full-disclosure - Re: 0day: PDF pwns Windows

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:48:22 -0400
From: "J. Oquendo" <sil@...iltrated.net>
To: Jason <security@...enik.com>
Cc: Chad Perrin <perrin@...theon.com>,
	"pdp \(architect\)" <pdp.gnucitizen@...glemail.com>,
	Gadi Evron <ge@...uxbox.org>, Casper.Dik@....COM,
	full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, Crispin Cowan <crispin@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: 0day: PDF pwns Windows

Jason wrote:

> You present a valid position but fall short of seeing the whole picture.

> As an attacker, nation state or otherwise, my goal being to cripple
> communications, 0day is the way to go. Resource exhaustion takes
> resources, something the 0day can deprive the enemy of.

Counterpoint... You're trying to shoot me down with 0day crap:

You --> 0day attack --> My Infrastructure

Me --> Botnet --> Your infrastructure

Never having to consume any resources other than a point and click shoot
em up attack, I necessarily won't even have to use my own resources. So
shoot away as your network becomes saturated.

> Knocking out infrastructure with attacks is a far more effective
> strategy. You can control it's timing, launch it with minimal resources,
> from anywhere, coordinate it, and be gone before it can be thwarted. The
> botnet would only serve as cover while the real attack happens.

In a strategic war, most countries aim to eliminate supply points and
mission critical infrastructure as quickly as possible. In a
cyberwarfare situation me personally, I would aim to 1) disrupt/stop via
a coordinated attack whether its via a botnet or something perhaps along
the lines of a physical cut to a nation's fiber lines.

0day would only serve me afterwards to perhaps maintain covert states of
communication. Maybe inject disinformation through crapaganda. Imagine
an enemies entire website infrastructure showing tailored news... Would
truly serve a purpose AFTER the attack not during.

> I am more inclined to believe that botnets in use today really only
> serve as cover, thuggish retribution, and extortion tools, not as
> effective tools of warfare. No real warfare threat would risk exposing
> themselves through the use of or construction of a botnet.
> 

Luckily for most companies and government, botnets aren't being used for
their full potential. And I don't mean potential as in they're a good
thing. I could think up a dozen cyberware scenarios in minutes that
would cripple countries and businesses. I believe countries, providers
and governments should at some point get the picture and perhaps create
guidelines to curtail the potential for havoc - imagine hospitals being
attacked and mission critical life saving technologies taken offline.

====================================================
J. Oquendo
"Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta"

http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF684C42E
sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5157 bytes)

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/