Re: IBM Debunks Oracle's MultiVersion Read Consistency ?

From: Nuno Souto <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: 7 May 2003 15:04:23 -0700
Message-ID: <73e20c6c.0305071404.758460da@posting.google.com>

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_exxesolutions.com> wrote in message news:<3EB919C7.A4EF4DD1_at_exxesolutions.com>...

> Certainly Tivoli, etc. can be used to secure DB2. But it is a separate product from a separate company
> requiring a separate license ... and raises the cost of ownership significantly. The database, in and of
> itself, has no security. And in a Windows environment that is a significant issue.

UDB is so fundamentaly freakin UNSAFE the admin password is stored, UNENCRYPTED, in the first 100 bytes of the first data file! Just dump it out and look.

About time some of the "dirties" of UDB/DB2 start to get exposure so their idiotic marketing gets their heads bashed-in. Instead of bad-mouthing other products, why don't they go to their R&D and ask them to FIX THE FREAKIN SOFTWARE, for a change?

Talk about "security".
Yeah, right!

Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam Received on Wed May 07 2003 - 17:04:23 CDT