Re: ODBC

tqbfsecnet.com
Sun, 10 May 1998 13:23:33 -0500 (CDT)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: David Kennedy CISSP: "Re: Blitzkrieg Server -- For Real?! ( LONG )"
• Previous message: Paul D. Robertson: "Re: Inward telnet from insecure clients (was Re: Security Related Issues)"
• In reply to: Bennett Todd: "Inward telnet from insecure clients (was Re: Security Related Issues)"
• Next in thread: Rick Murphy: "Re: ODBC"
• Reply: Rick Murphy: "Re: ODBC"
• Reply: Bennett Todd: "Re: ODBC"

> First answer would be easy: _don't_ do it. ODBC is an immature protocol;
> security isn't implemented by any vendor I know of. They don't have

Huh? I am very weak on database stuff, but I was of the impression that
ODBC *wasn't* an on-the-wire protocol, but rather a calling convention for
database libraries so that arbitrary drivers could interoperate with
arbitrary database-enabled programs.

If ODBC IS an on-the-wire protocol, can someone point me to where it's
defined?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas H. Ptacek Secure Networks, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.enteract.com/~tqbf "If you're so special, why aren't you dead?"

• Next message: David Kennedy CISSP: "Re: Blitzkrieg Server -- For Real?! ( LONG )"
• Previous message: Paul D. Robertson: "Re: Inward telnet from insecure clients (was Re: Security Related Issues)"
• In reply to: Bennett Todd: "Inward telnet from insecure clients (was Re: Security Related Issues)"
• Next in thread: Rick Murphy: "Re: ODBC"
• Reply: Rick Murphy: "Re: ODBC"
• Reply: Bennett Todd: "Re: ODBC"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Jul 17 1999 - 07:10:54 CDT