Why would anyone serious about security care about Defcon ?
j
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Why should I be complacient and except poor
products ? Or poor advice (plonk)
- Original Message -
From:
DWreck
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 3:04
PM
Subject: [Full-Disclosure] lame bitching
about products
Security professionals do NO
On Sun, 2004-10-17 at 12:55, Frank de Wit wrote:
> I thought I asked a question ; the answer 'yes' should have been
> sufficient ;-)
> Just joking, let's ask two other questions:
> -when you read about ICMP fingerprinting (see Ofir Arkin's great articles)
> -and you see tools like Xprobe and a lot
On Sun, 2004-10-17 at 15:46, Cedric Blancher wrote:
> Le dim 17/10/2004 à 22:21, James Edwards a écrit :
> > So, blocking ***all*** ICMP ***types*** is bad but you can block some
> > ***types*** without getting into trouble. Till you understand that all
> > the types do in rel
> Le lun 18/10/2004 à 00:35, James Edwards a écrit :
> > That is great till you want to run a server behind that firewall.
>
> I don't see the reason why it would cause a problem, as firewall is able
> to spot ICMP related to server's IP connections as well...
New co
On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 11:22, Richard Stevens wrote:
> Why FD? What is the direct security implications of this?
>
> I'm sure someone can construct a rather tenuous link, but really
All forensics requires a time line or time reference so the separate
pieces of forensic data can be assembled
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 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
On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 14:57, Michael Williamson wrote:
> Every time I post to a list I get these "out of office" auto-responses.
> Can these responders be configured to not respond to stuff from a list?
>
> -Michael
One cannot be l33t and clueful at the same time !
signature.asc
Descripti
> I've just been told that it was a DoS. No details.
Unlikely, Akamai is an overlay network & the root content node is not
reachable.
Akamai can in real time spread web traffic through out their global network
of
servers, diluting a DoS to the point it is not significant. It is more
likely that t
Akamai is saying their DNS continued to work.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/15/akamai_goes_postal/
Akamai has got back to us to explain that the problem stemmed from what a
spokesman called a "large scale international attack on the Internet's
infrastructure". Akamai said the attack was pr
> "Young called it a "large scale, international attack on Internet
> infrastructure." However, there was no evidence that non-Akamai
> infrastructure was affected."
>
> http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040615/D837KIU00.html
>
> Regards,
> Brent
With an attack of this indicated size, there are
>
> I don't think so- yeah a DOS against the content nodes isn't gonna do
> much but a DOS against their nameservers is fully workable.
Akamai seems to be saying the NS was functioning:
The spokesman denied however that it was an outage and said that the
Akamai name service continued to fu
ely some service being
> denied. Don't think so?.ask Google or Yahoo.
>
> - --Ben
Actually I did not sat this part:
>
> james edwards wrote:
> |>I've just been told that it was a DoS. No details.
I would agree that a DoS can be many things. But if you are able
> Sorry to offend those that use IRC legitimately (LOL - find something
> else to chat with your buddies), but why the hell are we not pushing
> to sunset IRC?
It is not IRC that is the problem, it is the people on IRC that cause
problems.
Guns don't kill people all by by themselves; people kill p
> if shooting people is evil, OBVIOUSLY guns are flawed, but only
> insofar as people are capable of abusing them, willing to abuse them,
> and effective in their attempts at doing so. so to burn the candle at
> both ends you have to fight the spread of trojans and virii by fixing
> the holes they
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/12/06/lycos_ends_antispam_effort_denies_downing_spam_sites.html
OK folks, its over.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Don't assume local problems are global.
- Original Message -
From:
Jianqiang Xin
To: Full-Disclosure (E-mail)
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 9:23
AM
Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Amazon.com is
down
It seems that Amazon.com
is down. Is it related to any at
> earlier today). Nevertheless, it does not change the fact that SWb
> started blocking *BUSINESS* customers, *without warning of ANY kind*,
> while charging a significant premium for service, and without any
> mechanism in place to *immediately* reverse this change. In fact, SWB
> should have ei
> Coincidentally, I had to dial back into the Internet.
Great, dial up proves google is down !
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Thank you Valdis, you were spot on. I'm sorry, I must
> have been misunderstood, my main concern IS a blunt
> legal object being used against hushmail to find my
> identity.
No business can ignore a judges orders to produce whatever required
information.
The business can contest the request but
Your point ?
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> They can't produce information that doesn't exist, which begs the
> questions: do they log your ip address?
It is a pointless question.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
23 matches
Mail list logo
