Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: Windows Vista current flaws |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 29 Sep 2005 06:47:56 -0500 |
You clearly are not protecting against one of your students running attack programs, network scans, etc. - since they own the computer they obviously have root access. So, what is it that you are 'protecting' against anyway? Are you trying to protect the unsophisticated computer user from being attacked and exploited? If so, your minimum standards probably do hit that target. But this is NOT an unsophisticated user. And if s/he wants to run beta software, then why do you care. Perhaps purely for informational purposes? If so, you can easily add a notification clause to the network access agreement. You've already got something like this, right? "Student agrees that any operating system software run on any host connected to our network will be legally acquired. For protection of yourself and other students we require you to obtain and apply all security patches for your operating system." "We actively monitor the network and will - without notification - disable your network port or suspend your network access if we observe any hostile or unusual activity origination from your computers." So add: "In the event student chooses to run beta or other pre-release software, s/he will notify network services via email of the nature and version of such operating system software at least 24 hours prior to installation. Student assumes all risks for using any (not just operating system) beta or pre-release software, and we do not provide any support for such beta or pre-release software." -----Burton -----Original Message----- From: Lance.Druger@wellsfargo.com [mailto:Lance.Druger@wellsfargo.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 5:39 PM To: security-basics@securityfocus.com Subject: RE: Windows Vista current flaws This is a residence hall, and not a "work" environment. If this was a bank or other corporation I'd agree with that, but these are students in a dorm room. I still think that there should be some flexibility. Just my 2 cents. Lance Druger -----Original Message----- From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:michealespinola@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:28 AM To: security-basics@securityfocus.com Subject: Re: Windows Vista current flaws Beta software should not be allowed to run unchecked in a production environment. On 9/27/05, Jon Lawhead <samurai@berkeley.edu> wrote:
Greetings all, I work in Network Security for UC Berkeley's residence halls. We have
a list of several "minimum
security standards" that we require all connected computers to meet
before being allowed access to
the network (stuff like having a firewall program, antivirus, etc).
One of the standards involves
having the latest patched version of a secure operating system. I
have a user on the network who
wishes to run a (legitimately acquired, or so he says) version of
Windows Vista beta version.
Before I decide on this, I wanted opinions on whether or not this is a
good idea. My first
instinct is to disallow any beta operating systems simply on the
grounds that they'll be buggy by
definition and may potentially have serious security flaws, but I
can't find anything to back this
up. Just wondering if I could get a few opinions on whether or not
this is a good idea. Thanks!
Jon Lawhead Network Security Coordinator Residential Computing University of California, Berkeley
-- ME2 <http://www.santeriasys.net/>
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Hard drive encryption in windows, Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: security-basics@securityfocus.com, Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Windows Vista current flaws, Lance.Druger |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Windows Vista current flaws, Cony Zhou 周圣 |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |