is mandatory for a change to go through umpteen million reviews (as dictated by the SOX) before it can be implemented.

I'm sick of folks saying "their IT sucks" without any real world experience. Patching a few thousand machines is one thing. Patching tens of thousands of machines, guarding the 100s of other companies you are connected with all while following change control as mandated by auditing companies or else face full disclosure is another.

Cowboys aren't allowed in a large enterprise.

Systems Administator for Eaton Corp. for 4 years. Critical patches like this were to be tested and implemented within 48 hours.

I know the type "Oh...another patch came out. I'll get to it after we have a meeting about having a meeting about how many meetings we have." It's that type of work environment that slows things down, and I see it a lot on my current job. I'm sure CNN fell victim.

guess you guys aren't public. If you are then name the auditors....I'd like to hire them so my group doesn't have to be handcuffed by SOX.

Filling out paperwork just to request approvals to install security patches really bites. SOX SUCKS :|

Yes they were. DJI symbol is ETN (they're the largest supplier of pressure hoses and valves to auto manufacturers in the world). I haven't been there for 3 years though, but the policy was when a critical patch came out, it was to be tested in our simulator servers for 48 hours and then deployed.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: KLin

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Fritzo
It only shut down CNN's 2000 boxes because their IT dept sucks. MS released the patch last week and their IT probably had to run a zillion unneeded tests on it first before deloying it, and now they're paying for it.

Never worked in a big shop have we?

Thank you Mr. Sarbane and Mr. Oxley. Where it is mandatory for a change to go through umpteen million reviews (as dictated by the SOX) before it can be implemented.

I'm sick of folks saying "their IT sucks" without any real world experience. Patching a few thousand machines is one thing. Patching tens of thousands of machines, guarding the 100s of other companies you are connected with all while following change control as mandated by auditing companies or else face full disclosure is another.

Cowboys aren't allowed in a large enterprise.

Systems Administator for Eaton Corp. for 4 years. Critical patches like this were to be tested and implemented within 48 hours.

I know the type "Oh...another patch came out. I'll get to it after we have a meeting about having a meeting about how many meetings we have." It's that type of work environment that slows things down, and I see it a lot on my current job. I'm sure CNN fell victim.

guess you guys aren't public. If you are then name the auditors....I'd like to hire them so my group doesn't have to be handcuffed by SOX.

Filling out paperwork just to request approvals to install security patches really bites. SOX SUCKS :|

Yes they were. DJI symbol is ETN (they're the largest supplier of pressure hoses and valves to auto manufacturers in the world). I haven't been there for 3 years though, but the policy was when a critical patch came out, it was to be tested in our simulator servers for 48 hours and then deployed.

That's the way it should be. But with SOX around (wasn't a big issue 3 years ago) - tracking, documenting and auditing any change is a requirement for full compliance. Depending on the auditor you can get "emergency" changes through.

 

[Jzero]

Anyone here using SUS? Because it STILL does not appear in approved items although a note in the log seems to indicate it downloaded the patch.

 

[glugglug]

Using my Win2K box while the video card on my XP box is dead and I'm deciding whether to get a new AGP card or upgrade to PCI-E

No problems. This post is coming from another Win2K box at work.

 

[ATLien247]

I'm not all that familiar with SOX, but wouldn't the revenue losses from system down time exceed the penalties for failing to comply with SOX?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: ATLien247
I'm not all that familiar with SOX, but wouldn't the revenue losses from system down time exceed the penalties for failing to comply with SOX?

no. Failing to comply with SOX is a very, very bad thing and could cause a company's stock to plummet. Investors would lose trust.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

What a godsend for Microsoft! They have another reason to tell people: 'See? You need to upgrade to Windows XP - RIGHT NOW!!!"

 

[ATLien247]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: ATLien247
I'm not all that familiar with SOX, but wouldn't the revenue losses from system down time exceed the penalties for failing to comply with SOX?

no. Failing to comply with SOX is a very, very bad thing and could cause a company's stock to plummet. Investors would lose trust.

I was thinking more about the penalties imposed for not complying, not investor trust.

I would think informed investors would be more concerned with accounting practices and finanical reporting than applying critical security patches. Go figure.

 

[Biggerhammer]

Nah, I've got W2K and I'm sti <NO CARRIER>