I'm trying to understand what I can do to protect proprietary data in SQL
2005. I have an application that currently uses Paradox and I plan to move
it to SQL 2005. Most users will start off with SQL 2005 Express, but will
eventually move to a 'full' version of SQL Server. Paradox allows me to
encrypt whole tables. I know it's not very good security because someone
can still do memory dumps etc. but in combination with licensing agreements
it's probably sufficient in my case to protect proprietary data stored in
the database. Can I achieve something similar in SQL 2005?
I see that I can encrypt data in specific columns, but I'm guessing that
those columns can't be indexed? (Or if they were indexed, it would have to
be the encrypted values rather than the original unencrypted values that
would actually be indexed thus making the indexing less useful)? It doesn't
seem like there's any way to encrypt a whole table?
In some of the stuff I've read, I get the sense that if I create a named
instance of a new SQL Server (Standard or Express), I can set up my instance
to only use SQL Authentication. Then I can prevent the Computer Admin of
the machine where SQL Server is installed from using his/her Windows
Authentication to access the database or named instance of the server. The
only way to configure the server or it's databases would be to know the SA
password and use SQL Authentication to log into the SQL server instance. Is
this correct? And, what does this gain me? How hard would it be to take
the database from my named instance and move it to a different SQL Server
Instance and then gain access to it?Hi,
Thanks for using Microsoft Online Managed Newsgroup.
From your description, I understand that:
You wanted to know:
1. if you can encrypt a whole table in SQL Server 2005;
2. if you can set up your SQL Server instance only use SQL Authentication;
3. how you can move your database from your named instance to a different
SQL Server instance and gain access to it.
If I have misunderstood, please let me know.
For your first question, by now there has been no such setting to encrypt a
whole table in SQL Server. You can encrypt a particular column in a table
by using a key or a certificate. You may refer to:
Improving Data Security by Using SQL Server 2005
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/it...tsec.mspx#EYAAC
For your second question, I would like to let you know that SQL Server has
only two authentication mode: one is Windows Authentication mode; the other
is Mixed Authentication mode (include Windows Authentication and SQL
Authentication). So Windows authentication will be always used by SQL
Server. Any trusted connections or local users can access your SQL Server,
however they will not have permissions to access databases if they are not
members of local administrators group and if you do not assign permissions
to them.
For your last question, I recommend that you:
1. Fully backup all of your user databases and logs;
2. Restore the databases to your new SQL Server instance;
3. Transfer SQL Server logins and passwords to the new SQL Server instance.
Please refer to:
How to transfer logins and passwords between instances of SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/246133/en-us
Also, I strongly recommend that you refer to this article for more
information:
How to move databases between computers that are running SQL Server
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314546/en-us
Besides, for SQL Server 2005 instance, you can also use Copy Database to
move the databases:
Using the Copy Database Wizard
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms188664.aspx
If you are very concerned with the table level encryption, I recommend that
you give Microsoft feedback via the link:
https://connect.microsoft.com/SQL
Your feedback will be routed to SQL team so that this feature will probably
be included in the next release.
Look forward to your reply. If you have any other questions or concerns,
please feel free to let me know. It is my pleasure to be of assistance.
Charles Wang
Microsoft Online Community Support
========================================
==============
When responding to posts, please "Reply to Group" via your newsreader
so that others may learn and benefit from this issue.
========================================
==============
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
========================================
==============|||Hi,
What is everything going on? Please feel free to let me know if you need
further assistance.
Have a great day!
Sincerely yours,
Charles Wang
Microsoft Online Community Support
Showing posts with label plan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label plan. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Project Plan template for Migration from MS SQL 2000 to MS sql 2005
Hello:
I'm looking for a Project Plan template for Migration from MS SQL 2000 to MS sql 2005.
We apporeciate your help.
regards
William
Hi William,
I am also searching for a migration template project plan. Pl. can you send it to me if you have found one?
Thanks,
GP
geeta_pajjuri@.yahoo.com
|||can you pls send a copy to me too.
Thanks
Narsan
lingala_narsan@.hotmail.com
|||We are also looking for a Project Plan for Migration. Greatly appreciate if someone can share.Regards,
Shastry
|||Hi guys,
If anyone has found this template, please could you send it to me...Many thanks in advance...
Cheers,
/A
alfredo_espejo(At)hotmail.com
Project Plan template for Migration from MS SQL 2000 to MS sql 2005
Hello:
I'm looking for a Project Plan template for Migration from MS SQL 2000 to MS sql 2005.
