full-disclosure - Re: Abusing Windows 7 Recovery Process

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: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 16:49:11 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Moshe Israel <moshe.israel@...ee.co.il>
Cc: "full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk" <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Abusing Windows 7 Recovery Process

On Sat, 13 Jul 2013 22:13:38 +0300, Moshe Israel said:
> All secured/regulated systems as required by most certifications/standards/best practices.

You're new in the industry, aren't you? :)

The point you're missing is that the vast majority of computers aren't covered
by said certifications and standards.  And most of the certifications are
merely a money grab by the auditors - the last numbers I found, something like
98% of breaches of systems that were covered by PCI were of systems that at
the time of the breach were PCI-compliant.  In  other words, being PCI compliant
didn't actually slow the attackers down one bit.

You social engineer your way into the 5th office building you pass, pick a
random PC on the 4th floor - I'll bet you that PC is probably *not* running
sufficient monitoring to detect an intruder rebooting it and messing with
the system.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

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