Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 5th May 2011 21:07 UTC, submitted by sawboss
Permalink for comment 472012
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-15
Firewall may or may not be specifically such a great term, it depends, and may refer to firewall installed on the machine itself, or a firewall between the machine and the internal network (the latter is obviously the more secure choice). But the point is that the server had full access to the whole internal network, it was not restricted in any way or form. In a network of the size of PSN itself and especially when the server is also acting as a server to traffic from the Internet any IT admin worth his/her salt should limit the access such a machine has on the internal network. Ie. it should not be able to access everything, only the very specific machines that it needs to function, and only the kind of traffic that one should expect from it.
Giving complete, unrestricted access to the internal network the magnitude of PSN from a machine running outdated, unpatched server software is a failure of epic proportions.
Edited 2011-05-06 11:35 UTC