[nycbug-talk] [Fwd: Security Threat Watch 028]

[Brad Schonhorst]

On May 11, 2004, at 3:06 PM, Pete Wright wrote:

> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 11, 2004, at 12:59 PM, Pete Wright wrote:
>>
>>> Pete Wright wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 11, 2004, at 12:24 PM, Pete Wright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mikel King wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Has anyone encountered this MAC bug?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i have heard of it, altho i don't think there is a virus or worm 
>>>>>> loose yet.  the good news is that it's AFP that has the vuln, 
>>>>>> which i think most OSX shops have moved away from by now...i hope 
>>>>>> ;^)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For what, SMB?  NFS?  You must be kidding.
>>>>>
>>>> no i'm not.  sorry.
>>>
>>>
>>> what other crossplatform, mostly open (via samba) network file 
>>> system would you suggest?
>>
>>
>> You said "most OSX shops", if it's an OS X shop, you don't care about 
>> using a protocol that would interop with something else.  In my 
>> experience, when you have macs talking to macs you use AFP, otherwise 
>> you use SMB.  You have to go out a little bit out of your way on 
>> every client and server to use something other than AFP if they're 
>> both macs.  There is no very compelling reason to move away from AFP.
>
>
> hey i'm an OSX shop, but that doesn't mean i shouldn't take into 
> consideration how things are gonna grow in the future.  I guess the 
> argument against afp, despite all of it's positive aspects, is that 
> people are now free to move away from it and use more open 
> technologies.  i was just assuming most people were i guess.  doesn't 
> seem to crazy to me...
>
> -pete
>
>

As of 10.3 apple is moving towards ldap for managed clients.

-brad