We apporeciate your help.
regards
William
Hi William,
I am also searching for a migration template project plan. Pl. can you send it to me if you have found one?
Thanks,
GP
geeta_pajjuri@.yahoo.com
|||can you pls send a copy to me too.
Thanks
Narsan
lingala_narsan@.hotmail.com
|||We are also looking for a Project Plan for Migration. Greatly appreciate if someone can share.Regards,
Shastry
|||Hi guys,
If anyone has found this template, please could you send it to me...Many thanks in advance...
Cheers,
/A
alfredo_espejo(At)hotmail.com
Project Plan template for Migration from MS SQL 2000 to MS sql 2005
Hello:
I'm looking for a Project Plan template for Migration from MS SQL 2000 to MS sql 2005.
We apporeciate your help.
regards
William
Hi William,
I am also searching for a migration template project plan. Pl. can you send it to me if you have found one?
Thanks,
GP
geeta_pajjuri@.yahoo.com
|||can you pls send a copy to me too.
Thanks
Narsan
lingala_narsan@.hotmail.com
|||We are also looking for a Project Plan for Migration. Greatly appreciate if someone can share.Regards,
Shastry
|||Hi guys,
If anyone has found this template, please could you send it to me...Many thanks in advance...
Cheers,
/A
alfredo_espejo(At)hotmail.com
|||Did you guys got one? please send me a copy leonson@.hotmail.com
Progress Versus SQL Server
Progress is a piece of crap! Sure it runs on Unix. But the time
invested in learning and working with it obscene! With SQL Server I
could easily plan a maintenance backup plan and transaction backup plan
- Progress - well you have to learn about AI files, sizing the BI and
AI files as well as the data files. It's a freakin nightmare. If I
want to see data in a table, can I simply click on a table and open it
- NO! Instead, I have to learn the 4GL language to write a script to
return records (what if I want to resort those records - write another
4GL script and run it again). But hey, why do you want to see the data
in the tables (at least that's what I was told by my company) Progress
GUI - what a joke. This database server might have been popular with
unix but the world today is GUI and Microsoft are the GUI experts.
Even with the GUI tools in Progress, I still can't click on a table,
open it and see the records. Maybe that's not important to others but
as a dba, it sure is a necessity. We're working with different
versions of Progress and none of them integrate with the other. I've
spent 2 months now trying to run some simple database maintenance on
Progress and all I can say is that I hate BI, AI, and D1, D2, D3 files.
Give me SQL Server any day where at least I can manage databases in a
normal logical way without having to deal with a stinkin .ST files and
prostrct this...prostrct that!!! Any Progress responses are welcome
but I'll take you on any day against SQL Server. If you're a
Pro-Progress and anti-SQL Server, you're behind the times - get with
the newest technology and GUI (not a GUI in development.) I have yet
to see a true relational database designed in Progress. Upsizing a
Progress database into a GUI environment - HA!I worked with Progress for several years running mission critical
applications and all I can say is that is an excellent technology as good as
SQL Server or Oracle.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"pkohn@.charter.net" wrote:
> Progress is a piece of crap! Sure it runs on Unix. But the time
> invested in learning and working with it obscene! With SQL Server I
> could easily plan a maintenance backup plan and transaction backup plan
> - Progress - well you have to learn about AI files, sizing the BI and
> AI files as well as the data files. It's a freakin nightmare. If I
> want to see data in a table, can I simply click on a table and open it
> - NO! Instead, I have to learn the 4GL language to write a script to
> return records (what if I want to resort those records - write another
> 4GL script and run it again). But hey, why do you want to see the data
> in the tables (at least that's what I was told by my company) Progress
> GUI - what a joke. This database server might have been popular with
> unix but the world today is GUI and Microsoft are the GUI experts.
> Even with the GUI tools in Progress, I still can't click on a table,
> open it and see the records. Maybe that's not important to others but
> as a dba, it sure is a necessity. We're working with different
> versions of Progress and none of them integrate with the other. I've
> spent 2 months now trying to run some simple database maintenance on
> Progress and all I can say is that I hate BI, AI, and D1, D2, D3 files.
