13 - which happens to be the same day you
reported the problem here after getting apparently zero response from
Oracle Support for 8 days. Maybe they just silently fixed the bug
during those 8 days - in which case they should have had the manners
to let you know.
Cheers
Nick Boyce
--
I can&#x
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/23/mystery_chrome_0_day/
> >... but that was before Google began offering up to $60,000 in bug
> > bounties
[...]
> Did I miss a major malware related to their warez?
>
> Or are they just paranoid?
Of
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Aftermath wrote:
> In the last two weeks some of my cyber friends have been getting this
> message in their gmail.
>
> http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ctx=mail&answer=2591015
[...]
> Has anyone else gotten this message from Google in the last 3 d
many people
are comfortable with); with this version I get a dialog box stating
"format error: not a PDF or corrupted", and no crash. This is also on
XP Pro SP3. Another reason to be disappointed with Foxit Reader V5 :)
Cheers
Nick Boyce
--
You are in a maze of twisty little
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Christian Sciberras wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Jeffrey Walton
>> wrote:
[snip]
>> > Adobe now includes additional warez in their updates without consent.
>> > The warez includes a browser and tools bar. The attached image is what
>> > I got when I
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Nick Boyce wrote:
> http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/certs/included/
>
> Be advised: the above page appears to be some kind of .. [recoils in
> horror] .. XML which doesn't render properly on WinXP, but renders fine on
> Debian Linux.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
https://www.infoworld.com/d/security/trustwave-admits-issuing-man-in-the-middle-digital-certificate-185972
>
> In case folks are interested in the following Mozilla's response to
> active MitM attacks that were facilitated by Trustwave, the
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:12 PM, . . wrote:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=718066
>
> what the hell is this?!
I'll bite ... (I know your question was rhetorical)
It's a very bad idea IMO.
>From TFA:
(https://wiki.mozilla.org/MetricsDataPing)
"Mozilla has a critical need to
9
[Very good idea, IMHO, given the idiot factor that seems to show up
here from time to time]
Cheers
Nick Boyce
--
Leave the Olympics in Greece, where they belong.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Gustavo wrote:
> WTF ?
>
> notebook:~$ ping www.compusa.com
> PING bh.georedirector.akadns.net (127.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
> 64 bytes from localhost.localdomain (127.0.0.1): icmp_req=1
> ttl=64 time=0.019 ms
Same here ... this time on Windows :
F:\>ping www
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Benji wrote:
> They've said nothing about what they're going to do to the server
> with said anomaly. Wouldnt be happy until a full reinstall.
>From http://blog.lastpass.com/2011/05/lastpass-security-notification.html :
"We're rebuilding the boxes in question a
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Justin Klein Keane wrote:
> Systems affected:
> - -
> Cisco Linksys Wireless G Boradband Router WRT54G with firmware version
> 4.21.1 was tested and found to be vulnerable.
FWIW, exact same weakness confirmed in Linksys AG241v1 with firmware
1.00.
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Gopi Nath wrote:
> I want to check the traffic. Because recently many times some systems
> were throughing more trafic. It was difficult for me to check each and
> every system mannulaly . Is there any tool which i can use to monitor
> the traffic of each and e
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Kristof Zelechovski
wrote:
> Regarding the Java Deployment Toolkit vulnerability:
> On Windows XP and later: open the Local Security Settings console and create
> a prohibition rule for the path
> %HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\JavaSoft\Java Web
> Start\1.6.0_19\H
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Tavis Ormandy wrote:
> ---
> Mitigation
> ---
[...]
> - Mozilla Firefox and other NPAPI based browser users can be protected using
> File System ACLs to prevent access to npdeploytk.dll.
Just for the record (since I had to go
e major distributions' kernel upgrade
> notice to this and other security lists. E.g. (to randomly pick an
> advisory):
>
> http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/fulldisclosure/2009-04/0060.html
Um .. I don't see the word "CIFS" anywhere in that bulletin.
Nick Boyc
On 10/23/07, Gregory Boyce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Nick Boyce wrote:
>
> >> # To Disable mailto (recommended)
> >> Modify tSchemePerms by setting the mailto: value to 3:
> >> version:1|shell:3|hcp:3|ms-help:3|ms-its:3|
> >>
tions ... can anyone explain the
function of the "telnet" and "ssh" parts of that little registry entry
?
Cheers,
Nick Boyce
--
"The system is repaired when ordinary greed takes over from
extraordinary fear - and that's what we're working towards."
Prof Larry
could trigger the buffer overflow with a maliciously
> crafted series of glyphs. A remote attacker could also entice a user to
> open a specially crafted web page, document or X client that will
> trigger the buffer overflow.
um ... doesn't that make it a *remote* privilege escalation
public . ;)
So, no - I don't think a Word upgrade is an answer for most folks.
Cheers,
Nick Boyce
--
The person who says it cannot be done
should not interrupt the person who is doing it.
-- Chinese Proverb
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in
20 matches
Mail list logo
