Saturday, March 29, 2008
Why Bex Huff is wrong about security...
I figured I would throw daggers at Bex Huff and his recent posting...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/096b0/096b0942b1d15486e5ff00110e6b5f00e887d88b" alt=""
best practices practical considerations around writing software to make patching easier. Do you think others in the blogosphere would be willing to dedicate a couple of blog postings to help figure this out?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/78bbd/78bbd16fc85a51dca4955026e83202e5bb2cff80" alt=""
| | View blog reactionsdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/096b0/096b0942b1d15486e5ff00110e6b5f00e887d88b" alt=""
- I was shocked to discover that fewer than 20% of Oracle customers admit to applying the rolling security patches that Oracle releases... yikes
- CERT often says that 99% of security breaches are due to users not applying patches. In other words, 80% of Oracle customers choose to make themselves vulnerable to 99% of the attacks.
- I'd argue most security problems are due to improperly configured and improperly maintained software.
- If you want secure applications, first demand software that is effortless to patch and maintain.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/78bbd/78bbd16fc85a51dca4955026e83202e5bb2cff80" alt=""