> Give me SQL Server any day where at least I can manage databases in a
> normal logical way without having to deal with a stinkin .ST files and
> prostrct this...prostrct that!!! Any Progress responses are welcome
> but I'll take you on any day against SQL Server. If you're a
> Pro-Progress and anti-SQL Server, you're behind the times - get with
> the newest technology and GUI (not a GUI in development.) I have yet
> to see a true relational database designed in Progress. Upsizing a
> Progress database into a GUI environment - HA!
>|||pkohn@.charter.net wrote:
> Progress is a piece of crap! Sure it runs on Unix. But the time
> invested in learning and working with it obscene! With SQL Server I
> could easily plan a maintenance backup plan and transaction backup plan
> - Progress - well you have to learn about AI files, sizing the BI and
> AI files as well as the data files. It's a freakin nightmare. If I
> want to see data in a table, can I simply click on a table and open it
> - NO! Instead, I have to learn the 4GL language to write a script to
> return records (what if I want to resort those records - write another
> 4GL script and run it again). But hey, why do you want to see the data
> in the tables (at least that's what I was told by my company) Progress
> GUI - what a joke. This database server might have been popular with
> unix but the world today is GUI and Microsoft are the GUI experts.
> Even with the GUI tools in Progress, I still can't click on a table,
> open it and see the records. Maybe that's not important to others but
> as a dba, it sure is a necessity. We're working with different
> versions of Progress and none of them integrate with the other. I've
> spent 2 months now trying to run some simple database maintenance on
> Progress and all I can say is that I hate BI, AI, and D1, D2, D3 files.
> Give me SQL Server any day where at least I can manage databases in a
> normal logical way without having to deal with a stinkin .ST files and
> prostrct this...prostrct that!!! Any Progress responses are welcome
> but I'll take you on any day against SQL Server. If you're a
> Pro-Progress and anti-SQL Server, you're behind the times - get with
> the newest technology and GUI (not a GUI in development.) I have yet
> to see a true relational database designed in Progress. Upsizing a
> Progress database into a GUI environment - HA!
>
Tossing in my 2-cents... I'm not a Progress guy, never touched it. I
do however find it interesting that your entire argument seems to be
based on SQL offering a better GUI. I blame that GUI for some of the
basic, everyday questions that cross this newsgroup on a daily basis.
My database has been running for 2 years, and my transaction log is
250GB, why? How can I export a database to a different server? The GUI
that you seem to cherish allows any Access user to think he's a SQL
Server DBA, without forcing him/her to learn the most basic tasks.
Point-and-click through the maintenance plan wizard, without
understanding a thing about what it's actually doing, all is well until
that plan begins to fail. Since they never understood what it was
doing, they have no idea where to start troubleshooting. Oh, look,
there's a "New Database Wizard", I can create a database! What's my
backup strategy? Do I need transactional recovery capabilities, or are
daily full backups enough? Dunno, the wizard didn't ask me those questions.
Personally, the only time I touch Enterprise Manager is when I have to
work with some DTS package that somebody dragged objects onto,
connecting them with workflow lines, because that's the only way they
know how to execute a stored procedure.
invested in learning and working with it obscene! With SQL Server I
could easily plan a maintenance backup plan and transaction backup plan
- Progress - well you have to learn about AI files, sizing the BI and
AI files as well as the data files. It's a freakin nightmare. If I
want to see data in a table, can I simply click on a table and open it
- NO! Instead, I have to learn the 4GL language to write a script to
return records (what if I want to resort those records - write another
4GL script and run it again). But hey, why do you want to see the data
in the tables (at least that's what I was told by my company) Progress
GUI - what a joke. This database server might have been popular with
unix but the world today is GUI and Microsoft are the GUI experts.
Even with the GUI tools in Progress, I still can't click on a table,
open it and see the records. Maybe that's not important to others but
as a dba, it sure is a necessity. We're working with different
versions of Progress and none of them integrate with the other. I've
spent 2 months now trying to run some simple database maintenance on
Progress and all I can say is that I hate BI, AI, and D1, D2, D3 files.
Give me SQL Server any day where at least I can manage databases in a
normal logical way without having to deal with a stinkin .ST files and
prostrct this...prostrct that!!! Any Progress responses are welcome
but I'll take you on any day against SQL Server. If you're a
Pro-Progress and anti-SQL Server, you're behind the times - get with
the newest technology and GUI (not a GUI in development.) I have yet
to see a true relational database designed in Progress. Upsizing a
Progress database into a GUI environment - HA!I worked with Progress for several years running mission critical
applications and all I can say is that is an excellent technology as good as
SQL Server or Oracle.
