Petri IT Knowledgebase Forums
 

Petri.co.il forums Home Forums Start Page Forums Frequently Asked Questions FAQ Member List Members List
Go Back   Petri IT Knowledgebase Forums > Server Operating Systems > Windows Server 2000 / 2003
Petri.co.il is happy to award auglan the title of Most Valuable Member !!!
Register Calendar Calendar Search Petri IT Knowledgebase Forums Search Todays Posts Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

this thread has 8 replies and has been viewed 1437 times

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 15th June 2009, 03:37
tradu81 tradu81 is offline
Casual
It's not a coincidence
 
 Join Date: Mar 2009
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Melbourne
 Posts: 63
 Reputation: tradu81 is on a distinguished road (10)
Default Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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  
Old 15th June 2009, 05:18
hazey's Avatar
hazey hazey is offline
Junior Member
It's not a coincidence
 
 Join Date: Aug 2008
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Australia
 Posts: 147
 Reputation: hazey is on a distinguished road (31)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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  
Old 15th June 2009, 05:20
tehcamel's Avatar
tehcamel tehcamel is offline
Moderator
 
 Join Date: Mar 2009
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Melbourne
 Posts: 5,033
  Send a message via Skype™ to tehcamel
 Reputation: tehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to all (557)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazey View Post
IMO it would be best to implement a WSUS solution, very easy to setup and maintain. It doesnt 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 particiuly want you production servers wandering off to Microsoft on their own accord and downloading updates.

just my opinion.
I concur with your response - I also suggest the use of WSUS. This gives you control over when patches are installed, which patches are installed (for instance, you may not want to install dotnet3.5 framework patches in a server that runs a dotnet1.1 application only..)
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.
__________________

IT Support for businesses. Australian IT Support
Adept Small Business IT
Passionate about IT Support

Please do show your appreciation to those who assist you by leaving Rep Point
Posting from a BB Playbook - please excuse my typing
  #4  
Old 15th June 2009, 05:29
joeqwerty's Avatar
joeqwerty joeqwerty is offline
Moderator
 
 Join Date: Jul 2007
  6 month star 12 month star
 Posts: 4,548
 Reputation: joeqwerty is a name known to alljoeqwerty is a name known to alljoeqwerty is a name known to alljoeqwerty is a name known to alljoeqwerty is a name known to alljoeqwerty is a name known to all (596)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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  
Old 15th June 2009, 08:23
Ossian Ossian is offline
Administrator
 
 Join Date: Nov 2003
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Bonnie Scotland
 Posts: 15,103
  Send a message via Skype™ to Ossian
 Reputation: Ossian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud ofOssian has much to be proud of (1300)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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  
Old 16th June 2009, 03:25
tradu81 tradu81 is offline
Casual
It's not a coincidence
 
 Join Date: Mar 2009
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Melbourne
 Posts: 63
 Reputation: tradu81 is on a distinguished road (10)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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  
Old 16th June 2009, 03:34
tehcamel's Avatar
tehcamel tehcamel is offline
Moderator
 
 Join Date: Mar 2009
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Melbourne
 Posts: 5,033
  Send a message via Skype™ to tehcamel
 Reputation: tehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to alltehcamel is a name known to all (557)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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..
__________________

IT Support for businesses. Australian IT Support
Adept Small Business IT
Passionate about IT Support

Please do show your appreciation to those who assist you by leaving Rep Point
Posting from a BB Playbook - please excuse my typing
  #8  
Old 16th June 2009, 19:12
Nonapeptide's Avatar
MVM Nonapeptide Nonapeptide is offline
Senior Member
MVM
 
 Join Date: Feb 2008
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
 Posts: 1,769
  Send a message via MSN to Nonapeptide Send a message via Yahoo to Nonapeptide Send a message via Skype™ to Nonapeptide
 Reputation: Nonapeptide has a spectacular aura aboutNonapeptide has a spectacular aura aboutNonapeptide has a spectacular aura about (246)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

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. Of course, certain servers and circumstances do not permit this, but that's a general rule.
__________________
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  
Old 19th June 2009, 03:57
tradu81 tradu81 is offline
Casual
It's not a coincidence
 
 Join Date: Mar 2009
  6 month star 12 month star
 Location: Melbourne
 Posts: 63
 Reputation: tradu81 is on a distinguished road (10)
Default Re: Automatic updates enabled or disabled on Windows 2003 Server?

Thank you.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +3. The time now is 03:32.

Steel Blue 3.5.4 vBulletin Style ©2006 vBEnhanced
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
 

Valid XHTML 1.0!   Valid CSS!

Copyright 2005 Daniel Petri