Re:[2] [cobalt-users] Cobalt to provide compensation for server hack?

[RaQ3 <cobalt@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Colin Smith <colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 20.02.01 22:33:41:

>> One of our RAQ3 servers was a victim of the recent hack. Has anyone 
>> taken up the issue of compensation for this incident with Cobalt? 
>> Surely they must be liable as they failed to provide sufficient 
>> server protection. We had all patches loaded and security was still 
>> compromised. 
>
>Um, do Cobalt say that their boxes are uncrackable? Nope. Is it *your*
>responsibility to make sure that your network remains uncompromised? 
>Yes. 
>
>Cobalts are a doddle to set up and get on a network. The do pretty much
>exactly what it says on the tin. If you drop those boxes onto the 
>Internet without really understanding what's required to harden 
>vanilla boxes then I don't see how it can be Cobalt's fault.
>
>It's one thing to run an easy to use vanilla server appliance on a 
>secure network, it's quite another to run a hardened server on the 
>Internet. Being competent to do the first does not make you competent 
>to do the second.

Hi Colin !

I didn't see the warning on the box:

Danger !   Please use this RaQ only within secure Networks.
Never connect it to the internet. It might get compromised ...

;-)

Thomas

--
InternAd.de
Internet Advertising
Thomas Prosi
tp@xxxxxxxxxxx