On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 21:01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> When I was a Police Officer in the U.K. the definition of Theft was ( and
> had been for a LONG time ):
>
> "Dishonestly obtains the property of another with the intent to
> permanently deprive them of it."
>
> Problem: Cisco still have t
Please publish:
http://security-protocols.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1987
Or the attached advisory.
Thanks,
badpack3t
www.security-protocols.com
SP Research Labs Advisory x13
--
> > STATEMENT: "There's no way around it."
> >
> > RESPONSE: I beg to differ. No disrespect intended, but given the mission
> statement for the Full Disclosure mailing list, the use of the "stolen code"
> clearly falls under the "FAIR USE" exemption of copyright law. Having said
> that, there may
James Edwards said:
>With all due respect...Fair Use does not cover stolen works !
See, this is where we get to the bit where the Global Legal system has yet
to catch up with I.T.
When I was a Police Officer in the U.K. the definition of Theft was ( and
had been for a LONG time ):
"Dishonestl
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Eric Scher
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 5:25 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Cisco's stolen code
>
>
> -
> >On Tue,
Hello Group,
Hopefully, this topic is ok to discuss here. I am
fairly new to IDS systems and am having trouble getting my cisco IDS to send TCP
resets. The lab network is as follows:
R4
R1IDS|
R2--R3
R4 and R2 are on the same ethernet segment
On 24-mei-04, at 14:46, Feher Tamas wrote:
http://www.b00gle.com/fa/?d=get
good thing the internet has a memory :)
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:yYCmQqdLUvMJ:www.b00gle.com/fa/
%3Fd%3Dget+&hl=en
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:iyMDunIkp08J:www.b00gle.com/fa/
tool.html+&hl=en
http://w
On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 17:54, Eric Scher wrote:
> -
> >On Tue, 2004-05-25 Tobias W. wrote:
> >
> >Well, let's face the simple facts. Cisco's code is copyrighted and it's
> >illegal to copy it, distribute it or even use it. There's no way arou
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 21:41, Ron DuFresne wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004, Ng, Kenneth (US) wrote:
[...]
> > suspect. Is it unfair? Definitely. But this is why the GNU people
> > emphasize staying away from any licensed source code.
>
> Well except all that code stoen from SCO ...
SCO ? What's t
-
>On Tue, 2004-05-25 Tobias W. wrote:
>
>Well, let's face the simple facts. Cisco's code is copyrighted and it's
>illegal to copy it, distribute it or even use it. There's no way around
>it.
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 23:10, Valentino Squilloni - Ouz wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004, Maarten wrote:
> > Not saying what you see must be wrong but, if your routing / packetfilter
> > / kernelsettings were properly configured you would not ever get these
> > packets as they would be dropped before
On 25.05.2004 21:55:19 +, Maarten wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 May 2004 15:57, Gregh wrote:
> > Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing ports lately and I know it isn't
> > originating FROM this machine. Haven't sniffed any packets but they come up
> > in logs.
>
> Not saying what you see must be
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Ng, Kenneth (US) wrote:
> Brian: I will give you another good reason to not go near the stolen code.
> If you EVER want to work on any project that is even remotely related to
> routers, or routing or anything else that Cisco equipment can do, you can
> not have touched any of
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 22:35, Steffen Schumacher wrote:
> On 25.05.2004 21:55:19 +, Maarten wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 May 2004 15:57, Gregh wrote:
> > > Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing ports lately and I know it
> > > isn't originating FROM this machine. Haven't sniffed any packets bu
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:49 AM
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] Odd packet?
> >Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing
> >ports lately and I know it isn't
> >originating FROM this machine. Haven't
> >sniffed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gentoo Linux Security Advisory GLSA 200405-20
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Maarten wrote:
> > Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing ports lately and I know it isn't
> > originating FROM this machine. Haven't sniffed any packets but they come up
> > in logs.
>
> Not saying what you see must be wrong but, if your routing / packetfilter /
> kernels
On Tue, 25 May 2004 11:05:03 PDT, Seth Alan Woolley said:
> Copyright means the right to publish a work in its entirety. As long as
> they aren't republishing the whole code when they find a vulnerability,
> it's protected under fair use. What is illegal to republish isn't
> illegal to acquire.
--- madsaxon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:45 AM 5/25/2004 -0700, Harlan Carvey wrote:
>
> >Valdis,
> >
> >I sincerely hope that you do not presume to speak
> for
> >everyone...
>
> He's not offering an opinion, merely stating a fact:
> if whitehats are security researchers who don't
> break
On Tue, 25 May 2004 10:45:49 PDT, Harlan Carvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Valdis,
>
> I sincerely hope that you do not presume to speak for
> everyone...
> > #include
No, that's merely a "include standard flame war here". Presumably everybody
has made up their minds on that issue already.
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 15:57, Gregh wrote:
> Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing ports lately and I know it isn't
> originating FROM this machine. Haven't sniffed any packets but they come up
> in logs.
Not saying what you see must be wrong but, if your routing / packetfilter /
kernelsettin
Brian: I will give you another good reason to not go near the stolen code.
If you EVER want to work on any project that is even remotely related to
routers, or routing or anything else that Cisco equipment can do, you can
not have touched any of the stolen code, or your code will be suspect.
(Your
At 10:45 AM 5/25/2004 -0700, Harlan Carvey wrote:
Valdis,
I sincerely hope that you do not presume to speak for
everyone...
He's not offering an opinion, merely stating a fact:
if whitehats are security researchers who don't
break the law, then they don't audit code the
possession of which is illeg
Is it so funny that a company uses Unix for all the real work and Windows
for all the other stuff? :-). One word: VMWARE.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 5:01 PM
To: adam
Cc: Ron DuFresne; [EMAIL P
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 06:08:52PM +0200, Tobias Weisserth wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 17:28, Brian Toovey wrote:
> ...
> > Calm down - While I think it was kind of ignorant to post here asking
> > for code and not grep IRC, I dont think this was "not sticking to the
> > rules" or
m5x,
As with most public forums, you've missed the point...
--- madsaxon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:45 AM 5/25/2004 -0700, Harlan Carvey wrote:
>
> >Valdis,
> >
> >I sincerely hope that you do not presume to speak
> for
> >everyone...
>
> He's not offering an opinion, merely stating a f
Valdis,
I sincerely hope that you do not presume to speak for
everyone...
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2004 11:28:19 EDT, Brian Toovey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > if whitehats dont audit the code, who will? I
> find your response more
> > ignorant.
>
> Whitehats won't
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gentoo Linux Security Advisory [ERRATA UPDATE]GLSA 200405-16:02
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://security.gentoo.org/
- - - - - -
Well, let's face the simple facts. Cisco's code is copyrighted and it's
illegal to copy it, distribute it or even use it. There's no way around
it. Whatever your intentions are the Cisco code is legally off-limits.
I agree, partially
This may stink and it may hinder security audits but
Tobias Weisserth had thus to say: (Tue, May 25, 2004 at 06:08:52PM +0200)
> Well, let's face the simple facts. Cisco's code is copyrighted and it's
> illegal to copy it, distribute it or even use it. There's no way around
> it. Whatever your intentions are the Cisco code is legally off-limits.
Of
On Tue, 25 May 2004 11:28:19 EDT, Brian Toovey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> if whitehats dont audit the code, who will? I find your response more
> ignorant.
Whitehats won't go anywhere near the Cisco code for the same reason they won't
go near the Windows code - even if they feel morally justif
We are looking at a web conferencing solution from WiredRed. Does
anyone have any insights on this software or a open source solution that
could be ran outside the DMZ? The service can run as a "service" or
"application" under Windows 2000/XP clients and under 2000/2003 servers.
It uses the foll
Hi Brian,
On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 17:28, Brian Toovey wrote:
...
> Calm down - While I think it was kind of ignorant to post here asking
> for code and not grep IRC, I dont think this was "not sticking to the
> rules" or "not playing the game." If and when this source becomes
> available I hope dec
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 12:18:05PM +0200, Gadi Evron wrote:
> Anyone has any details regarding current useful IRCd + SSL
> implementations they can recommend?
>
> I'd appreciate any input.
>
DISCLAIMER: I've only toyed with this with a very small, very
sophisticated user base. These are simply a
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gentoo Linux Security Advisory GLSA 200405-19
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://security.gentoo.org/
- - - - - -
>Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing
>ports lately and I know it isn't
>originating FROM this machine. Haven't
>sniffed any packets but they come up
>in logs.
>Anyone know of anything that spoofs as
>coming from 127.0.0.1 but comes from
>outside and what it may relate to? Only
>been the
why not post a log snippet with the offending log
entry ? Its then
possible to analize what you are seeing there. blind Faith was a short
lived band...
Thanks,
Ron DuFresne
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Gregh wrote:
> Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing ports lately and I know it isn't
> ori
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Dave Howe wrote:
> > Hmm.. so the company is hiring them as a "unix/cisco tech weenie"
> > and then forcing them to use Windows?
> *Sigh* you have given a name to my Ongoing Horror.
>
> I am *forced* to use MS Office - Word, Excel and Outlook - on Windows. My
> job dutes are
On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 09:10, VX Dude wrote:
--- Tobias WeWeisserthtotobiaseweisserthedewrote:
> Dear "B$H",
>
> On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 11:49, B$H wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > Where can i find the CiCisco'stolen code?
>
It is my understanding that it is not accessable on IRC yet - but I co
Thilo Schulz wrote:
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 13:26, Dave Howe wrote:
XChat does ssl just fine - I just don't know of any IRCd with the support
compiled in.
There is a IRCd that supports it natively, although there are many people, who
argue that this IRCd is a bit lame and the choice of script kidd
Getting quite a few 127.0.0.1 on differing ports lately and I know it isn't
originating FROM this machine. Haven't sniffed any packets but they come up
in logs.
Anyone know of anything that spoofs as coming from 127.0.0.1 but comes from
outside and what it may relate to? Only been the last week an
> What do they expect you to do you X Windows work with then?
TBH - they don't, and I don't.
on the rare occasions I need to use X, I walk to the server room and use
the console. I could also use xVNC, or cygwin/x , but I don't use X often
enough for it to matter. There are also a few CDs for the
--- Tobias WeWeisserthtotobiaseweisserthedewrote:
> Dear "B$H",
>
> On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 11:49, B$H wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > Where can i find the CiCisco'stolen code?
>
> Full disclosure is NOT about spreading copyright
> protected code.
>
> Your question is stupid. Distributing, owning and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 25 May 2004 13:26, Dave Howe wrote:
> XChat does ssl just fine - I just don't know of any IRCd with the support
> compiled in.
There is a IRCd that supports it natively, although there are many people, who
argue that this IRCd is a bit lam
On Tue, 25 May 2004 12:18:05 +0200
Gadi Evron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Seeing that usual "MS sucks" debate above with no real purpose, I got to
> thinking..
agreed..
>
> SSL supporting IRC servers have been around for a very long time now.
> And I remember compiling it with ssl support... just to test.
> so it might be needed in a big scheme somewhere. I just don't know
where.
> Best place to ask then... on IRC itself. :)
XChat does ssl just fine - I just don't know of any IRCd with the support
compiled in.
Dear "B$H",
On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 11:49, B$H wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Where can i find the Cisco's stolen code?
Full disclosure is NOT about spreading copyright protected code.
Your question is stupid. Distributing, owning and using Cisco's code is
illegal. So just forget about it. Sticking to the
On Tue, 25 May 2004 09:59:09 +0100
"Dave Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hmm.. so the company is hiring them as a "unix/cisco tech weenie"
> > and then forcing them to use Windows?
> *Sigh* you have given a name to my Ongoing Horror.
>
> I am *forced* to use MS Office - Word, Excel and Outlo
Im in a situation very similar to yours. But I finally install linux in mi box, then
vmware for linux (I pay my own license) and the M$ shit runing over it.
When my boss appear I put the vmware at fullscreen mode and nobody takes care of the
change :)
Its a little bit bloat but better than infect
>Hi all!
>
>Where can i find the Cisco's stolen code?
>
>regards,
>
>B$H
>m-sec
I recommend you try here :
http://tinyurl.com/2fmxs
Contact any of the people listed there,
they will definately help you to obtain
Cisco's stolen code!
___
Full-Disc
Collin wrote:
I have to say this is the best attempt at baiting the use ive seen.
Even I'm tempted to open it, and I don't even have a job...just kidding!
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *"Mfrd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*Date: *May 24, 2004 4:43:45 PM CDT
*To: *"Full-disclosure" <[EMAIL PROT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Seeing that usual "MS sucks" debate above with no real purpose, I got to
thinking..
SSL supporting IRC servers have been around for a very long time now.
There are a couple of implementations, and a few more private
implementations.. some of which use a
Hi all!
Where can i find the Cisco's stolen code?
regards,
B$H
m-sec
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hmm.. so the company is hiring them as a "unix/cisco tech weenie"
> and then forcing them to use Windows?
*Sigh* you have given a name to my Ongoing Horror.
I am *forced* to use MS Office - Word, Excel and Outlook - on Windows. My
job dutes are to look after the Solaris, HPUX, Compaq Tru64 and
Hello Full-disclosrurers,
Thanks for your suggestions on the web page on http://www.securitytrap.com/mail.html,
now the site
- add a top10 most interested items caculated by the clicks,
- add the RSS feed link on each mailing list for those who want to use it.
- remove s
55 matches
Mail list logo
