linux/mac file servers .... yep its time to update

demonfurbiedemonfurbie Member Posts: 1,819 ■■■■■□□□□□
wgu undergrad: done ... woot!!
WGU MS IT Management: done ... double woot :cheers:

Comments

  • Forsaken_GAForsaken_GA Member Posts: 4,024
    Glad I tend to use NFS instead of SMB/CIFS!
  • EveryoneEveryone Member Posts: 1,661
    Prepare for a lot of data theft. Unfortunately I can see a lot of places not addressing this quickly, if at all, at least not until it's too late.
  • EveryoneEveryone Member Posts: 1,661
    Interesting that the version numbers it says you should upgrade to in the article to fix the vulnerability don't match the version numbers you get for RHEL. I checked my CentOS 6.2 box and it updated Samba to 3.5.10-115.el6_2. According to Red Hat, that is the patched version they've released.
  • Forsaken_GAForsaken_GA Member Posts: 4,024
    RHEL does things differently. The version number you see is the base level of the package for that release of Red Hat, and they don't update the base version number, they just update the -115.el6_2 part as they backport and build new packages with the security/bug fixes. Debian does the same thing.
  • undomielundomiel Member Posts: 2,818
    Just think about all those unpatched NAS boxes running Samba out there.
    Jumping on the IT blogging band wagon -- http://www.jefferyland.com/
  • demonfurbiedemonfurbie Member Posts: 1,819 ■■■■■□□□□□
    undomiel wrote: »
    Just think about all those unpatched NAS boxes running Samba out there.
    yea alot of people forget those have an os and most of the time it is linux
    wgu undergrad: done ... woot!!
    WGU MS IT Management: done ... double woot :cheers:
  • onesaintonesaint Member Posts: 801
    I'm sure I'd be surprised, but who runs SMB/CIFS over the WAN???
    Work in progress: picking up Postgres, elastisearch, redis, Cloudera, & AWS.
    Next up: eventually the RHCE and to start blogging again.

    Control Protocol; my blog of exam notes and IT randomness
Sign In or Register to comment.