Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread Richard A Nelson
In the non-unix world, telnet is still a necessity :( Yes, I have putty on *my* windows boxen... But there are still significant numbers of boxes that I use - MVS/VM (z/OS), W2k, etc. that require me to allow directed telnet to my laptop/workstation. Just because there is a H2 on the block, doe

未承諾広告※人生一発大逆転!

2004-09-24 Thread redriver007jp
(B $BL$>5Bz9-9p"((J $Bhttp://beingmail.dyndns.dk/scripts/deleteform.html $B!!(J $B!!(Jhttp://akatukinotume.minidns.net/scripts/addform.html (B $BHNGd5~6h2r#1#0#0!]#1(J (B $BEEOC(J0774-55-6699 (B (B 8$B7n$K=8$a$?(J100$BK|%a!<%k$r%5!<%S%9Cf!*(J $B%5%$%I%S%8%M%9

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

2004-09-24 Thread Jenna Pool
0434145362570780471 Content-Type:html; charset="ISO-8859-1" B;uy meds for 8O% 1ess than in st0re Or;der H;ere http://www.pkabdfbudb.info/20/ Within thine own bud buriest thy content, Where Beams of warm Imagination play, 0434145362570780471-- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAI

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread Peter McAlpine
On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 18:35, Dale Amon wrote: > On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 08:28:13AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > Cisco gear contains the Debian telnetd? And if that's true, how would us > > releasing a DSA for it necessarily help all the Cisco routers out there. > > We're not talking about the

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread Rick Moen
Quoting James Renken ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Agreed - but some of my customers, even after I've pointed out the risks, > just don't want to go through the trouble of changing from their preferred > Telnet programs. ObNivenAndPournelle: "Think of it as evolution in action." -- Cheers, Rick Moen

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread Dale Amon
On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 08:28:13AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > Cisco gear contains the Debian telnetd? And if that's true, how would us > releasing a DSA for it necessarily help all the Cisco routers out there. > We're not talking about the general intelligence of using telnet (or, at > least,

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread James Renken
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, s. keeling wrote: > > I noticed the message below on BUGTRAQ last weekend, reporting a remote > > root compromise in telnetd. I haven't seen any discussion of this on the > > list archives, nor a new DSA. Am I missing something? > > Is anyone still using telnet when there's

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread Matthew Palmer
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 11:24:54PM +0100, Dale Amon wrote: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 04:15:09PM -0600, s. keeling wrote: > > Is anyone still using telnet when there's ssh? Why? I wouldn't even > > use it inside my own firewalled LAN. ssh is just better. > > Unfortuneately if you use Cisco gear

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread Dale Amon
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 04:15:09PM -0600, s. keeling wrote: > Is anyone still using telnet when there's ssh? Why? I wouldn't even > use it inside my own firewalled LAN. ssh is just better. Unfortuneately if you use Cisco gear you are pretty much stuck. Some of the older stuff just doesn't have

Re: telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread s. keeling
Incoming from James Renken: > Greetings, > > I noticed the message below on BUGTRAQ last weekend, reporting a remote > root compromise in telnetd. I haven't seen any discussion of this on the > list archives, nor a new DSA. Am I missing something? Is anyone still using telnet when there's ssh?

telnetd vulnerability from BUGTRAQ

2004-09-24 Thread James Renken
Greetings, I noticed the message below on BUGTRAQ last weekend, reporting a remote root compromise in telnetd. I haven't seen any discussion of this on the list archives, nor a new DSA. Am I missing something? Thanks! -- James Renken, System Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] San

人生一発大逆転!

2004-09-24 Thread redriver007jp
$B!!!y!z!{!z!y!z!{!z%l%C%D!*%a%k%^%,!!(J $B!!!y!z!{!z!y!z!{!z!!(J (B $B!!:#F|$O!!!*!!87$7$$;D=k$,B3$-$^$9$,$*855$$G$9$+!*(J $B2F%P%F$7$J$$MM4hD%$C$F$/[EMAIL PROTECTED](J $B!!(J $B!!(J $B!!(J (B$B!y!z!{!z!y!z!y!z!{!z!y!z!y

Re: Rebuilding packages on *all* architectures

2004-09-24 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > But what if the source is modified? This will be the next step tp solve. However I think not having a solution for that problem should not prevent us from having a sane bootstrap environment and use it. One idea could be to have an automatic way to che

Re: Rebuilding packages on *all* architectures

2004-09-24 Thread Russell Coker
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 06:15, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want to add another point to this discussion. While we cannot > prevent malicious maintainers from installing to the archives or > poisoning the buildds, requiring all binaries to be remade on the > buildds would rule out the

Anetac Software : Feedback auto-response

2004-09-24 Thread Anetac Feedback
Anetac Software : Feedback auto-response Your message has been received. This is automatically generated information. Please do not respond, we will get back to you as soon as possible. Thank you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact