John Bartow
john at winhaven.net
Thu Nov 13 23:04:19 CST 2003
Jim, Oh sure. I'll send it right over. I installed it duel boot on my UnixWare machine. <BIG GRIN> NOT I used to be a SysAdmin for AT&T Unix version 3.2.(something or or other) and then had to move to UnixWare version 4? (IIRC-whatever version it was the first version of Novell "UnixWare"). "THAT was sure a good idea on their part" <smirking cynically> I would have loved an SCO system! I tried really hard to get one but just couldn't swing it. And I didn't have the hardware for Sun (pre-Solaris). I actually came into the NT world because when we were starting our GIS pilot project and we wanted it to be hosted on Unixware so I would admin everything the same. Funny thing is we couldn't find one that would run on UnixWare so we went with Intergraph (who had their own Unix called Clipper). The project finally got approved and right about then Intergraph made this wild leap into porting everything to Windows NT and we had to go with it. They were the first really big company to support NT and they suffered for it for a long time. NT 3.1 and even 3.5 were pretty horrible. NT 3.51 was really the first stable version of the product IMHO. But even then you had to deal with the horrible Windows 3.1 GUI. NT 4 was a slice of heaven! I actually ran my GIS Pilot project on NT 3.51, NT 4 with the attribute data held in an Informix SE v5 RDBMS on UnixWare. Nobody could believe it worked. I do believe it was the only configuration like that in the world-ever :o) We used to tell Intergraph Support (the local Intergraph guys idea) that it was an SCO box and just make little changes here and there where things were different between UnixWare and SCO. Never had any data loss and other than the initial connection time (about a minute) it ran as fast as anything I've ever worked on. I did that (UnixWare-SysAdmin/NT-Admin/RDBMS-Admin/GIS Pilot Project Manager) for 4 years. Plus I supported all of the dept. desktops/programs and three CADD stations. Never a dull moment. I don't think I ever listed that all before. No wonder I got burned out and can't remember anything anymore! BTW what were we discussing? John B. "slap-happy tired" http://www.w2knews.com/rd/rd.cfm?id=031110FA-Inner_Geek > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence > (AccessD) > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 9:57 PM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD] POLL: Access Security > > > OT > > John, > > I will have you know that I was a fully certified SCO reseller > and trainer, > at one time. Mind you that was almost fifteen years ago and I > having a tough > time setting up Samba on an old beater-box using 5.2 Red Hat linux. Do you > have a 5.2 pre-built floating around that you would like to send me? > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of John Bartow > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:29 AM > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > Subject: RE: [AccessD] POLL: Access Security > > > Hi Jim, > I'll bet you can't write about "SCO Unix" on too many lists > anymore without > getting flamed! > :o) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Jim Lawrence > > (AccessD) > > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:01 AM > > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] POLL: Access Security > > > > > > Hi All: > > > > This security thing can go a little overboard. If your applications have > > sensitive data and provides access from the general public no one > > will ever > > use a standard computer terminal and Access's MDB as the BE, it > > is just too > > flaky. > > > > SCO Unix had a 'Yellow Book' setting that when toggled > basically made the > > system inaccessible and consumed all the system resources > monitoring every > > access, every task performed and continually validated every > > user, again and > > again. The system now became a monster to handle and even to do > > the simplest > > of tasks, for the systems guy, could take an hour. (Everyone in > > that office > > was delighted when the data was backed up and the server was > > reformatted and > > the system re-installed.) > > > > My point is, that sometimes super tight security is a waste of > > time. A good > > talk by the office manager on how he/she will whack the first person who > > screws with things, without authorization, is the best security of all. > > > > Jim > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com > > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Elam, Debbie > > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 6:08 AM > > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > > Subject: RE: [AccessD] POLL: Access Security > > > > > > 2 > > > > Have had a whole series of HR databases with sensitive data that needs > > locked tight. It takes me a while and I avoid it if I can. Secured > > databases are a PITA. I inherited a database locked so tight > it was darn > > near impenetrable. All of this for info that was common > knowledge in the > > workplace and not all that sensitive outside it. The thing is nearly > > impossible to modify or troubleshoot and I would love to give > the guy that > > wrote this a piece of my mind. > > > > Debbie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John W. Colby [mailto:jcolby at colbyconsulting.com] > > Sent: 13 November 2003 01:00 > > To: AccessD > > Subject: [AccessD] POLL: Access Security > > > > > > I'd like to take a poll regarding your knowledge of Access' built-in > > security. By security I do NOT mean the database properties, > rather using > > workgroups / users to secure forms, tables, queries etc. > > > > Anyone interested in participating please choose one of the following: > > > > 1) I am an Access security guru. I can quickly and easily lock > a database > > down so tight I can't even get back in. No help / books needed. > > 2) I am fluent with Access security. I can get the job done but it > > definitely takes a few hours. I probably won't need the help / books. > > 3) I have done Access Security on at least one real paying > > project. I would > > need help / books to do it again. > > 4) I have heard about Access Security, read about it, managed to > > shoot a toe > > off, maybe played around with it, but I am confident I could get the job > > done. Books / help definitly needed. > > 5) Access has built in security? What is this and where would I > > go to learn > > it? Why haven't I ever seen these books / help? > > > > If you would please just select a number and reply I would > appreciate it. > > > > As for myself, I must admit I rate a solid 4. No client has ever been > > willing to pay for it and I have always had other things to learn > > / do so I > > just never did it (for real). > > > > John W. Colby > > www.colbyconsulting.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > - JENKENS & GILCHRIST E-MAIL NOTICE - This transmission may be: > > (1) subject > > to the Attorney-Client Privilege, (2) an attorney work product, or (3) > > strictly confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this > > message, you may not disclose, print, copy or disseminate this > > information. > > If you have received this in error, please reply and notify the sender > > (only) and delete the message. Unauthorized interception of this > > e-mail is a > > violation of federal criminal law. > > This communication does not reflect an intention by the sender or the > > sender's client or principal to conduct a transaction or make any > > agreement > > by electronic means. Nothing contained in this message or in any > > attachment > > shall satisfy the requirements for a writing, and nothing > contained herein > > shall constitute a contract or electronic signature under the Electronic > > Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, any version of > the Uniform > > Electronic Transactions Act or any other statute governing electronic > > transactions. > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > AccessD mailing list > > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > >