Comments for Alan Hargreaves' Blog

Comment on I have a performance problem by Brendan Gregg

Brendan Gregg — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 03:48:29 +0000

Good post! another question I like to ask, when handed a metric:

how do you think this metric is affecting the workload?

Many metrics can look odd, and not matter so much (asynchronous). Some can look related to workload pain, but are symptoms and not the cause. I try to convert everything into a synchronous component of workload latency to figure out how much they really matter.

Comment on I have a performance problem by Alan

Alan — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 04:26:50 +0000

Comment on I have a performance problem by Alan

Alan — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 04:25:00 +0000

Sorry I don’t know. I would have thought perhaps versioning, but I’ve seen no evidence of that.

Comment on I have a performance problem by Paul

Paul — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:11:49 +0000

I know this is a bit off topic, but do you know why Oracle documents all have dot one on the end?
eg 1285485.1
Seems like the .1 is redundant?

Comment on I have a performance problem by Sarah Boyd Turner

Sarah Boyd Turner — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:45:04 +0000

I concur. How do we know it’s Viagra and not Cialis that will help? Long live SGR!

Comment on A plea to security auditors by Alan

Alan — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 07:15:00 +0000

I couldn’t possibly comment Joerg

Craig, I’m glad that you are seeing some improvement in what we do.

Comment on A plea to security auditors by Craig S. Bell

Craig S. Bell — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:38:59 +0000

Hear, hear! You would think they get paid by the vuln. It does seem as if they don’t feel obligated to address the possible mitigating factors that might declare you safe.

Even the software vendors themselves can be guilty of cutting corners. The first couple of Oracle quarterly CPU releases that covered Solaris had these problems.

I had to make a spreadsheet that cross-referenced three or four docs to get what could have easily been incorporated in the announcement. The good news is that they listened to my (and others) feedback, and the latest CPU is an improvement.

It’s still not perfect — due to intentionally ambiguous alert descriptions (some of which they file themselves), I still don’t always know the underlying root cause; but, at least I know which patch I need to fulfill the checkbox reviews and audits. =-)

-cheers, CSB

Comment on A plea to security auditors by Joerg M.

Joerg M. — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 08:16:46 +0000

Often the problem is the point that everybody with a pen test tool calls themself a security auditor ….

Comment on McAfee data file 6282 reporting a trojan on Solaris (SPARC and x64) ? by A plea to security auditors « Alan Hargreaves' Blog

A plea to security auditors « Alan Hargreaves' Blog — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 05:01:28 +0000

[...] Verify that the system really is vulnerable. As I pointed out in an earlier blog, looking at the version label is not always enough to say that a version is vulnerable. Let alone the fact that sometimes even the best of tools get false positives. [...]

Comment on Apache patches on Solaris 10 by Apache patches on Solaris 10 « Alan Hargreaves' Blog « apache

Apache patches on Solaris 10 « Alan Hargreaves' Blog « apache — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:31:57 +0000

[...] Więcej: Apache patches on Solaris 10 « Alan Hargreaves' Blog [...]