Re: [Full-disclosure] New term RDV is born

2007-09-28 Thread Jibujibujibu
I am a system administrator and I find this list full of noise due to
people like you.

On 9/28/07, Daniel Marsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  On 9/28/07, Jimby Sharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  I am a system administrator and I find this list full of noise due to
  people like you.
 
  On 9/28/07, Knud Erik Højgaard  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   I am a system administrator and I find this list full of noise due to
   people like you.
   --
  
   On 9/28/07, Jimby Sharp  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stop your stupid bullshit. If you have no work to do, create your
  own
mailing list and post your bullshit there. We have better things to
  do
than think about stupid names.
   
If the media thinks that hackers are always evil, it is because of
stupid people like you, who have nothing good to contribute or
  discuss
but create confusion and propaganda over nothing.
   
I am a system administrator and I find this list full of noise due
  to
people like you. Could someone please ban this insane person called
worriedsecurity?
   
On 9/28/07, worried security [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 9/27/07, T Biehn  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Genius!


 Billy: Wow, thats a cool 0-day.

 Joe: You mean an RDV.

 Billy: What?

 Joe: Only the bad guys call it 0-day now, haven't you heard?

 Billy: Nope.

 Joe: Yeah Gadi Evron and friends didn't like the term 0-day
  anymore, because
 it sounds too evil elite hacker and not whitehat enough, so n3td3v
  came up
 with RDV.

 Billy: So who is n3td3v?

 Joe: A guy in the underground who keeps getting blamed for being
  some dude
 called Gobbles.

 Billy: Oh right, i'm a whitehat, so I better start replacing 0-day
  with RDV
 now. I want to be politically correct and don't want to be
  mistaken as a
 blackhat, because only blackhats call it 0-day now.

 Joe: Yes, not everyone likes n3td3v, but its kind of catchy, so
  people kept
 with RDV.

 Billy: Yeah, thats sweet.

 Joe: Exactly. Us whitehats have got to stick together and distance
  ourselves
 from catchphrases thought up by the evil blackhat community.

 Billy: Whitehats rule! Down with the blackhats.

 Joe: Whitehat supremacy, way to go!

 ___
 Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
 Charter:
 http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
 Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

   
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
   
  
 
  ___
  Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
  Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
  Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
 

  I am a system administrator and I find this list full of noise due to
 people like you.




 ___
 Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
 Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
 Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Re: [Full-disclosure] place bets this doesn't appear on pro us government securityfocus frontpage

2007-09-12 Thread Jibujibujibu
China has suffered massive losses of state secrets
Like what? China beats Buddist monks? China neglects farmers?

If their state secrets were put on the internet, most likely these state
secrets were not that, you know, secret in the first place. :0

On 9/12/07, Reuters wrote:

 BEIJING (Reuters) - China has suffered massive losses of state secrets
 through the Internet, a senior official said, as China faces reports that it
 has raided the computer networks of Western powers.

 ___
 Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
 Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
 Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Re: [Full-disclosure] n3td3v denounces the actions of www.derangedsecurity.com

2007-09-09 Thread Jibujibujibu
wot;dr

On 9/9/07, worried security [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 this person has been sharing login information to the world wide web,
 opening up world governments up to terrorist cyber intrusions. this guy has
 not been sent to guantanamo bay yet why not? this reckless act of evil
 against western values is not good for the world. we should stop these
 individuals from posting government related informations which could harm
 the population of a country by allowing sensitive data to be accessed by
 terrorist cyber intrusion. all terrorists are linked up to the world wide
 web, making it likely the informations were accessable to them and not just
 responsible security professionals and law inforcement agencies. he said he
 was posting the informations to let all affected governments learn of the
 vulnerability to their government infrastructure as a collective of people
 as it would cause him too much time and money to contact each government
 network individually. however when there are more than government network
 employees learning of the informations, then it becomes a risk to national
 security. the protection of the population and the interests must become the
 governments first priorty. leaving this individual to make funny remarks of
 the governments in question by parading their network access informations in
 the public glare does more than alerting the proper authority to the cause
 of getting security tightened. 
 derangedsecurity.comhttp://www.derangedsecurity.comshould be held 
 accountable for their actions infront of judge and jury. i as
 member of the public are fine with arguments and full disclosure of
 e-commerce vulnerability informations being post to the world wide web in
 the good nature of freedom of speech but the argument that exposing the
 network access information of world governments leaving the network open to
 terrorist cyber intrusion is unacceptable by any code of ethics that i can
 agree with. i as member of the public say not in my name can you release
 network access informations to the public for self satisfaction and delight
 that you have managed to breach the national security infrastructure of a
 government. i say you should be ashamed, and if you had just claimed you
 were just being an accessory and conspiracy to cause terrorist cyber
 intrustions then i wouldn't be writing to complain, but its the fact you use
 full disclosure of a responsible security professional as an excuse for your
 actions which makes me believe you should be stripped of your job title and
 held accountable to the governments you have left vulnerable to terrorist
 cyber intrusion. you are not a security professional, you are lower than
 that, you are working against the ethics of the basis of your career of
 security professional. responsible security professionals don't risk the
 national security interests of multiple world governments, leaving the
 population vulnerable in the process by making the government network weaker
 by offering access to the mass public, where ultimately cyber terrorists are
 lurking in wait to ambush the network access data to espionage on their
 operations. this information you post is what your risking to the world, is
 a greater feeling of instability throughout the affected countries and a
 general feeling of alarm and distress to the mass public. your informations
 were reported to the mass public media on the internet as well as chinese
 television stations, and other mediums of public broadcasting, this is
 unacceptable in the level of your full disclosure ethic has caused to the
 wider world. i believe your actions to be morally incorrect and that your
 actions should be illegal while our brave men are fighting the war on terror
 to protect your childrens future, this kind of anti government disclosure
 shouldn't come under the ordinary full disclosure ethics. you post on your
 website that you are angry your hosting company disapproved on your
 disclosure to the mass public, you said why bother terminating my website
 when informations are already been in the public domain? damage limtiation
 is the reason, and the fact the informations shouldn't have been there in
 the first place, i thought maybe this would be an indication that your code
 of conduct was actually immorally and maybe you would reconsider the
 legality of  what you put on your website, but you didn't, you kept the
 tempo high by relocating your website to a new server which was under the
 control of your irresponsible self, away from account terminations and away
 from becoming under the scrutiny of a hosting companys terms of service
 agreement. you then try and point blame to others, you blame the united
 states government for contacting your hosting provider to get you shutdown
 and you blame the governments for leaving their own population open to a
 national security breach. you in no way find yourself accountable for any
 wrong doing in light of the informations posted, and