bugtraq - Re[2]: Solaris telnet vulnberability

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]

Message-ID: <1946605590.20070214013204@Zoller.lu>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 01:32:04 +0100
From: Thierry Zoller <Thierry@...ler.lu>
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re[2]: Solaris telnet vulnberability - how many on your network?

Dear Casper Dik,

I wasn't crying wolf about a Backdoor, heck I am not Steve Gibson. I
was asking whether somebody will investigate why this hasn't been
caught by audits or simply Q&A ?

CDSC> And one which was too easy to discover;
You said it, it's "easy to discover", so who has discovered it? Sun ? Considering
it's that easy to catch, why hasn't SUN ? Maybe you can give us a
heads up on that ?

CDSC>  real back doors are better
I like that tautologie, "real backdoors", what makes a backdoor more
real than another one ? Is it the coolness, the stealth ? Or is it
simply the fact that it gives back door access ?

CDSC> masquared as buffer overflows you might not chance upon.
Nobody doesn't that anymore, everybody does code audits now and catches
bufferoverflows, right? I think other overflows are more interesting
to hide access.

-- 
http://secdev.zoller.lu
Thierry Zoller
Fingerprint : 5D84 BFDC CD36 A951 2C45  2E57 28B3 75DD 0AC6 F1C7