Re: My bank uses Windows? Is "Check 21" safe?

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Leythos, Oct 9, 2004.

  1. Leythos

    Leythos Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > When I walk through the lobby of my bank, I see Windows screen savers
    > running on some computers and Windows menu screens on others. I know my
    > bank has never heard of MacIntosh or Linux. I hesitate to think how many
    > spybots and viruses might lurk in those machines.


    In all the years I've managed and designed computers and networks I've
    never had a compromised machine on our networks or our clients networks
    when we were in charge of the network.

    A bank is going to be locked down more than you would imagine, and much
    more than any non-banking corporate environment.

    Windows is easy to manage, secure, and keep bug free in a controlled
    environment. Since about half the of the business servers and more than
    half of the workstations are running Windows I would not sweat it.

    --
    --

    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
     
    Leythos, Oct 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Leythos

    xmp Guest

    Leythos wrote:
    >
    > In all the years I've managed and designed computers and networks I've
    > never had a compromised machine on our networks or our clients networks
    > when we were in charge of the network.
    >
    > A bank is going to be locked down more than you would imagine, and much
    > more than any non-banking corporate environment.
    >


    Oh really? Why did many ATM's go down during LSASS and DCOM worms?

    > Windows is easy to manage, secure, and keep bug free in a controlled
    > environment.


    The crux of your statement is "controlled environment." By playing
    games with semantics (which I'm certain you will do), the statement is
    incredibly vague, and thus meaningless.

    > Since about half the of the business servers and more than
    > half of the workstations are running Windows I would not sweat it.
    >


    Um no, you sir, are what we call a zealot. Trusted Solaris, Trusted
    HP-UX, now those are relatively secure.

    As far as workstations, I've run across HP-UX and QNX frequently, in
    more mission critical applications than the pedestrian desktops in the
    offices.

    Why do think DOCKMASTER was run on Trusted Multics until 1998?

    michael
     
    xmp, Oct 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Leythos

    Leythos Guest

    In article <YSZ9d.626$>,
    says...
    > Um no, you sir, are what we call a zealot. Trusted Solaris, Trusted
    > HP-UX, now those are relatively secure.


    If you think that HP-UX is secure then you've been missing all of the
    alerts they put out this year.

    I'm not a zealot, I manage thousands of machines across the country, and
    have not had any problems with them - 90% of them are Windows systems.

    --
    --

    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
     
    Leythos, Oct 10, 2004
    #3
  4. Leythos

    George Guest

    On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:26:05 GMT, I found this from Leythos
    <> :

    >In all the years I've managed and designed computers and networks I've
    >never had a compromised machine on our networks or our clients networks
    >when we were in charge of the network.


    I work in a big bank. We use Linux, for security reasons.
    I wonder why?
     
    George, Oct 10, 2004
    #4
  5. George <> wrote:

    >>In all the years I've managed and designed computers and networks I've
    >>never had a compromised machine on our networks or our clients networks
    >>when we were in charge of the network.

    >
    > I work in a big bank. We use Linux, for security reasons.
    > I wonder why?


    Because your IT staff prefers Linux?

    Linux isn't safer just because it's not made by MS - you have to spend
    as much time in setting up a secure Linux machine as you'd have to with
    Windows. Besides, I've yet to see a good way for Linux to deploy
    configuration settings and patches like it can be done with Windows
    using ActiveDirectory and SUSServer/SMS

    Juergen Nieveler
    --
    There is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole.
     
    Juergen Nieveler, Oct 10, 2004
    #5
  6. Leythos wrote:

    > In article <YSZ9d.626$>,
    > says...
    >> Um no, you sir, are what we call a zealot. Trusted Solaris, Trusted
    >> HP-UX, now those are relatively secure.

    >
    > If you think that HP-UX is secure then you've been missing all of the
    > alerts they put out this year.
    >
    > I'm not a zealot, I manage thousands of machines across the country, and
    > have not had any problems with them - 90% of them are Windows systems.
    >


    Sorry but *BSDs are far easier to secure not to meantion reliable. I always
    minumize the amount winblows servers I control...

    I am not a zealot, I am a realist.

    -- Michael
     
    Michael J. Pelletier, Dec 5, 2004
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. mchiper

    Re: Bank of America or any Bank

    mchiper, Sep 6, 2003, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    586
    Frode
    Sep 13, 2003
  2. Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer

    Re: My bank uses Windows? Is "Check 21" safe?

    Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer, Oct 9, 2004, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    418
    Wolfgang S. Rupprecht
    Oct 12, 2004
  3. xmp
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    374
  4. Juergen Nieveler

    Re: My bank uses Windows? Is "Check 21" safe?

    Juergen Nieveler, Oct 9, 2004, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    863
    xxyydmzorgxxyy
    Oct 24, 2004
  5. Richard Pearrell

    salary at Chevy Chase Bank and PNC Bank

    Richard Pearrell, Jul 26, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,040
    richard
    Jul 27, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page