2 Jan
2002
2 Jan
'02
9:06 a.m.
Does anybody have a copy of this? I have MS OS/2 1.3, and I have
TCP/IP for OS/2 1.3 EE, but they don't work together. I'd love to have
EE so I can put TCP/IP on it and install the lot on a 286. Maybe I can
dig up a web server for it. :)
Thanks!
--James B.
4 Jan
4 Jan
5:23 a.m.
New subject: Web servers on classic hardware (was: Re: OS/2 1.3 EE)
On 2 Jan 2002 jwbirdsa(a)picarefy.com wrote:
Maybe I can dig up a web server for it. :)
That reminds me of a question. Say I want to set up a webserver on my
<on-topic machine>. If it runs NetBSD, then great, I can run recent
versions of all the necessary software with all of the latest security
fixes. However, if I want/have to run <on-topic software combination>,
there's a good chance that old vulnerabilities will be available on the
system. How much would I have to worry about this?
Here are some of my thoughts so far:
* Most exploitation activities may be directed at newer software, leaving
exploits of the <on-topic software combination> forgotten.
* Isolate the system from everything else, so if it was compromised, there
would be no need to care.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)subatomix.com
5:38 a.m.
New subject: Web servers on classic hardware (was: Re: OS/2 1.3 EE)
And make sure you have a reasonable backup (OS regeneration
included) before exposing it to the wild web....
George Rachor
=========================================================
George L. Rachor Jr. george(a)rachors.com
Hillsboro, Oregon http://rachors.com
United States of America Amateur Radio : KD7DCX
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
On 2 Jan 2002 jwbirdsa(a)picarefy.com wrote:
Maybe I can dig up a web server for it. :)
That reminds me of a question. Say I want to set up a webserver on my
<on-topic machine>. If it runs NetBSD, then great, I can run recent
versions of all the necessary software with all of the latest security
fixes. However, if I want/have to run <on-topic software combination>,
there's a good chance that old vulnerabilities will be available on the
system. How much would I have to worry about this?
Here are some of my thoughts so far:
* Most exploitation activities may be directed at newer software, leaving
exploits of the <on-topic software combination> forgotten.
* Isolate the system from everything else, so if it was compromised, there
would be no need to care.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)subatomix.com
5:48 a.m.
New subject: Web servers on classic hardware (was: Re: OS/2 1.3 EE)
jeff,
I would think that if the system was not Intel and/or Windows based, you
wouldn't have to worry about most security exploits.
For a free TCP/IP implementaion for 8 and 16 bit CPUs, check out
http://www.dunkels.com/adam/uip/
For a C64 :) web server, goto http://c64.cc65.org/
Cheers,
Bryan
That reminds me of a question. Say I want to set up a webserver on my
<on-topic machine>. If it runs NetBSD, then great, I can run recent
versions of all the necessary software with all of the latest security
fixes. However, if I want/have to run <on-topic software combination>,
there's a good chance that old vulnerabilities will be available on the
system. How much would I have to worry about this?
Here are some of my thoughts so far:
* Most exploitation activities may be directed at newer software, leaving
exploits of the <on-topic software combination> forgotten.
* Isolate the system from everything else, so if it was compromised, there
would be no need to care.
--
Jeffrey S. Sharp
jss(a)subatomix.com
5:58 a.m.
New subject: Web servers on classic hardware (was: Re: OS/2 1.3 EE)
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 01:23:00PM -0600, Jeffrey S. Sharp wrote:
* Isolate the system from everything else, so if it
was compromised, there
would be no need to care.
First, be sure to not reuse any passwords between the don't-care
machine and any others. It could be compromised, your password
sniffed, and reapplied on a machine that you do care about.
Second, be willing to face wrath (if not someday liabilities) if
someone uses your don't-care machine as platform from which to attack
or spam others.
I think you want to do a reasonably good job of protecting this <on
topic> machine.
-kb
8389
days inactive
8391
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
bpope＠wordstock.com -
george＠racsys.rt.rain.com -
jss＠subatomix.com -
jwbirdsa＠picarefy.com -
kentborg＠borg.org