Re: Oracle security alert #68

From: Andy Hardy <junkmail_at_[127.0.0.1>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:28:22 +0100
Message-ID: <rlOJKiD2uqcBFw5m@[127.0.0.1]>

In message <910046b4.0410141855.6dbc4bbe_at_posting.google.com> , Paul Drake <bdbafh_at_gmail.com> writes
>Andy Hardy <junkmail@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
>news:<lZsKl6Ci2WbBFwCb@[127.0.0.1]>...
>> In message <416C36DD.11C374A2_at_YourShoesyahoo.com> , Walt
>> <walt_askier_at_YourShoesyahoo.com> writes
>> >
>> >I'd like to apply the patch for Oracle Security Alert #68
>> ><http://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/showdoc?db=NOT&id=281188.1.>
>>
>> I hope that the 9i patch is better than the 8i one - consists of 589
>> files and a readme saying where they all should be copied to...
>
>it depends.

It's amazing that an 'essential' patch has been rolled out in such a 'loose' manner!

I'd be interested in the WIn32/817 batch script...

-- 
Andy Hardy. PGP ID: 0xA62A4849

Received on Sun Oct 17 2004 - 12:28:22 CDT

Re: Oracle security alert #68 - advice?