Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!ac.UK!CRAA055%UK.AC.KCL.CC.VAXB
From: CRAA055%UK.AC.KCL.CC.VAXB@ac.UK
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Installing Patches
Message-ID: <8708071317.AA22197@jade.berkeley.edu>
Date: Sun, 9-Aug-87 00:22:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: jade.8708071317.AA22197
Posted: Sun Aug  9 00:22:17 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Aug-87 13:20:06 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 25

Brian Beesley is right to ask DEC to include the official "checksum" with each
patch provided (it might help if they also docuemnted the CHECKSUM program
officially). This would minimise problems caused by patched patches.

Surely, more to the point is that if a system manager is stupid enough to
install a patch received over the network, rather than wait for the official
release from DEC, he/she deserves all he/she gets?  particularly, when the
patch in question is a fix to a security hole!

Andy Harper,
Kings College London UK

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
I Computing Centre, Kings College, Strand, London, UK       I
I Tel: +44 (0)1 836 5454          I
+-------------------------------------------+-------------------------------+
I JANET: A.Harper @ UK.AC.KCL.CC.VAXB     I ARPA: A.Harper%KCL.CC.VAXB  I
I         I  @ ucl-cs.arpa     I
I EARN:  A.Harper @ VAXB.CC.KCL.AC.UK     I ARPA: A.Harper      I
I     or A.Harper%VAXB.CC.KCL.AC.UK @ AC.UK I  @ VAXB.CC.KCL.AC.UK I
I         I        I
I UUCP:  ...ukc!uk.ac.kcl.cc.vaxb!A.Harper  I ARPA: A.Harper%KCL.CC.VAXB  I
I         I  @ CS.UCL.AC.UK     I
I EAN:   A.Harper @ VAXB.CC.KCL.AC.UK     I        I
+-------------------------------------------+-------------------------------+