Working in IT 3.0: xp_cmdshell

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Working in IT 3.0: xp_cmdshell

MF_James: May 8, 2008; I CANNOT HANDLE BEING CALLED OUT ON MY DUMBASS OPINIONS ABOUT ANTI-VIRUS AND SECURITY. I REALLY LIKE TO THINK THAT I KNOW THINGS HERE

INSTEAD I AM GOING TO WHINE ABOUT IT IN OTHER THREADS SO MY OPINION CAN FEEL VALIDATED IN AN ECHO CHAMBER I LIKE

Collateral Damage posted:

That was about the time airlines started using adaptive pricing, or what was the reason flights starting getting fully booked?

There's a lot of reasons and a lot of ancillary reasons for those reasons, but the short of it:

2002-2003: 2-3 major airlines declare bankruptcy in the wake of 9/11 because people were just scared of flying (ticket sales did drop, but to the extreme that was claimed) and supposedly they were losing money blah blah blah (hint: executives couldn't get their $20mil bonuses every year without affecting payroll).

Most airline workers below C-level took 25-60% paycuts (and some were even in airlines that didn't get chapter 11), operating costs dwindled severely in the short term, and thus ticket prices went way down, but total amount of flights was lowered as well, amazingly ticket sales started climbing a lot. At this point, business travel has remained pretty consistent, but consumer flying is climbing.

Then fuel prices started going up, so they raised ticket prices exponentially.

More business related travel started happening, domestic and non-domestic. Also, with our population ever increasing, so is the amount of people flying. The amount of flights per day is NOT increasing at a rate (if at all) consistent with the increase in demand because the airports simply cannot handle more flights per-day. I think there has also been a large cultural shift, which was happening prior to 9/11, was stymied for a bit, and has continued since 2004ish, and that shift is away from driving long distances and instead flying, also, people aren't as scared to fly, and the people that are scared are more willing to try.

Honestly I don't know where adaptive pricing fits in to this, if it has any bearing on the situation at all (it likely does, but I've never really looked into it as it's been unimportant to me)

# ? Jun 27, 2016 21:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 12:23

psydude: Apr 1, 2008

MF_James posted:

economy or whatever term they are using for it now isn't that bad. Just have a couple drinks and sleep for the next 2-9 hours, but I guess not everyone is as (un)fortunate as me, I'm able to fall asleep at the drop of a hat even in uncomfortable situations.

Also, don't treat the airline staff like poo poo, a lot of people do, and there's going to be a special area in hell for offenders. They are underpaid, overworked and deal with shitheads all day.

I'm 6'5" and have a bad back, so it's business class or bust. Although I usually fly Southwest domestically so I'm usually gambling with my travel budget to get one of the super exit row seats. Still pays off 90% of the time.

# ? Jun 27, 2016 22:16

Inspector_666: Oct 7, 2003; _{benny with the good hair}

I'm 6' 1" but I can also fall asleep anywhere so I just get on the plane, go to my lovely coach seat and fall asleep before we push back from the gate, and don't wake up until we touch down.

Then again I've also never flown for business reasons so yeah, I'm not paying for business on my own dime.

# ? Jun 27, 2016 22:34

3 Action Economist: May 22, 2002; Educate. Agitate. Liberate.

I flew from NH to Portland, OR (with a stop in Chicago) on Southwest and I loved it!

Sometimes being 5'5" is a benefit.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 00:23

Proud Christian Mom: Dec 20, 2006; READING COMPREHENSION IS HARD

Vulture Culture posted:

Even in 2016 this is a really awful idea for end-users who can't tell a popup scam from an error message

beat your users with a stick until they comply or just take their computer away

# ? Jun 28, 2016 01:03

adorai: Nov 2, 2002; 10/27/04 Never forget; Grimey Drawer

go3 posted:

beat your users with a stick until they comply or just take their computer away

You do understand that IT is there to support the business, not neuter their productive resources, right?

# ? Jun 28, 2016 01:10

CrazyLittle: Sep 11, 2001; Clapping Larry

adorai posted:

You do understand that IT is there to support the business, not neuter their productive resources, right?

Why can't it be both?

# ? Jun 28, 2016 01:43

Cthulhuite: Mar 22, 2007; Shwmae!

