[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cobalt-security] are these worm files?
- Subject: Re: [cobalt-security] are these worm files?
- From: "Tsukaeru.net" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:09:56 +0900
- List-id: Mailing list for users to address network security on Cobalt products. <cobalt-security.list.cobalt.com>
Which patch is the appropriate patch...? I have all the latest RAQ4 patches
and installed portsentry. Should this cover it?
Jason Frisch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Sculthorpe" <sculthorpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <cobalt-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [cobalt-security] are these worm files?
>
> Absolutely, it's my dry british sense of humour for anyone that missed
that aspect
> of my comments and I don't condone that type of behaviour at all, it does
however
> promote the thinking that for those with a large number of RAQ's there is
always a
> way to speed up applying those patches!
>
> It saddens me to see this type of a breach because I am 99% certain the
attack
> wouldn't have been successful if he had applied the appropriate updates, I
hope
> others on this list learn from it and get their systems sorted quickly.
>
> The fact is, if you don't then you are in big trouble!
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
> On 26/03/2001 at 01:34 Gossi The Dog wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Adam Sculthorpe wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Someone should write an ethical worm that breaks into the system,
> >secures it then leaves !
> >>
> >> Gossi, are you up for it? :)
> >
> >Certainly, but I know from past experience if admins notice, they tend to
> >not realise you are doing them a favour securing the system, and instead
> >send the FBI/MI5/MIB/Whoever around to break 'yer legs.
> >
> >Seriously, doing anything like that is asking for trouble. It'd actually
> >be fairly easy to code a modified version of Ramen and Lion to patch
> >Redhat/SuSE/Debian etc, however I don't feel inclined to play around for
> >above reasons.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cobalt-security mailing list
> >cobalt-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-security
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cobalt-security mailing list
> cobalt-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-security
>