![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| Petri.co.il is happy to award auglan the title of Most Valuable Member !!! |
| Register | Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
Mark Forums Read |
| Notices |
|
|
Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?this thread has 8 replies and has been viewed 1437 times
|
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Hi,
I was hoping I could get some recommendations on whether automatic updates should be enabled or disabled on Servers in a large enterprise environment? I personally would have it disabled on servers but would like to get other opinions and the risks and benefits of having it disabled and enabled on servers. (I'm not worried about workstations). There is no software distribution server in the environment and automatic updates is anebled in the whole domain. Thanks |
|
#2
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
IMO it would be best to implement a WSUS solution, very easy to setup and maintain. It doesn't even need to be on its own server just some space for updates is necessary. The benefits being you can choose what to download (critical updates, optional etc, etc) and test them before unleashing on your production environment. Windows update as far as i am concerned is more for a SOHO environment not enterprise. You don't really want you production servers wandering off to Microsoft on their own accord and downloading updates.
just my opinion. |
|
#3
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
Quote:
It also allows you to setup test groups and deploy patches in a staged manner. It also means that you only download the patches and updates once.. and at an offpeak time, rather than having X number of srvers all downloading the same thing.
__________________
Posting from a BB Playbook - please excuse my typing |
|
#4
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
I would also recommend WSUS as a way to control the updates for your servers. If you're unable to implement WSUS then I recommend setting the Automatic Updates service to disabled on your servers and implementing a regular maintenance schedule for you to assess and install updates on your servers.
Just an off topic side note: The .NET frameworks are independent of each other. 1, 2, and 3 (and their accompanying service packs) can be installed on the same machine without affecting applications that require a particular framework. |
|
#5
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Even with WSUS, I always set servers to "download and notify to install" rather than automatic install. This is in an environment with approaching 50 servers. As it gets bigger, I will have to set up a test area.
__________________
Tom Jones MCT, MCSE (2000:Security & 2003), MCSA:Security & Messaging, MCDBA, MCDST, MCITP(EA, EMA, SA, EDA, ES, CS), MCTS, MCP, Sec+ PhD, MSc, FIAP, MIITT IT Trainer / Consultant Ossian Ltd Scotland ** Remember to give credit where credit is due and leave reputation points where appropriate ** |
|
#6
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Hi,
I appreciate all your reponses. I'm aware of WSUS or even 3rd Party distribution servers but I'm not looking for a solution but a recommendation as there is no distribution server in an environment. My client does not have a distribution server and are not willing to spend on additional hardware\software. Basically, they have automatic updates enabled on the Default domain policy. From experience, having automatic updates on servers is not the way to go because the way I look at it is if it ain't broken there is no need for updates on servers unless it's a critical update. In saying that, having automatic updates on does not provide me with a platform in which I can test the patches\updates as with a product like WSUS for example. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think there is any harm with having it on considering the option is set to 'Notify me but don't automatically download them or install them'? I would like to put forward a recommendation to have this GPO disabled purely so that servers do not get the prompt that there are updates available. Can you think of any good reason to disable this on the servers? Are there security risks if this is enabled or is there a best practice\ recommendation by a higher party such as Microsoft to disable this on servers? Again thank you all for your efforts. |
|
#7
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
they shouldn't have to spend money on additional hardware or software.. if you've got some spare disk space, you can just install WSUS. It's free.
I'd recommend they go this direction. WSUS load is relatively low, depending on your environment of course..
__________________
Posting from a BB Playbook - please excuse my typing |
|
#8
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
This reminds of a thread I started some time back. I think the consensus is to not have your servers update automatically. I don't even link to download them automatically. Every few months I review the list of updates that are waiting and then I download and install them if any are particularly necessary. If none are necessary, I don't even have the server download them. I try to reboot servers as little as possible and prefer to see uptime measured in months and not days.
__________________
Wesley David LinkedIn | Careers 2.0 ------------------------------- Microsoft Certifications: MCSE 2003 | MCSA:Messaging 2003 | MCITP:EA, SA, EST | MCTS: a'plenty | MCDST Vendor Neutral Certifications: CWNA Blog: www.TheNubbyAdmin.com || Twitter: @Nonapeptide || GTalk, Reader and Google+: Nonapeptide@gmail.com || Skype: Wesley.Nonapeptide Goofy kitten avatar photo from Troy Snow: flickr.com/photos/troysnow/ |
|
#9
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
Thank you.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Automatic Reboots after updates installed via WSUS | georgeeye | Windows Server 2000 / 2003 | 5 | 27th May 2009 22:07 |
| Automatic Updates broken, XP Pro SP2 | gforceindustries | Windows 2000 Pro, XP Pro | 2 | 17th September 2008 14:37 |
| Exchange has problems after user is disabled and then re-enabled. | U-Phorik | Exchange 2000 / 2003 | 2 | 23rd May 2007 17:33 |
| automatic updates for XP Pro | Yoda28 | Windows 2000 Pro, XP Pro | 4 | 14th September 2006 09:44 |
| Windows Updates for Server 2003 | emjay653 | Windows Server 2000 / 2003 | 1 | 16th May 2005 15:10 |