bugtraq - RE: Privacy leak in VeriSign's SiteFinder service #2

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <D0A4D670C7EAD411964800105ADE8C9C0E15@NT_SERVER>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 08:51:42 +0100
From: Matt Rudge <mrudge@....ie>
To: 'Marco Ivaldi' <raptor@...eadbeef.info>
Cc: "BUGTRAQ@...URITYFOCUS. COM" <BUGTRAQ@...urityfocus.com>
Subject: RE: Privacy leak in VeriSign's SiteFinder service #2

What's more, the old MTA was just a dupe - it would return set responses
regardless of what was passed to it.  As can be seen from the following
example posted to the IETF list:

----------snip---------
220 snubby2-wceast Snubby Mail Rejector Daemon v1.3 ready
blah
250 OK
blah
250 OK
blah
550 User domain does not exist.
blh
250 OK
blah
221 snubby2-wceast Snubby Mail Rejector Daemon v1.3 closing transmission 
channel
----------snip---------

As of Tuesday 16th September the MTA was replaced for a more RFC-compliant
one.

There's been an interesting discussion on this subject on the IETF list for
the last couple of weeks, based around Verisign initiating a wildcard A
record for the .com and .net zones.  I don't want to repeat the discussion
here, but it makes interesting reading for some background on this issue.

Regards

Matt Rudge
Technical Director
Hegarty Computer Services
http://www.hcs.ie

-----Original Message-----
From: Marco Ivaldi [mailto:raptor@...eadbeef.info] 
Sent: 24 September 2003 20:01
To: Mark Coleman
Cc: Richard M. Smith; BUGTRAQ@...URITYFOCUS. COM;
incidents@...urityfocus.org
Subject: Re: Privacy leak in VeriSign's SiteFinder service #2

Moreover, they're still working on this SMTP server. Just one week ago,
they were running another Postfix-like MTA, with completely different
behaviour:

8< snip >8

What if Verisign is planning to open more similar TCP/IP services on that
host? What if they're going to further modify the existing ones, to better
invade individuals' privacy?

:raptor
-- 
Marco Ivaldi
Antifork Research, Inc.   http://0xdeadbeef.info/
3B05 C9C5 A2DE C3D7 4233  0394 EF85 2008 DBFD B707