RES: Re: Scheduling NTBackup to mapped drive
- From: "Tiago de Aviz" <Tiago@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "[ExchangeList]" <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 16:39:06 -0300
Ok. What if i DO my homework? Lock down account that are not meant for logon,
change local security policy, change administrator's names....? Why would there
be a need to lock it?
Tiago de Aviz
SoftSell
(41) 340-2363
www.softsell.com.br
Esta mensagem, incluindo seus anexos, tem caráter confidencial e seu conteúdo é
restrito ao destinatário da mensagem. Caso você tenha recebido esta mensagem
por engano, queira por favor retorná-la ao destinatário e apagá-la de seus
arquivos. Qualquer uso não autorizado, replicação ou disseminação desta
mensagem ou parte dela é expressamente proibido. A SoftSell não é responsável
pelo conteúdo ou a veracidade desta informação.
-----Mensagem original-----
De: Jared Johnson [mailto:jaredsjazz@xxxxxxxxx]
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 6 de agosto de 2004 16:23
Para: [ExchangeList]
Assunto: [exchangelist] Re: Scheduling NTBackup to mapped drive
http://www.MSExchange.org/
Mark, even for you, the great Exchange guy, I cannot
do your research for you. Someone with your Exchange
skill level really should know better.
Old habits die hard. I know many of you are only angry
because for so long you have been doing it the wrong
way and it's tough to face up to that. Believe me, I
understand.
Think about it: WHY would you give a hacker more
opportunities to log in to various known accounts,
i.e., GUEST (because of these newbies don't disable
that account), the Administrator (because newbies
don't rename the account), or having the server power
off because of the power profile isn't loaded when
logged out (unless changed, but newbies don't), the
IIS accounts, the ASPNet accounts, etc. etc. That's
just ridiculous to give hackers that easy opportunity.
I just did a google search and quickly found a "Five
Security Steps.." by Microsoft. One of them mentioned,
"locking your computer..."
Google it, go to support.microsoft.com, to dogpile,
your local professional IT Auditor. You'll find more
information on it that you'll want to.
--- Mark Fugatt <mark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> http://www.MSExchange.org/
>
> Yes, I would like you to provide me with one link
> that mentions that locking
> is more secure than logging out.
>
> What was the very first Windows 2000 admin book ever
> written?, and I will see
> if I can find reference to it in there.
>
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:14:21 -0700 (PDT), Jared
> Johnson wrote
> > http://www.MSExchange.org/
> >
> > Read the posts again. Do your search on dogpile,
> read
> > your beginning admin books. The proof is
> everywhere.
> > It's just plain common sense.
> >
> > You really want ME to do your research FOR YOU? Am
> I
> > your personal secretary dog? Dont' think so. Read
> the
> > very first Windows 2000 admin book ever written,
> and
> > you'll see. Basics my friend.
> >
> > --- "Michael B. Smith" <michael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.MSExchange.org/
> > >
> > > Have you yet answered ANYONE as to why?
> > >
> > > Or provided a reference? Either Microsoft or
> FIPS?
> > > Or anything else for
> > > that matter?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jared Johnson
> [mailto:jaredsjazz@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 10:58 AM
> > > To: [ExchangeList]
> > > Subject: [exchangelist] Re: Scheduling NTBackup
> to
> > > mapped drive
> > >
> > > http://www.MSExchange.org/
> > >
> > > We do the same. Until some provides written
> > > > documentation from
> > > > Microsoft or a security company technically
> > > endorsed by Microsoft, I
> > > > will continue to Log off my servers when I am
> > > finished my task.>>
> > >
> > >
> > > All beginning admins do. It's not until you're
> in
> > > the big leagues that
> > > you realize why you should lock your boxes.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Danny <nocmonkey@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > http://www.MSExchange.org/
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 09:50:17 +0100, Duke
> > > <duke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > http://www.MSExchange.org/
> > > > >
> > > > > Morning, Afternoon, Evenin All.
> > > >
> > > > Good morning, Duke and all.
> > > >
> > > > > Has Danny's original question been answered?
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure, as I have had several different
> > > responses. My goal is
> > > > to not have anyone logged in, and two backup
> jobs
> > > to run in the
> > > > background. Both jobs will save the backup to
> a
> > > remote Windows 2000
> > > > server. Job #1 will backup the Information
> Store,
> > > Job #2 will backup
> > > > the System State.
> > > >
> > > > > Forgetting the rhetorics, Danny have you
> gotten
> > > > the solution to the problem?
> > > >
> > > > No.
> > > >
> > > > > Locking or logging out depends very much on
> the
> > > > environment within which
> > > > > you are operating. Here, we mostly lock when
> > > > running a task and log out
> > > > > otherwise. There is no one clear right way.
> > > >
> > > > We do the same. Until some provides written
> > > documentation from
> > > > Microsoft or a security company technically
> > > endorsed by Microsoft, I
> > > > will continue to Log off my servers when I am
> > > finished my task.
> > > >
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > >
> > > > ...D
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Other related posts:
