On Tue, 25 May 2004, Lionel Hendricks wrote:
> Actually my environment is over 99% windows workstations. We access all of
> the *nix boxes via SSL from W2K/XP. We've got *nix boxes for everything from
> Web & Mail, to Databases and IDS's... you name it (there are also Windows
> counterparts to eac
I have to say this is the best attempt at baiting the use ive seen.
Even I'm tempted to open it, and I don't even have a job...just kidding!
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Mfrd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: May 24, 2004 4:43:45 PM CDT
To: "Full-disclosure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Full-Disclos
>
> But it's true that IRC is fun and still can be a great help in WAN management
> coordination... same as talkd. It's just one of those things that have been
> frowned upon by the hordes of non Unix people that came in IT later and was
> re-invented the wrong way in group-ware stuff. As a re
Actually my environment is over 99% windows workstations. We access all of
the *nix boxes via SSL from W2K/XP. We've got *nix boxes for everything from
Web & Mail, to Databases and IDS's... you name it (there are also Windows
counterparts to each as well). Point is, all of our Admins / Engineers sp
> Hi All,
>
> I look after a small (20) station network and we are looking for a way to
> centrally control the contact list on MSN of our users.
>
> I have seen commercial products such as iMMarshall but these are far too
> expensive and much too complicated for our needs.
>
> Management want
On Mon, 24 May 2004 17:15:10 -0500 (CDT)
Ron DuFresne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think if they were savvy unix/ISO users, they certaily would have at
> least a linux/*bsd partition to work from.
When a place gets money to throw at 100+ solaris boxes and Cisco gear, permanent
leased lines,
On Mon, 24 May 2004 16:49:34 -0400
adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you really think that they would be using mIRC if they had unix on
> their workstations anyways? Maybe reading comprehension isn't one of
> your best skills.
>
He he he...
Yep, nope, I mean no.. wait, yes.
Ron DuFresne
I think if they were savvy unix/ISO users, they certaily would have at
least a linux/*bsd partition to work from.
Thanks,
Ron DuFresne
On Mon, 24 May 2004, adam wrote:
> Do you really think that they would be using mIRC if they had unix on
> their workstations anyways? Maybe reading compreh
Zone-h.org reports..
"A Portuguese group dubbed "Outlaw group" has defaced the Microsoft.com web
site, the hacked page (www.microsoft.com/mspress/uk/) isn't available anymore
since 9:00pm GMT"
read more...
http://zone-h.org/en/news/read/id=4251/
m.wood
_
You_are_dismissed.hta
Description: Binary data
On Monday 24 May 2004 21:37, adam wrote:
> Just because they're using mIRC, doesn't mean that they aren't
> unix/cisco
> tech geeks. Ever consider that they might have run Windows on their
> workstations at work? And even so using the clients that have been ported
> to Windows might
I guess you could write a program that acts like a proxy between the msn
client and server.
It would then be easy to filter out certain contacts from the list.
However, the user only has to disable the proxy on the connections tab to
bypass this, plus you would need some programming skills to writ
If I'm not mistaken, there have been just as many if not more bugs in mIRC
than there have been in the unix ports (Xchat for instance). Correct me if
I'm mistaken.
RLT
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of adam
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 3:37 PM
T
Hi All,
I look after a small (20) station network and we are looking for a way to
centrally control the contact list on MSN of our users.
I have seen commercial products such as iMMarshall but these are far too
expensive and much too complicated for our needs.
Management want us to create a blac
On Mon, 24 May 2004 15:37:05 EDT, adam said:
> Ever consider that they might have run Windows on their workstations at work?
Hmm.. so the company is hiring them as a "unix/cisco tech weenie" and then
forcing them to use Windows? That sounds like the set-up for either a Dilbert
or a UserFriendly
Do you really think that they would be using mIRC if they had unix on
their workstations anyways? Maybe reading comprehension isn't one of
your best skills.
Thanks Again!
On Mon, 24 May 2004, adam wrote:
Just because they're using mIRC, doesn't mean that they aren't unix/cisco
Just because they're using mIRC, doesn't mean that they aren't unix/cisco tech geeks.
Ever consider that they might have run Windows on their workstations at work? And even so
using the clients that have been ported to Windows might be an even worse idea because of bugs
in the ported c
Ich werde ab 24.05.2004 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am
31.05.2004.
Ich werde Ihre Nachricht nach meiner Rückkehr beantworten.