Ben Nevarez, MCDBA, OCP
Database Administrator
"pkohn@.charter.net" wrote:
> Progress is a piece of crap! Sure it runs on Unix. But the time
> invested in learning and working with it obscene! With SQL Server I
> could easily plan a maintenance backup plan and transaction backup plan
> - Progress - well you have to learn about AI files, sizing the BI and
> AI files as well as the data files. It's a freakin nightmare. If I
> want to see data in a table, can I simply click on a table and open it
> - NO! Instead, I have to learn the 4GL language to write a script to
> return records (what if I want to resort those records - write another
> 4GL script and run it again). But hey, why do you want to see the data
> in the tables (at least that's what I was told by my company) Progress
> GUI - what a joke. This database server might have been popular with
> unix but the world today is GUI and Microsoft are the GUI experts.
> Even with the GUI tools in Progress, I still can't click on a table,
> open it and see the records. Maybe that's not important to others but
> as a dba, it sure is a necessity. We're working with different
> versions of Progress and none of them integrate with the other. I've
> spent 2 months now trying to run some simple database maintenance on
> Progress and all I can say is that I hate BI, AI, and D1, D2, D3 files.
> Give me SQL Server any day where at least I can manage databases in a
> normal logical way without having to deal with a stinkin .ST files and
> prostrct this...prostrct that!!! Any Progress responses are welcome
> but I'll take you on any day against SQL Server. If you're a
> Pro-Progress and anti-SQL Server, you're behind the times - get with
> the newest technology and GUI (not a GUI in development.) I have yet
> to see a true relational database designed in Progress. Upsizing a
> Progress database into a GUI environment - HA!
>|||pkohn@.charter.net wrote:
> Progress is a piece of crap! Sure it runs on Unix. But the time
> invested in learning and working with it obscene! With SQL Server I
> could easily plan a maintenance backup plan and transaction backup plan
> - Progress - well you have to learn about AI files, sizing the BI and
> AI files as well as the data files. It's a freakin nightmare. If I
> want to see data in a table, can I simply click on a table and open it
> - NO! Instead, I have to learn the 4GL language to write a script to
> return records (what if I want to resort those records - write another
> 4GL script and run it again). But hey, why do you want to see the data
> in the tables (at least that's what I was told by my company) Progress
> GUI - what a joke. This database server might have been popular with
> unix but the world today is GUI and Microsoft are the GUI experts.
> Even with the GUI tools in Progress, I still can't click on a table,
> open it and see the records. Maybe that's not important to others but
> as a dba, it sure is a necessity. We're working with different
> versions of Progress and none of them integrate with the other. I've
> spent 2 months now trying to run some simple database maintenance on
> Progress and all I can say is that I hate BI, AI, and D1, D2, D3 files.
> Give me SQL Server any day where at least I can manage databases in a
> normal logical way without having to deal with a stinkin .ST files and
> prostrct this...prostrct that!!! Any Progress responses are welcome
> but I'll take you on any day against SQL Server. If you're a
> Pro-Progress and anti-SQL Server, you're behind the times - get with
> the newest technology and GUI (not a GUI in development.) I have yet
> to see a true relational database designed in Progress. Upsizing a
> Progress database into a GUI environment - HA!
>
Tossing in my 2-cents... I'm not a Progress guy, never touched it. I
do however find it interesting that your entire argument seems to be
based on SQL offering a better GUI. I blame that GUI for some of the
basic, everyday questions that cross this newsgroup on a daily basis.
My database has been running for 2 years, and my transaction log is
250GB, why? How can I export a database to a different server? The GUI
that you seem to cherish allows any Access user to think he's a SQL
Server DBA, without forcing him/her to learn the most basic tasks.
Point-and-click through the maintenance plan wizard, without
understanding a thing about what it's actually doing, all is well until
that plan begins to fail. Since they never understood what it was
doing, they have no idea where to start troubleshooting. Oh, look,
there's a "New Database Wizard", I can create a database! What's my
backup strategy? Do I need transactional recovery capabilities, or are
daily full backups enough? Dunno, the wizard didn't ask me those questions.
Personally, the only time I touch Enterprise Manager is when I have to
work with some DTS package that somebody dragged objects onto,
connecting them with workflow lines, because that's the only way they
know how to execute a stored procedure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)