>> amazing! what a great detailed advisory! a total of three vague
>> sentences. you are an idiot.
> But their website graphics is super cool!
And it says "Security Over Simplified" after all.
--
Thanks, Peter
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Ch
> its not quite the best way, human resource-wise,
> to get on top of these damn scanners :-|
We've replaced the allow ssh access to all with an allow on a need
basis. So most national IP-ranges, several foreign ones and some static
IPs are allowed. All the rest is bumped. We have no customers in C
> But this 'big brother' scenario is not the case in my opinion. At least
> not now.
That might be true. But the case is that somebody could. And we all know
that if something can, eventually someone will.
> The case is to sell more Adwords.
The difference between intent and ability. Personally I
Ronald MacDonald wrote:
> God's sake, that's enough already!
Luckily you quoted them in full, adding even more.
It can't be long before someone lame enough will launch the month of
hashes of random hashes.
--
Peter
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in
> > recently died of Colonium-210 poisoning under mysterious
> > circumstances".
> Colonium my arse!
Well, Colonium-210, maybe something like Chanel-5. Is for the cheeks
too, though you're talking about the other cheeks...
Peter
___
Full-Disclos
This line is not necessary since standard squid.conf contains this line:
That has nothing to do with the proposed configuration. No serious squid
implementation would have a standard ACL list, so every serious admin
would rewrite them. And if you are serious you have some sort of
convention for
