Re: Windows vs SQL
From: Mark Broadbent (nospamplease_mark.broadbent_at_virgin.net)
Date: 07/16/03
- Next message: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: Protecting my backup"
- Previous message: Adrian Hall: "Re: Saving DTS"
- In reply to: Sean: "Re: Windows vs SQL"
- Next in thread: Jasper Smith: "Re: Windows vs SQL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:43:56 +0100
see Jasper's reply. I would also add that with the sql security, the sa
account is a "known" entity in that a hacker knows that it exists and there
just has to worry about cracking the password wheras the Windows auth. users
could be called anything. Also the sql accounts will not lock out if there
are too many validation attempts (wheras Windows accounts will). Needless to
say a very long sa password using a combination of chars, numbers and
special chars would take a hacker a very long time to crack.
Sometimes you have to plump for the mixed authentication because of old apps
requirements.
-- BR, Mark Broadbent mcse+i, mcdba _________________________ "Sean" <seanmccown@srcp.com> wrote in message news:0b4e01c34b11$43140aa0$a001280a@phx.gbl... > thanks for your response, but that just doesnt make > sense... i have accountants, lawyers, etc in my company, > and they have varied rights on the lan... to say that i > would want a hacker to have any rights that these people > do is just unheard of... i wouldnt want anyone outside the > company to have access to a HR director's 'necessary' > resources... there has to be a better answer than that... > right? > sean. > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >The guidelines also indicate that the NT account should > not be given access > >to uncessary resources, making the admins point moot. > > > >"Sean" <seanmccown@srcp.com> wrote in message > >news:019e01c34b0b$402d4d20$a601280a@phx.gbl... > >> im always hearing that ms recommends trusted security > for > >> sql... but many admins i know prefer sql security > because > >> they say that if someone were to compromise a sql > >> password, they only have access to sql, but if they were > >> to compromise a trusted password, they would also have a > >> windows account to get onto the lan with... how does > this > >> fit into ms's model for recommending trusted security... > >> i mean... even with trusted security, i can go to dos > and > >> bring up any of my db tools with runas... so what does > >> trusted security buy me in this context, or what > >> mechanisms are in play to prevent this.... > >> > >> thanks, > >> sean. > > > > > >. > >
- Next message: Andrew J. Kelly: "Re: Protecting my backup"
- Previous message: Adrian Hall: "Re: Saving DTS"
- In reply to: Sean: "Re: Windows vs SQL"
- Next in thread: Jasper Smith: "Re: Windows vs SQL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|