Gabriel Talavera's questions

Im trying to keep away some attackers that try to exploit XSS vulnerabilities from my website, I have found that most of the malicious attempts start with a classic "alert(document.cookie);\" test. The site is not vulnerable to XSS but I want to block the offending IP addresses before they found a real vulnerability, also, to keep the logs clean.

My first thought is to have a script constantly checking in the Apache logs all IP addresses that start with that probe and send those addresses to an iptables drop rule. With something like this:

cat /var/log/httpd/-access_log | grep "alert(document.cookie);" | awk '{print $1}' | uniq

Why would be an effective way to send the output of that command to iptables?

Thanks in advance for any input!

I have read in a couple of places that when you are in the situation in which there are no spare disks and the RAID level doesn't protect you from another disk failure, some administrators choose to turn off storage until the new storage drives arrives.

However, I came across various vendors that advice against turning off storage unless you are replacing a a controller in a single controller system.

So, when the data is at serious risk if one more drive fails, why would be a bad idea to turn off the storage?

Thanks in advance!

We are planning to place a HP MSA P2000 with two FC/iSCSI controllers in our network.

We have two options to provide more storage to Virtual Machines (We are running Hyper-V):

A) Add iSCSI targets to the Virtual Hosts and then create VHD that we would add to each guest server.

B) Directly add iSCSI targets in each guest server.

Just wondering if one of those options is better than the other, and which is the common practice in a virtualized environment.

Thanks in advance for any input!