Sometimes supporting the business means beating on the end users.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 01:54

Vulture Culture: Jul 14, 2003; I was never enjoying it. I only eat it for the nutrients.

go3 posted:

beat your users with a stick until they comply or just take their computer away

Most of these office drones are already beaten down and devoid of morale. What more can you do to them but add welts in new shapes and colors?

# ? Jun 28, 2016 02:51

Neddy Seagoon: Oct 12, 2012; "Hi Everybody!"

Got an email from Seek (Australian employment listing website) about a company seeing my profile and thinking a job might interest me. I'm very happy with my current position, but I had a look for a laugh.

It was for a Customer Service Consultant :stonklol:

.

My old job was processing mobile phone sales, which I quit after a month because jesus christ the tedium, and it's evidently going to follow me to my grave. :cripes:

# ? Jun 28, 2016 13:01

Sickening: Jul 16, 2007; Black summer was the best summer.

Vulture Culture posted:

Even in 2016 this is a really awful idea for end-users who can't tell a popup scam from an error message
[/

[quote="Vulture Culture" post="461501441"]
Even in 2016 this is a really awful idea for end-users who can't tell a popup scam from an error message

Pop up blocker and patching seem to fix this problem more than anti virus. Seems like it just makes sense to invest that antivirus money into more effective solutions.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 13:43

Vulture Culture: Jul 14, 2003; I was never enjoying it. I only eat it for the nutrients.

Sickening posted:

Pop up blocker and patching seem to fix this problem more than anti virus. Seems like it just makes sense to invest that antivirus money into more effective solutions.

"More than" is not an effective approach to risk management compared to multi-layered security. This isn't to say that antivirus is a particularly effective general approach compared to something like a sane AppLocker policy, but it's still effective at preventing a specific class of threats for a specific class of users.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 14:12

Sickening: Jul 16, 2007; Black summer was the best summer.

Vulture Culture posted:

"More than" is not an effective approach to risk management compared to multi-layered security. This isn't to say that antivirus is a particularly effective general approach compared to something like a sane AppLocker policy, but it's still effective at preventing a specific class of threats for a specific class of users.

I don't think its very effective at any class of threats, which is the problem.

Attacks by email? - more effective solutions out there
Attacks by browser? - more effective solutions out there
Attacks by removable media - more effective solutions out there
Attacks by other computers on the network? - more effective solutions out there

I just can't justify its existence anymore.

Sickening fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Jun 28, 2016

# ? Jun 28, 2016 14:52

adorai: Nov 2, 2002; 10/27/04 Never forget; Grimey Drawer

Sickening posted:

I don't think its very effective at any class of threats, which is the problem.

Attacks by email? - more effective solutions out there
Attacks by browser? - more effective solutions out there
Attacks by removable media - more effective solutions out there
Attacks by other computers on the network? - more effective solutions out there

I just can't justify its existence anymore.

Anti virus is the last line of defense. Importantly for some industries, if there is a security event that results in litigation, the very first question asked is going to be, "were you running antivirus?". Regardless of whether it would have helped, you need to be able to say yes.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 15:19

FlapYoJacks: Feb 12, 2009

adorai posted:

Anti virus is the last line of defense. Importantly for some industries, if there is a security event that results in litigation, the very first question asked is going to be, "were you running antivirus?". Regardless of whether it would have helped, you need to be able to say yes.

Which is why the only one anybody should be running (in that instance) is windows defender. All of the other ones are even worse than that.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 15:23

22 Eargesplitten: Oct 10, 2010

Is there a way to install .exe files from the command line/powershell that accepts the EULA automatically? Msiexec has a EULA=1 argument, but some of these files I need to install are .exe files.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 18:16

anthonypants: May 6, 2007; by Nyc_Tattoo; Dinosaur Gum

22 Eargesplitten posted:

Is there a way to install .exe files from the command line/powershell that accepts the EULA automatically? Msiexec has a EULA=1 argument, but some of these files I need to install are .exe files.

Only if the .exe fiile was built to allow for that parameter.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 18:18

22 Eargesplitten: Oct 10, 2010

Thanks. It looks like this one just did it automatically when running from the command line. Hopefully the rest will do that too. (they probably won't)

# ? Jun 28, 2016 18:35

BaseballPCHiker: Jan 16, 2006

22 Eargesplitten posted:

Thanks. It looks like this one just did it automatically when running from the command line. Hopefully the rest will do that too. (they probably won't)

If you're going to be doing more and more deployments look into the enterprise thread. We cover a lot of SCCM and software deployment topics.

