RE: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program

From: Byron Kennedy (byron@markettools.com)
Date: 10/05/01


Message-ID: <AD00D886F65D354CB2D08F8896DE6518B38E07@maileng.markettools.com>
From: Byron Kennedy <byron@markettools.com>
To: 'Wim Remes' <wim.remes@skynet.be>, "Arendt, Jordan ED0" <Jordan.Arendt@sasked.gov.sk.ca>, 'Paul L Schmehl' <pauls@utdallas.edu>, Byron Kennedy <byron@markettools.com>, focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:01:34 -0700 

I don't disagree agree with you in substance, especially in your last
paragraph, but why is it a stupid idea? Is it because, you say, "Most
Admins (at least the
very few that are concerned about security on their network) already use
programs or have developed techniques to push patches, etc to the
clients"? Oww yeah? We'll I consider myself a rather technical person, in
legal terms what you suggest is called "vague and presumptuous" - calling
for conclusions and lacks supportive evidence. I'd actually bet that many of
us security minded professionals, for many very valid reasons don't or
haven't developed these tools and where we have, perhaps see room for
innovation and improvement. So, back to your theory, do you also purpose
that we all use Antivirus packages and scanning engines that we integrate
ourselves via perl and c++ and never use the auto update features because
it's more secure to download the digitally signed/encrypted definitions
manually and distribute them ourselves - with our own tools? :)

Vendors natively providing security update automation isn't necessarily a
bad thing and neither is using our own tools internally. Sure such vendor
supplied tools could potentially have security issues, but so do all
connections to the intranet. Whatever tool you use, secure it. what about
md5, tls and ipsec? There are many ways to achieve the objective securely.
Microsoft, in their continuous efforts to supply us with integrated,
user-friendly tools, is now, offering another. I contend the tool is not
the security problem - it's the mentality. Why not write in about ways that
this software could be offered in the most secure manner possible? what an
asset that'd be to your peers!

cheers-byron

-----Original Message-----
From: Wim Remes [mailto:wim.remes@skynet.be]
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 11:26 AM
To: Arendt, Jordan ED0; 'Paul L Schmehl'; Byron Kennedy;
focus-ms@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program

That 2nd last paragraph is a really stupid idea. Most Admins (at least the
very few that are concerned about
security on their network) already use programs or have developed
techniques to push patches, etc to the
clients. I'm certainly not gonna pay for another M$ product when I can
handle updating of the clients with
a simple tool like KixTart !!!! That 'new' server product will in itself be
subject to vulnerabilities, poor programming,...
Let's imagine that a hacker succeeds in writing a virus that masks itself as
a MS-update, gets access
on the Local Update Server & sits back until the MS-server decides to
distribute it to every single client on your network...
That'd be fun ....

Security ain't a thing you can buy ! It is a service you provide to your
customers, something you work on every day &
last but not least something that should never be put back with the simple
question "Why would anyone target me?"

cheers,

Wim

-------------------------------------------------------------
I really don't wanna hear that Texan say "Make no mistake about it..." one
more time...
----- Original Message -----
From: Arendt, Jordan ED0 <Jordan.Arendt@sasked.gov.sk.ca>
To: 'Paul L Schmehl' <pauls@utdallas.edu>; Byron Kennedy
<byron@markettools.com>; <focus-ms@securityfocus.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program

> Read the second last paragraph:
>
> http://www.secadministrator.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=22751
>
>
> Jordan
>
> -------------------------
> <snip>
>
> But you're absolutely right. Updates at LAN speeds would sure be more
> convenient, especially in a "crisis" situation. The Internet isn't always
> "up". Our LAN is.
>
> <snip>
> > needed fixes. Oww yeah, and it could provide a web front-end like
> > windowsupdate. :) I'm sure someone besides me has thought of this. The
> > Windowsupdate site is a great interface to point users to, but we need a
> > local Server w/ LAN speed access.
>



Relevant Pages

  • RE: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program
    ... Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program ... I'll say that I don't see a place in my network for this kind of server, ... it is A TOOL that might have a place in your daily Security ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)
  • RE: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program
    ... Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program ... Admins (at least the very few that are concerned about security on their ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)
  • Re: 2003 & SQL 2000 clustering Memory
    ... > Apply security update MS04-032 ... For information about the Strategic Technology Protection ... > Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: 2003 & SQL 2000 clustering Memory
    ... Apply security update MS04-032 ... For information about the Strategic Technology Protection Program and to order your FREE Security Tool Kit, ... Microsoft highly recommends that users with Internet access update their Microsoft software to better protect against viruses and security vulnerabilities. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clustering)
  • Re: Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program
    ... Microsoft Announces Strategic Technology Protection Program ... Updates at LAN speeds would sure be more ...
    (Focus-Microsoft)