-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > What's wrong with just giving a detailed explanation that aids in > how to fix the problem in detail compared to something that can just > be compiled straight off the list. Would you stake your job and reputation on that? I NEED to see that the patch I am applying worked before I put my seal of approval on it. To many times vendor patches don't solve the problem and without the exploit to test it, you'll never know. Granted, you could take this to the extreme and just write your own telnetd or whatever, but that's a little impractical. ;) I think it's every good sysadmin's duty to perform their own analysis, otherwise we're just mindless drones, applying a patch when we're told to. You can't take pride in that. If you blindly trust everything you hear, without seeing for yourself, you won't last long in this business. Or maybe he just has an obsession with knowing how things work. I know I do... to a fault. - -- Marc Soda ASPRE, Inc. marcat_private http://www.aspre.net/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7mMJy8/oGPCGMSEgRAurkAJ971UOKKOHEQbB9z6nE6thz48k2GwCg5lj5 46lJO8I5jBQ2Vq3bLjyacMU= =iglx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 10:42:40 PDT