can this 'discussion' please be moved to ms-dos-weenies or
> something?
You miss the point. Thousands of Web servers out there are Pentium-based.
Bruce Robertson wrote:
> can this 'discussion' please be moved to ms-dos-weenies or
> something?You miss the point. Thousands of Web servers out there are
Pentium-based.
Why is that a problem? Unless somebody could execute the code on the
boxthen it is not a threat - closed systems, like WWW servers (most
servers like
that really) should not be in any danger.
A multi-user box, or anything that can give shell access would be really
worth
upgrading to something that didn't have the bug!
As to if it should be discussed on the nanog list - well, maybe not 
[ On Wed, November 12, 1997 at 09:54:21 (-0800), Bruce Robertson wrote: ]
Subject: Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc
> can this 'discussion' please be moved to ms-dos-weenies or
> something?You miss the point. Thousands of Web servers out there are Pentium-based.
In fact I would guess that most small and medium sized ISPs run Pentium
based servers of one description or another, and of course those that
provide any kind of shell access, or who offer to run CGIs or ~/.forward
scripts, etc., for their users, etc., will all be extremely vulnerable
to attack. It's the ultimate denial of service attack, as even the mere
threat of actual attack is likely to force such machines to be taken out
of service.
I'll bet non-Intel replacement chips are very rare these days. I'm
kinda sorry I didn't buy the AMD K6 CPU I was planning for a new server
before this came out. It'll probably cost me $100 more now if I can
even find one!