Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 21 May 2001 13:20:29 -0500
From:      "Jason Halbert" <res02jw5@gte.net>
To:        "Dan Nelson" <dnelson@emsphone.com>, "Ceri" <ceri@techsupport.co.uk>
Cc:        <Adyas@twowaytv.com>, <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: uptime limits
Message-ID:  <BGEMLPNNHJHKCPDPBMGGKEKJCAAA.res02jw5@gte.net>
In-Reply-To: <20010521091544.A25239@dan.emsphone.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What _is_ the big thing with uptime anyway?  Yes, I am fairly
impressed with myself when I go 3 to 6 or 9 months without rebooting.
I do like upgrading my box though.  Even if you have a really high
loaded web server or something, you could switch the load to another
machine, perform the upgrade, reboot and be back online in no time.  I
really do not understand this obsession with uptime.  If people are
trying to draw a line between stability (not crashing) and uptime,
then this is a moot point.  _We_ all know that FreeBSD is rock solid.
That is, if you do everything right, then mostly likely a crash of
destructive proportions is not likely.  Most of the time a FreeBSD box
is just going to sit and "whistle while it works", as it were,
provided people do take care of it.

I agree with Ceri on this one.


---
Jason
jason@jason-n3xt.org


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Dan Nelson
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 09:16
To: Ceri
Cc: Adyas@twowaytv.com; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: uptime limits


In the last episode (May 21), Ceri said:
> On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 04:05:24PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington said:
> > * Alex Dyas <ADyas@twowaytv.com> [20010521 15:36]: writing on the
subject 'RE: uptime limits'
> > > If you have an uptime of 497 days then you basically have a
> > > system riddled with security holes.
> >
> >  This assumes that a reboot is necessary to apply a security
patch.
> >  Is this necessarily the case?  For instance, an upgrade of Bind
to
> >  patch a hole wouldn't mean powering the system down would it?
>
> No, but fixing anyone of the 10 exploits in the kernel category
since
> Jan 10th 2000 (497 days ago) would.  Yes, I have a list ;^)
>
> Admittedly, I wasn't aware that there was a marketing spin to all
this.
> I can imagine the marketing department's spin on that already :
>     ``Yeah well Apache's been fux0red for months and we can't get
>     that sendmail thing working properly but at least we didn't
>     reboot yet.''

Neither Apache or Sendmail upgrades require a reboot, though.
Assuming
you have a decent firewall that blocks odd TCP packets, and don't
allow
shells on your machine, there really aren't very many security holes
that require a kernel upgrade.

--
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@emsphone.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BGEMLPNNHJHKCPDPBMGGKEKJCAAA.res02jw5>