Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?
From: Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP] (kweilbacMVP_at_gte.net)
Date: 07/22/04
- Next message: anonymous_at_discussions.microsoft.com: "Cutting down on SBS internet traffic"
- Previous message: weikeng: "Re: SBS2003 + Office XP on Client"
- In reply to: Phydeux: "Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?"
- Next in thread: Phydeux: "Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?"
- Reply: Phydeux: "Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 00:40:58 -0400
/* ON SOAPBOX */
That may be fine for you; but it certainly is not, and would not be,
acceptable to me.
Understand that you just let an unknown person have full access to your
computer, and you don't have a clue of what they did. Sorry, in my book that
just made your system completely untrustworthy and questionable. And the
fact that this was probably a MS person, means that they just broke their
own MS Law #2 of Security:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/community/columns/security/essays/10imlaws.mspx
Especially for new customers, I tell my customers ahead of time what I
expect to do before I do anything, and then before I make ANY changes I
explain to them why I'm going to do it - whether they understand or not -
and get their permission to continue. And once I'm done, I send them a
report of what I did. And I tell them I do this so that if they decide to
use someone else to support their systems down the road they can say,
"Here's what Kevin did".
Personally, I don't give a rip how high this person is in the MS ranks. In
fact the higher up he or she is, the more flagrant their act -- they have
compromised your system's security -- and their actions are completely
unacceptable. And that would be the real reason they might choose to hide
their face.
In fact, I dare that person to come forward and give me a single valid
reason for what they did. I don't care if its Bill G or Steve B. themselves.
/* OFF SOAPBOX */
We now return to our regularly scheduled newsgroup ...
-- Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP] "The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long" "Phydeux" <phydeux@phydeux.com> wrote in message news:uttQq63bEHA.796@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > All I know is that this guy ranks VERY high within MS Redmond, wishes to > stay anonymous, and was able to make the fix. I never actually spoke to him > myself. My client is a close friend of his and just passed along what his > friend needed me to do, which was allow him temporary admin access and the > IP of the server. I believe he's trying to stay anonymous because its > really not supposed to be in his purview to do these things. He was just > doing a friend a favor. And if my client trusts him enough to give him > admin access, I can hardly argue it. And while I understand your point and > interest Kevin, I don't think he'd contact the MVPs in order to maintain his > anonymity. The fact that he never spoke to me directly tells me he's very > cautious who he talks to. > > As for people beating up on me, I'm not going to let root get to me. He's > being childish and inconsiderate of the wishes of someone who is not here. > And the more he brow-beats me, the less likely I would be to offer up the > solution if I had it. > > Oh, and here's a bit of off-topic humor for you. I saw a job listing today > in the paper looking for a Windows 2003 Server Admin that required "3 years > prior experience with 2003 Server". All I can say is, good luck to that HR > staff! LOL > > "Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]" <kweilbacMVP@gte.net> wrote in message > news:%237I%23d9MbEHA.4092@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > > I'm sorry if some people appear to be beating up on you. Certainly, that > is > > not my intent. > > > > If what this person did is proprietary information, I would not expect > that > > to be posted it here. But without hearing from this Microsoft person and > > getting his/her input, how would we know? > > > > As such, there has already been a post from another user with almost the > > identical problem you had. It would be great for us to respond with > > something like: "Yes, that has occurred with others and the possible > > solution is (a) download this hotfix from Microsoft, or (b) call PSS, or > (c) > > rerun some utility, or (d) make the follwoing change to a registry, or (e) > > whatever the correct answer is.... > > > > This is a community forum trying to help one another. > > > > If I would "beat you up" on anything, it would only be the fact that you > > seem to be resisting even contacting the person that helped you and > letting > > him/her know. If this person does not want to post directly to this > > newsgroup, they could certainly contact any of the SBS MVP's by email or > IM > > for a private discussion. All MVPs have signed the appropriate > > non-disclosure agreements with Microsoft, and know where to draw the line > as > > far as what can or cannot be shared with the public. > > > > -- > > Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP] > > "The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long" > > > > > > "Phydeux" <phydeux@phydeux.com> wrote in message > > news:%23661p8JbEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > > No, what I said (or at least intended to imply) was that he wouldn't > > > even share with me what the cause or fix were. He asked for admin > access, > > I > > > gave it to him, ten minutes later he calls and says he's done. I found > no > > > obvious traces of what he did, and he couldn't divulge the details. So > > its > > > not a matter of whether or not I wanted to post the details here or not. > > I > > > simply don't HAVE the details. He never told me what the problem was, > > only > > > that it was fixed. I was happy enough with that. And I simply let > folks > > > here know it had been solved. I didn't expect anyone to get indignant > > about > > > it. Geez! > > > > > > As to my point about not wanting him to post