I dont know if you mentioned it or not but look into downloading the Microsoft Oorca tool (they hide it as part of some other download, look around and you'll find it) and use that to edit MSI files if you can. It will give you a lot more options when it comes to installers.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 19:06

anthonypants: May 6, 2007; by Nyc_Tattoo; Dinosaur Gum

adorai posted:

Anti virus is the last line of defense. Importantly for some industries, if there is a security event that results in litigation, the very first question asked is going to be, "were you running antivirus?". Regardless of whether it would have helped, you need to be able to say yes.

Incidentally, a huge number of Symantec vulnerabilities just got announced today.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 19:16

Happiness Commando: Feb 1, 2002; $$ joy at gunpoint $$

Anyone know how to get FSRM with an active profile to pass two layers of arguments? Apparently FSRM commands need to be run by users with local admin - and since I have an SBS server :bang:

my FSRM server is the DC and has no local anything. Also apparently, psexec will let me work around it, but I need to pass arguments to psexec and the batch script, and it keeps telling me that the path or command is invalid. I've tried:

code:


command: psexec \\localhost -s -i %path%\batch.bat
arguments: [FSRM arg1] [FSRM arg2]


command: psexec \\localhost -s -i 
arguments: %path%\batch.bat [FSRM arg1] [FSRM arg2]


command: psexec  
arguments: \\localhost -s -i %path%\batch.bat [FSRM arg1] [FSRM arg2]

All with different arrangements of quotation marks and it either accepts it and fails to run or doesnt even accept the path as valid. I can get psexec to run the batch file from the shell, so it's definitely an FSRM thing. Theres something about messing with the ACLs of some FSRM config files but I really don't want to do that...

# ? Jun 28, 2016 19:17

deedee megadoodoo: Sep 28, 2000; Two roads diverged in a wood, and I, I took the one to Flavortown, and that has made all the difference.

Does anyone else here not have any certifications because you're just not good at taking tests? I won't spend money on certifications because I know I'm going to do terrible on the test. But it's not an issue with the application itself because I know how it works and can demonstrate competency with it. My current employer wants me to take the AWS Certified Solutions Architect exams so I thought I could probably pass the aAssociate test easily since I work with AWS on a daily basis. But I just took a practice exam and the way some of the questions are worded completely threw me off. I nearly ran out of time because I had to reread questions 5 or 6 times. I took a look at the Professional exam and it's 170 minutes with no break. Even if I don't run out of time, my ADD is going to kick in around the 60 minute mark and I'm going to fail. How the hell do you people deal with this? Is test taking just easy for some people?

# ? Jun 28, 2016 19:27

Thanks Ants: May 21, 2004; #essereFerrari

Every MS test I take where they give you the result broken down into topics always shows a steady decline over time as the "gently caress this" kicks in.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 19:45

RFC2324: Jun 7, 2012; http 418

HatfulOfHollow posted:

Is test taking just easy for some people?

Yes, but:

Thanks Ants posted:

Every MS test I take where they give you the result broken down into topics always shows a steady decline over time as the "gently caress this" kicks in.

I need to get my RHCE, but I know this will be a problem.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 20:04

Vulture Culture: Jul 14, 2003; I was never enjoying it. I only eat it for the nutrients.

anthonypants posted:

Incidentally, a huge number of Symantec vulnerabilities just got announced today.

Jesus gently caress, Symantec.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 20:28

ChubbyThePhat: Dec 22, 2006; Who nico nico needs anyone else

anthonypants posted:

Incidentally, a huge number of Symantec vulnerabilities just got announced today.

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Seriously though, jesus christ.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 21:35

Sickening: Jul 16, 2007; Black summer was the best summer.

ChubbyThePhat posted:

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Seriously though, jesus christ.

Last line of defense my rear end. Looks like multilayered pile of poo poo to me.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 23:22

Wrath of the Bitch King: May 11, 2005; Research confirms that black is a color like silver is a color, and that beyond black is clarity.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: every aspect of Symantec, from the client to the management infrastructure, is cleverly disguised malware.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 23:33

anthonypants: May 6, 2007; by Nyc_Tattoo; Dinosaur Gum

Wrath of the Bitch King posted:

I've said it before and I'll say it again: every aspect of Symantec, from the client to the management infrastructure, is cleverly disguised malware.

