Firefox, SQL Dbase Server, and Windows 2000 Server
-
Hello Everyone,
There was recent turmoil in my office due to the fact that our clients were getting these SQL server error messages, resulting in a connection loss and eventual reboot. What worsened this was that after a while the sql server seemed to be logging itself out, or mysteriously stopping, causing total loss of connection.
I am an absolute, down and dirty newbie who knows very little about the architecture of sql server, but I know windows server 2000 (which it's installed on) and just about everything else windows. We have a consultant who comes in and takes care of the big nasty issues with the sql server when they come up.
The final result, according to the consultant, was that the errors occurred because I installed Firefox on the server containing the sql server installation. "Firefox changed some system dll's and caused the sql server to crash." was what I was told.
Now, considering I almost lost my job because of this, and I'm simply not convinced, I ask: "Is there any damaging relationship between the Firefox Browser, Windows 2000 Server, and SQL Server?"
Let me know what your thoughts are on this.
-
To my absolute best knowlegde that answer is know. Although installing Firefox really was a bad idea it should not have tampered with any System DLLs that would have effected SQL and even thou I am not using Win 2000 Server it has not cuased this issue on any Win 2k Pro with SQL 2k and Firefox. Likelyhood is almost nill but there is the off chance it could have damaged something during install. Check the event logs to see if any clues exist.
-
Yeah, the funny thing is that I did check the event logs, there was nothing on record that indicated that there was a problem with that particular installation. As a matter of fact, according to the event log the system was pretty much AOK.
The mystery deepens with the consultant: he's pretty tight lipped about it, and I'm hoping that he's not simply trying to lay blame for the whole issue on me. You know what they say about stuff flowing downstream...
Funny you bring it up though, why is it a bad idea to install firefox on the server?
-
Well, Firefox is a user application, User applications belong on user machines, not servers. Simple as that
Although I am intrigued that this consultant believes system DLLs on Windows 2000 (which includes Windows File Protection) can be changed by a browser install program.
-
So, how would you manage getting updates to your server? If Firefox is a user app then so is IE.
AFAIK there is no reason why you should NOT have an app on a server, but then you wouldn't want to use a server as a workstation.
You could pay a visit to the Firefox user forum to see if anyone knows on this.
-
I tend to agree with Antares. Firefox is open-source software. Such software usually does its configuration via configuration files and hardly doesn't touch, update or even replace any system-vital DLL. Did your consultant get a little bit more into details or was it just his educated guess to justify his bill?
--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/[/url] -
David,
I have firefox installed on a test server (just a Dell 4300 with 512MB RAM) running Windows 2000 Server SP4 and SQL Server 2000 SP3. I've haven't experienced any problems at all in the 3 weeks or so that I've been using it.
To back up his claim, the consultant should provide you with a list of the .DLLs that were allegedly replaced.
Mike
-
sounds like a bunch of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) if you ask me. FireFox is my primary browser mainly because of tabbed browsing (it's not necessarily more secure... see the spoofing vulnerabilities currently present in Bugzilla and reported in most security forums).
Here's a way to do a simple almost fool-proof test, compare hashes of the DLLs. There are products that do this, but you could write say a Perl script to do it, too. Take hashes of any .DLLs in the critical directories (%WINDIR%, %WINDIR%\System32, etc.) on a system without FireFox. Store those values away. Then install Firefox. Take hashes one more time and then check to see what values changed. If your consultant claims FireFox changes the .DLLs, he should have some sort of evidence like this. And if he/she goes into saying well you can't rely on hashes because they've proven collisions are a lot more predictable, that's correct but no one at this point has found a good means to do so unless it's intentionally engineered.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
I also have Firefox installed on a test box with Windows 2000 Server SP4 and SQL Server 2000 SP3 with no problems. I've had this setup for nearly a year without issues (several of the beta versions of Firefox, now on v.1), so I too am skeptical of this diagnosis.
-
Wow, thank you for the feedback guys.
This is the whole reason I came here: to justify my suspicion: FUD!! When it came down to it, due to the consultant's assessment of the situation, I've gone from the go-to network admin to the piss-on that doesn't know jack. Real nice, now I have to go to the consultant if I even want to look at the server, let alone update any of my client machines out here on the floor.
Hell, the fool even uninstalled firefox from my workstation! Now that it's been removed from the server, I'll check the hashes on the system critical .Dll's.. but is there a way to also verify the integrity of sql enterprise server critical files as well? If I can do this then set up a box (We have a spare dell poweredge) as a test bed, then I can prove that it wasn't the installation that made the server crash and get my freggin reputation back
Thanks everyone! -
Sure. Check the files in the following directories:
Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\COM
and subdirs
Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\80\Tools\Binn
Default Instance:
Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL\Binn
Named Instance:
Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL$<Instance Name>\Binn
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
Oh yeah and if you find that the contrator did not give you a valid answer your contract should allow you to void payment for failuer to fulfill their duties, so use that if you find them wrong.
-
Unfortunately that requires that David gets his credibility back first. His boss needs to listen to him again and believe what he says. From my own observations that is no easy task. It happens ever so often that when we suggested something here, nobody cared. However, when some smart $2000 per day consultant states exactly the same, suddenly it is the way to go.
And most often the guys who can sign these contracts are not the guys who have the technical knowledge to judge on the qualification on a consultant. Sad, but true!
David even can't show his boss this printed discussion. His boss might only say, he should work instead of surfing the net while being at work. That might prove risky.
Good luck!
--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/[/url] -
Thank you. Unfortunately you've hit the nail on the head. What worsens it is that I've only been working there a couple of months, the consultant that works with the company has been with them for several years, and the "IT" staff that was on board before I came in are really doctors playing a sort of double-role. Their knowledge both starts and ends at NT 4.0.
My only real solution is to take it slow, have plenty of patience, and most importantly, Educate myself. I can't be a real FUD Buster until I get my trusty FUD Buster Certification
Thank you for your help guys. This has proven to be a real learning experience.
-
Truly the kind of outfit you #don't# want to work for.
I can see Dilbert written all over this...
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply