RE: [FW1] Code Red: What security specialist don't mention in war nings

["METE EMINAGAOGLU (IT)" <mete.e@FW1-NOSPAMdigiturk.net>]

Title: RE: [FW1] Code Red: What security specialist don't mention in warnings

>>No, actually I am not absolutely wrong nor am I missing anything.

 

Neither do I.

 

In the Nokia module, in.ahhtpd only uses 3-4% of the whole CPU, not a value quoted so high, such as 90-100%.

 

Thus, to cut it short;

 

If CP 4.1 SP 3 or higher (as management server), and Nokia Module with IPSO 3.3 SP 3.0 or higher is used as the platform, FW's http security server can be thought as a feasible solution. On the other platforms such as Solaris, AIX, or with older CP versions, do not apply the mentioned solution (using http with resource, etc...).    

 

I think this should resolve all the conflicts.

 

Best regards...

-----Original Message-----
From: Luke, Jason (ISS Southfield) [mailto:jluke@iss.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 5:53 PM
To: 'METE EMINAGAOGLU (IT)'
Cc: 'fw-1-mailinglist@beethoven.us.checkpoint.com'
Subject: RE: [FW1] Code Red: What security specialist don't mention in war nings

No, actually I am not absolutely wrong nor am I missing anything.  I can't recall ever trying this on a Nokia, but on Sun I can reproduce it.  It's a known bug that has never been fully explained.  I vaguely remember this being an NT problem as well. 

Here's a few others who share my pain...

http://msgs.securepoint.com/cgi-bin/get/fw1-0008/9.html

http://msgs.securepoint.com/cgi-bin/get/fw1-0010/83.html

http://msgs.securepoint.com/cgi-bin/get/fw1-9910/768.html