Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also?

Bill Gunshannon wrote:
In article <468ce6ad@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Mark Berryman <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Bill Gunshannon wrote:

In article <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B86840250A3EF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@xxxxxx> writes:

-----Original Message-----
From: bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon
Sent: July 5, 2007 12:43 PM
To: Info-VAX@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also?
=20
In article <90d24$468d09bd$cef8887a$5386@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Mr Main, with ragards to your patches issue.

In the late 1990s, the weenies would convince management to

deploy

Windows because it was a lot cheaper, there were a lot more

available

staff and it had an assured future. When asked if there was a

virus

problem, the answer would inevitably be "we'll set it up properly

and it

won't affect us".

By the time they got hit with I LOVE YOU or some other

debilitating

event, their deployment of windows was so entrenched that it was
impossible to change to a real OS so thet learned to live with it

and

try to minimise the damage.

Your story of Vista switching back to VMS because of a windows

virus is

very good, but unfortunatly rare.

=20
And probably not the whole (or even the real) story as what people
use
Vista for can not be done on VMS. Vista is a desktop operating
system,
not a server operating system.
=20
bill
=20

Bill...

mmm.. you missed the point.

The earlier URL points to a company called VISTA that packages or uses a
mission critical software package called SCADA on a number of platforms.
One of their Customers was running Windows Server and was down for 2
days because of a nasty virus. Subsequently, they have since switched to
OpenVMS on Integrity and by the report, the migration went very well.

Absolutely zero to do with client stuff.

OK, sorry. When one uses the terms "Vista" and Windows in the same
paragraph today certain assumptions are bound to be made. So then,
this just goes back to the original argument about someone was doing
with a servert hat allowed it to come in contact with a virus!! If
the VMS system is managed as badly as the Windows system obviously
was they are bound to have problems even with VMS. Not necessarily
the same problems, but problems and possibly security problems. No
OS is immune from the effects of incompetent sys admins.

If I read you correctly you seem to be claiming that only incompetently managed Windows systems get infected. If so, you are far from correct. There are many documented cases of systems being hacked and/or infected even though they were up to date on patches and running current antivirus software (as well as other protections).


There is a lot more to admining any system than just that. Starting
with a proper config.


Look up the impact of almost any zero-day exploit to name just one example.


I don't have to all I have to do is look at systems that are not being
hacked/zombied/infected. A properly admined IT system, no matter what
the OS, is going to be stable, secure and usefull. The reciprical also
applies, no matter what the OS.

The fact that the news is loaded with cases of systems being hacked only
points out the fact that with the proliferation of IT systems has come
a dearth of competent sysadmins. Just because you admined the 2 PC's in
your high school library when you were a sophmore doesn't make you a
sysadmin. Any more than the fact that you ran a web site on Linux
out of your dad's garage during the dot-com boom made you an "IT
Professional". Maybe, in the name of true investigative reporting,
the journals running these aryicles should also publish the credentials
of the parties responsible for maintaining the systems. Oh wait, if
we did that we would have to stop bashing Windows, Unix. Can't have
that now, can we.....

bill


If competent administration is all that is needed to prevent a system from
being hijacked, then why do you need *any* antivirus software at all?

And why do you *ever* need to apply any patches?












The answer, of course, is that a system exposed to a virus or an unpatched
exploit can get hacked anyway, no matter how competent the administrator.
Keeping up on patches and A/V is part of the job of the administrator.

But there is a race condition. What if the bad guy attacks before the
O/S vendor knows about the exploit, or the A/V vendor designs, implements
and distributes a test for it? Then you're up the creek. What are the
chances of this happening? Obviously, the more viruses and serious O/S
bugs, the greater the odds.





--
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also?
    ... On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon ... Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, ... Vista for can not be done on VMS. ... One of their Customers was running Windows Server and was down for 2 ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also?
    ... In article, bill@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon) writes: ... Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, ... Vista for can not be done on VMS. ... One of their Customers was running Windows Server and was down for 2 ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also?
    ... On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon ... Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, ... Vista for can not be done on VMS. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: PC Systems for sale
    ... you really need something else just to install VMS. ... however not running Windows or OSX. ... Alpha and Itanium boxes here and NO WEENDOZE. ... line ("it's Vista; there is no alternative") will not be able to make ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also?
    ... On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannon ... Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, ... Vista for can not be done on VMS. ... the VMS system is managed as badly as the Windows system obviously ...
    (comp.os.vms)