[Gruppo-web] [loco-council] Disappointed by Canonical SysAdmin Team behaviour
Riccardo Padovani
riccardo a rpadovani.com
Ven 31 Ott 2014 11:48:14 GMT
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:35:17PM -0400, cprofitt wrote:
>
> Thanks for raising this issue.
Hi all,
I'm currently admin of the Italian Web Group, but only since Sep 2013, and
original contributors are not in the LoCo anymore, so I reply for how the
situation is now;
I read old mails/rt but there is nothing interesting to our case.
> I have never managed a Canonical supported website before so I would
> like to ask for some background.
>
> * Is there an SLA that Canonical has made to community web pages
> they host?
There is this wiki page: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoHosting, but our team is
not listed there, so there is nothing about our LoCo.
Reading old mails, seems the first time switched to Canonical server is in Jan
2007[1], but I don't find any rt on rt.ubuntu.com about the migration
> * Is there any agreement in regards to notification when problems
> arise?
No
> * Was it documented that the IT team has control of the drupal
> environment via LP? If so how did the IS team miss that they had
> made that change?
There is no english public documentation about how drupal is managed by us, but
it's the first time that IS team says something about a critical bug in Drupal,
so somehow they know we manage drupal by our own, because it's years we do
updates and IS team says nothing
> * How is the risk evaluated? Is there a guide that those affected
> can be made aware of to help them understand?
Nothing public as far my team and I know
> * Is there any site or communication that lets team know when
> service will be restored?
Nothing public as far my team and I know
> I can see with this particular vulnerability why action was taken, but I
> think it is reasonable that the IS team communicate with the people
> listed as contacts on the affected sites. Good incident response /
> security teams have a designated person (often non-technical) that is
> responsible for communications during incidents; does Canonical IS have
> such a person?
No. Plus, if we didn't ask explanation to IS team, there would still be a white
page with 'Forbidden' message on all ubuntu.it pages, because no message was
set from IS team when they chose to block our website.
At the moment there is a page we created so users are informed that is not a
random error.
Regards,
[1](IT)http://liste.ubuntu-it.org/pipermail/gruppo-web/2007-January/000519.html
--
Riccardo Padovani
www.rpadovani.com
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato non testuale è stato rimosso....
Nome: non disponibile
Tipo: application/pgp-signature
Dimensione: 819 bytes
Descrizione: Digital signature
URL: <http://liste.ubuntu-it.org/pipermail/gruppo-web/attachments/20141031/d1d7e087/attachment.pgp>
Maggiori informazioni sulla lista
Gruppo-web