There may be no impersonation going on. Could be that email for terminated people is directed to a common mailbox which might be perused by security folks to check whether anything wrong might have been going on and not noticed while the person was there. In effect the mail has then gone to a wildcard name at the company's machine. If you send to the machine, you should not be surprised if someone representing the machine owner might read it.
Someone communicating exploits might attract interest, if nothing else just to see that whoever was represented by the Maynor address did not appear to be involved in some crime ring. I seem to recall various stories of people being caught doing things they should not by events that happened shortly after they left a company. As for keeping old accounts or mailboxes in being, the advice used to be given that disabling accounts but leaving them was better than deleting because an attempted use of a disabled account would produce messages about "account foo login fail" or the like, where unknown accounts would produce "account <unknown> login fail". Same kind of thing works for mail. It can be better to know if a recently departed person's account is being attempted. You can then ask that person if he/she was the one trying it, and why, for example. Glenn Everhart -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Lowry Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:49 PM To: H D Moore Cc: full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] You shady bastards. The only part I find legally questionable is the impersonation of Mr. Maynor by someone at his old company. It certainly appears legal for his company to read the email. Acting on that email under the guise of the addressee would seem to tread pretty close to impersonation. 2 cents ... On Jun 6, 2007, at 9:47 AM, H D Moore wrote: > Hello, > > Some friends and I were putting together a contact list for the folks > attending the Defcon conference this year in Las Vegas. My friend sent > out an email, with a large CC list, asking people to respond if they > planned on attending. The email was addressed to quite a few > people, with > one of them being David Maynor. Unfortunately, his old SecureWorks > address was used, not his current address with ErrattaSec. > > Since one of the messages sent to the group contained a URL to our > phone > numbers and names, I got paranoid and decided to determine whether > SecureWorks was still reading email addressed to David Maynor. I > sent an > email to David's old SecureWorks address, with a subject line > promising > 0-day, and a link to a non-public URL on the metasploit.com web server > (via SSL). Twelve hours later, someone from a Comcast cable modem in > Atlanta tried to access the link, and this someone was (confirmed) not > David. SecureWorks is based in Atlanta. All times are CDT. > > I sent the following message last night at 7:02pm. > > --- > From: H D Moore <hdm[at]metasploit.com> > To: David Maynor <dmaynor[at]secureworks.com> > Subject: Zero-day I promised > Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 19:02:11 -0500 > User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > Message-Id: <200706051902.11544.hdm[at]metasploit.com> > Status: RO > X-Status: RSC > > https://metasploit.com/maynor.tar.gz > --- > > Approximately 12 hours later, the following request shows up in my > Apache > log file. It looks like someone at SecureWorks is reading email > addressed > to David and tried to access the link I sent: > > 71.59.27.152 - - [05/Jun/2007:19:16:42 -0500] "GET /maynor.tar.gz > HTTP/1.1" 404 211 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) > AppleWebKit/419 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/419.3" > > This address resolves to: > c-71-59-27-152.hsd1.ga.comcast.net > > The whois information is just the standard Comcast block boilerplate. > > --- > > Is this illegal? I could see reading email addressed to him being > within > the bounds of the law, but it seems like trying to download the "0day" > link crosses the line. > > Illegal or not, this is still pretty damned shady. > > Bastards. > > -HD > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ ----------------------------------------- This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank 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/
