Re: Preventing ALL text SQL Injection by removing single-quotes ?

From: Brad M. (anonymous_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 08/30/05 

Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:03:05 -0600

Seriously, you need to stop replying to messages this way. Personally, I'm
not going to go into debate with you as to whether or not your question was
answered. You don't have the right to tell anyone that they can convey
their opinions or experience onto you *AFTER AND ONLY AFTER* (doesn't *THIS*
get annoying???) they specifically answered the question that you asked.
Experts (and they are called that for a reason) are here to pass on their
knowledge and experience that they have gained in the real world to people
that haven't yet gained the same.

And, just to cover my bases...if you really are a well-intentioned,
unfortunately-placed (and albeit, poorly-mannered) programmer and just
happen to be working with a bunch of retards (no offense to anyone you work
with, just an example) who aren't letting you do your job properly - quit
now. Because WHEN this thing sh*ts the bed (and I say when because it's a
matter of time), they're gonna come a-lookin' for you, and then you're gonna
come lookin' for us for help - small world isn't it? In short, be polite.
Life is like a jar of jalapenos - what you do today, might burn your ass
tomorrow...

Cheers
Brad

"Susan S via SQLMonster.com" <forum@SQLMonster.com> wrote in message
news:5178FC9FE1E8E@SQLMonster.com...
>
>>depends on the language and environment.
>
> It's server-side vbscript/asp code... reading a MS-SQL 2000 database.
>
>>You need to start thinking in terms of Layers of defence.
>
> We can't possibly change all the existing layers of security... and lack
> of
> security... that
> we've had in place for the past 5 years.
>
>> What happens if you FORGET a Replace?
>
> Same thing that happens whenver you don't make something work properly...
> it
> doesn't work.
> (Nor would I expect it to.)
>
> Honest.. .we *ONLY* need one question answered today.
>
> *AFTER* you answer that... then you are free to wonder off on 40 other
> topics.
>
> (But I have no need for that info... we *ALREADY* have that info.)
>
>
> --
> Message posted via http://www.sqlmonster.com

Relevant Pages

  • Re: security scenario
    ... security is sufficiant like ... Not being smart or anything but what layers in this scenerio do you see ... install it is better to ... > open the case install the cd-rom, set the jumpers on cd-rom and IDE, ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • RE: security scenario
    ... Not being smart or anything but what layers in this scenerio do you see ... Subject: security scenario ... install it is better to ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • Re: Defense in depth: LSM *modules*, not a static interface
    ... cases would probably make sense as stackable security modules. ... Not allowing stacking means that, rather than creating modules which complement each other, certain layers need to be migrated into the mainline kernel code. ... For example small LSMs that provide hooks for Malware scanners, certain security improvements and POSIX capabilities could be stacked with other larger lsms rather than copying these techniques into all the large lsms or putting them into the mainline kernel. ... I personally think that AppArmor provides security improvements which are particularly suitable in some situations. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Online Armor Firewall?
    ... the windows for the shatter attacks are trivial to see with Spy++. ... I for one only post public advisories on Bugtraq, if the vendor fails to address the vulnerabilities appropriately. ... Vertically stacked independent layers with enforcable security policies increase security, because breaking the system requires breaking all intermediate layers. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • [fw-wiz] concerning ~el8 / project mayhem
    ... While not trying to spark a debate on the merits of or against full ... certainly it has been hashed over in this and other lists ... into the souls of some reputed security experts, leaving them to now, ... So, again, while not trying to spark that old full disclosure good/bad ...
    (Firewall-Wizards)