it in public, that's > only > > > common sense. If you were MS, would YOU want people posting proprietary > > > information in a public forum? IBM has backdoor codes for its servers > > that > > > their technicians can't even write down. They have to call in on a > > landline > > > phone without a cordless handset and have the code given to them as they > > > type it with no one in the room. All this to maintain security of their > > > proprietary secrets. Its no wonder the guy didn't leave any ostensible > > > traces for me to look at or tell me what was wrong. > > > > > > > > > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message > > > news:%23hYr7OEbEHA.1644@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > > "Phydeux" <phydeux@phydeux.com> wrote in message > > > > news:%23c7Qz0DbEHA.3684@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > > > > I'm not saying ignorance is bliss. I'm saying that it would be > > > > > irresponsible to put such information out into public view. > > > > > > > > That's utter CRAP. > > > > > > > > What you were asked to do is describe any known problem that may have > > been > > > > discovered! What was the nature of the fix in general? If the MS guy > > > used > > > > a proprietary technique to fix it and preferred not to describe that > in > > > > detail then NO ONE here would have complained. Instead what you did > was > > > > INSULT us all by saying I'm telling you folks NOTHING! > > > > > > > > > But that > > > > > presupposes that I even knew what he did, > > > > > > > > We don't necessarily want to know wht he did. WE want to know the > issue > > > he > > > > fixed. We want you to find him and ask him THAT! > > > > > > > > > but he kept me from seeing it as > > > > > well. So all I know is he went into the server by remote, ten > minutes > > > > later > > > > > it was working fine. What he did I'll never know, I'm just grateful > > he > > > > was > > > > > able to correct it without having to rebuild the entire server. > > > > > > > > Find him again and ask him for the sake of all SBS2003 users. > > > > > > > > > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message > > > > > news:%23ykv0I6aEHA.2812@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > > > > > > "Phydeux" <phydeux@phydeux.com> wrote in message > > > > > > news:eOiLxa4aEHA.2516@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > He wouldn't even tell ME what it was he did, that's why he > > > needed > > > > to > > > > > > > remote in himself. And to be honest, I don't think we'd want > him > > to > > > > > post > > > > > > > what he did and how he did it in public. Many could misuse such > > > > > > information > > > > > > > to bypass the Windows Activation system. I'm happy just knowing > > he > > > > was > > > > > > able > > > > > > > to correct the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > That kind of a response doesn't buy you much here. Ignorance is > > bliss > > > > for > > > > > > SBS2003 professionals is an insult! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP]" <kweilbacMVP@gte.net> wrote in > > message > > > > > > > news:uUFqPgzaEHA.644@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > > It would be nice if you could get back to the person who > helped > > > you > > > > > and > > > > > > > say > > > > > > > > that the folks here at the Microsoft SBS newsgroup would like > to > > > > know > > > > > > (a) > > > > > > > > what caused the problem, and (v)how this was fixed for future > > > > > reference. > > > > > > > Or > > > > > > > > ask him/her to come to the NG themselves and post an > > explanation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Kevin Weilbacher [SBS-MVP] > > > > > > > > "The days pass by so quickly now, the nights are seldom long" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Phydeux" <phydeux@phydeux.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > news:%23QAoIPxaEHA.3944@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > > > I have no idea what it was, he said he could fix it if I > > > gave > > > > > him > > > > > > > > > temporary admin access and the IP. He logged in, did about > 5 > > > > > minutes > > > > > > > > worth > > > > > > > > > of work, and logged out. Whatever he did left no visible > > > traces. > > > > > But > > > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > > again, he works at MS so I'm sure he's privvy to a few > things > > > > we're > > > > > > not. > > > > > > > > > Either way, its fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > news:%23w4E$lfaEHA.712@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Phydeux" <phydeux@phydeux.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > > news:%23M7W1cfaEHA.2840@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > > > > > > > > > > > Well, my client has a close friend who is pretty > high > > up > > > > in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > echelons > > > > > > > > > > > at Redmond, and asked him to get involved. He worked > some > > > > kind > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > magic, > > > > > > > > > > > and corrected the issue remotely. So now its resolved. > > And > > > > > with > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > 3 > > > > > > > > > > > days left before the windows would have slammed shut on > > the > > > > > > server. > > > > > > > > > > *PHEW!* > > > > > > > > > > > I wonder if his friend could get me a job with MS? > > > HMmmm.... > > > > > :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So did you ever find out what was happening? What the fix > > > was? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
- Next message: anonymous_at_discussions.microsoft.com: "Cutting down on SBS internet traffic"
- Previous message: weikeng: "Re: SBS2003 + Office XP on Client"
- In reply to: Phydeux: "Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?"
- Next in thread: Phydeux: "Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?"
- Reply: Phydeux: "Re: Activated 2003SBS asking to be activated again?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