Sure, but please don't let that fool you into thinking that antivirus products from other vendors aren't.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 23:34

Wrath of the Bitch King: May 11, 2005; Research confirms that black is a color like silver is a color, and that beyond black is clarity.

Not at all, Symantec is just the most egregious.

Every aspect of their AV offering is shoddy, buggy, and difficult to administer. LUA is an attack on sensibility.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 23:35

FlapYoJacks: Feb 12, 2009

Tell me again how anti-virus is good?

quote:

On Linux, Mac and other UNIX platforms, this results in a clean heap overflow as root in the Symantec or Norton process. On Windows, this results in kernel memory corruption.

Because Symantec uses a filter driver to intercept all system I/O, just emailing a file to a victim or sending them a link to an exploit is enough to trigger it - the victim does not need to open the file or interact with it in anyway. Because no interaction is necessary to exploit it, this is a wormable vulnerability with potentially devastating consequences to Norton and Symantec customers.

An attacker could easily compromise an entire enterprise fleet using a vulnerability like this. Network administrators should keep scenarios like this in mind when deciding to deploy Antivirus, it�s a significant tradeoff in terms of increasing attack surface.

# ? Jun 28, 2016 23:38

Proteus Jones: Feb 28, 2013

ratbert90 posted:

Tell me again how anti-virus is good?

It gets better:

quote:

Symantec dropped the ball here. A quick look at the decomposer library shipped by Symantec showed that they were using code derived from open source libraries like libmspack and unrarsrc, but hadn�t updated them in at least 7 years.

Dozens of public vulnerabilities in these libraries affected Symantec, some with public exploits. We sent Symantec some examples, and they verified they had fallen behind on releases.

Oops.

And apparently the first time the POC code was sent to them it crashed their mail gateway, because they were protected by their own product.

# ? Jun 29, 2016 00:24

RFC2324: Jun 7, 2012; http 418

Symantec makes a UNIX product?

Who knew?

# ? Jun 29, 2016 00:29

Gucci Loafers: May 20, 2006; Ask yourself, do you really want to talk to pair of really nice gaudy shoes?

People use Symantec products still?

# ? Jun 29, 2016 00:31

RFC2324: Jun 7, 2012; http 418

Tab8715 posted:

People use Symantec products still?

I have worked for several major companies who did.

My current company, a major telecom, does.

# ? Jun 29, 2016 00:36

Gucci Loafers: May 20, 2006; Ask yourself, do you really want to talk to pair of really nice gaudy shoes?

Bleh. I do suppose they make a bunch of corporate applications but goddamn the quality of Symantec product I've ever used is largely mediocre.

# ? Jun 29, 2016 00:41

22 Eargesplitten: Oct 10, 2010

ratbert90 posted:

Tell me again how anti-virus is good?

So their response to cryptolocker is to make it so that people in accounting don't even have to open the suspicious file? That's considerate of them.

# ? Jun 29, 2016 00:41

Lilli: Feb 21, 2011; Goodbye, my child.

This isnt the right thread at all! But for what its worth my new job is going really well so far!

# ? Jun 29, 2016 02:07

Wrath of the Bitch King: May 11, 2005; Research confirms that black is a color like silver is a color, and that beyond black is clarity.

Tab8715 posted:

People use Symantec products still?

We did at my company until I was forced to draft a 50+ page document detailing the issues the software has created (with attached tickets), time expended on administration, relative difficulty of version upgrades, the unabashed shitshow that is Symantecs Teefer miniport/Network Protection driver, and the relative cost of licensing versus Windows Defender/System Center Endpoint Protection. Our InfoSec guys just wouldn't have it and have shut me down for two years, but I caught the ear of the CIO and got a chance to present this to the board.

Oh, and I forgot to mention the lovely logging. It took a ridiculous amount of effort but we moved away from that hell and I'm really glad for it.

This recent stuff just validates how I felt for all the years I had to deal with it.

# ? Jun 29, 2016 03:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 25, 2024 12:23

Chickenwalker: Apr 21, 2011; by FactsAreUseless

poop

Chickenwalker fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Sep 23, 2018

# ? Jun 29, 2016 04:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Working in IT 3.0: xp_cmdshell

«‹›2890 »