Bitte wenden Sie sich inzwischen vertrauensvoll an Horst Müller, Robert
Mikes oder Matthias Stössl.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Michael STIFT
__
Ditto on Valdis comments except on the hookers part :)
Another problem with both Kibub and Bobax is that they both use random
port to download the binary from an infected host. I find it diffcult
to write firewall rules for process that opens random ports ;)
Kibuv write up form Symantec:
"Creat
More information (in Russian, of course):
http://www.securitylab.ru/45401.html
Exploit:
http://www.securitylab.ru/_Exploits/2004/05/killvoc-small.c
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.htm
[SNIP]
>
> Unfortunately because of mIrc's reputation, some high management decided to have
> use disuse it Great, especially since we are all Solaris or Cisco kids and
> nothing to do with Microsoft based half compliant IRC stuff.
>
> So if you can get the author or mIrc extradited t
On Mon, 24 May 2004 17:41:34 +0200, Tobias Weisserth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I can't understand why it seems so hard to catch samples of worms that
> knock at my firewall 24/7.
>
> Just open the corresponding ports and forward them to a vulnerable
> machine on a different subnet (DMZ) and le
On Sun, 23 May 2004 15:35:36 +0200, Ondrej Krajicek said:
> Well, why? It's just a programming language, the tool not the purpose.
> AFAIK, one of the better designed...
>
> This not a troll-feeder, I am really interested in a reason
> why C# is a trollish language ;).
Ahh grasshopper.. listen a
On Mon, 24 May 2004 13:16:40 +0100
"Dave Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Giannakis Eleftherios wrote:
> > are there any known issues concerning rootkits, backdoors, cmd
> > execution concerning an irc(with ssl) client ?
> The answer to the question as posed is No
> However, the *real* answer to
Hi "joe smith",
On Mon, 2004-05-24 at 17:09, joe smith wrote:
> Does anyone have a capture sample of Bobax and Kibuv? I'm doing an
> analysis it. I search around and come up empty. Any variant is fine.
I can't understand why it seems so hard to catch samples of worms that
knock at my firewall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adv: safari_0x06
Release Date: 24/05/2004
Affected Products: MacOSX >= 10.3.3, Various Browsers, possibly others
platforms/browsers
Fixed in: Not fixed.
Impact: Remote code execution.
Severity: High.
Vendors: Notified (20-23/02/04)
Author: [EMAIL PROTEC
Does anyone have a capture sample of Bobax and Kibuv? I'm doing an
analysis it. I search around and come up empty. Any variant is fine.
Thanks
Joe
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
On Monday May 24 2004 14:46, Feher Tamas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> >http://www.b00gle.com/fa/?d=get
>
> Starting from here, the usual combination of unpatched IE and plain
> user will quickly receive a nice set of malware automatically:
> Small.gl, Istbar.dw, Java_Classloader, Java_OpenStream, etc.
>
> T
Hello,
>http://www.b00gle.com/fa/?d=get
Starting from here, the usual combination of unpatched IE and plain
user will quickly receive a nice set of malware automatically:
Small.gl, Istbar.dw, Java_Classloader, Java_OpenStream, etc.
The end station is probably Gator, CoolWeb, a spam proxy or
so
> are there any known issues concerning rootkits, backdoors,
> cmd execution concerning an irc(with ssl) client ? I use the
> irssi client to conect to a irc server with ssl.Is there a way for
> the admins of the irc server to open/intrude somehow to my
> pc(through the high port that the client op
Giannakis Eleftherios wrote:
> are there any known issues concerning rootkits, backdoors, cmd
> execution concerning an irc(with ssl) client ?
The answer to the question as posed is No
However, the *real* answer to the question is to componentize the four
items we are discussing, and query each ind
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Computer Security Mexico 2004
"10th Years celebrating Computer Security Mexico"
Antiguo Colegio de San Ildefonso
Hi!
Netgear has some small router and firewalling devices for home users and
small companies (SOHO). Most of these solutions are able to do a simple
keyword based URL filtering. Lets say we don't want users to visit
http://www.scip.ch so we create a filter for the keyword "scip.ch". If a
user wants
On Monday 24 May 2004 12:41, Giannakis Eleftherios wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> are there any known issues concerning rootkits, backdoors, cmd execution
> concerning an irc(with ssl) client ? I use the irssi client to conect to a
> irc server with ssl.Is there a way for the admins of the irc serve
Hello everybody,
are there any known issues concerning rootkits, backdoors, cmd execution concerning an
irc(with ssl) client ? I use the irssi client to conect to a irc server with ssl.Is
there a way for the admins of the irc server to open/intrude somehow to my pc(through
the high port that th
35 matches
Mail list logo
