full-disclosure - Sabotage (was: major hole in apache 1.x)

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

Message-ID: <200208161324.JAA16062@slartibartfast.magrathea.com>
From: ras at slartibartfast.magrathea.com (Robert A. Seace)
Subject: Sabotage   (was: major hole in apache 1.x)

In the profound words of Roman Drahtmueller:
> 
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 ras@...rtibartfast.magrathea.com wrote:
[stupid spam snipped...]

	No, I didn't...  Nor did any of the others listed as
senders really do the sending of this pointless spam...
Crackers and black-hats and script-kiddies and etc. are
one thing; but, spammers are just lower than the lowest
form of scum known to mankind...  I don't know why anyone
would want to stoop to such a level to make their point,
whatever that might be, rather than make it rationally like
adult human beings...  Honestly, don't you people have more
integrity than to use lousy spammer tactics??  I expect
much better from even the lamest of script-kiddies...
And, I certainly expect much better from anyone trying to
claim a moral high-ground over some issue, such as is
apaprently going on here...  No one is trying to silence
you; go ahead, and make your points...  But, please, do
so rationally, with well-reasoned arguments, and not with
pointless spamming, which does absolutely nothing to further
your message, but only makes you look bad in everyone's
eyes...  If you truly wish to gather support for your
movement, you certainly won't accomplish it by these silly
methods...

> I think I still didn't get the point why some few people try to spoil and
> sabotage this list.
> 
> The reasons for the list as stated by Len are clear, and for my
> understanding they are honorable, practicable and even make the list
> necessary.
> 
> The recent disturbances originate from people who obviously do not
> appreciate this value. This indicates that there is even more reason for
> me (and SuSE Security) to follow and support the list as it would
> demonstrate our own weakness and ignorance if we quit.
> I wish that other subscribers do the same.
> 
> After all, we're all used to adverse circumstances when it comes to
> security. This moronic kindergarten is only a small facette.

	Indeed...  But, I can't help but wish for some small manner
of moderation, just to weed out spams and forgeries like these,
though...  I'm not talking about making decisions on what info
should and shouldn't be disclosed; I'm talking about preventing
messages which contain absolutely no info and are clearly just
spam, and/or are clearly forged...  It's not like these forgeries
are all that difficult to spot, either...  Even if they didn't
recreate the same exact spam under several different addresses...
The "Received:" headers tell the story...  Can't we just weed
these out before they even hit the list??  Allowing them does
nothing to further the efforts of full disclosure; quite the
opposite, it hinders those efforts...

-- 
||========================================================================||
||    Rob Seace    ||               URL              || ras@...rathea.com ||
||  AKA: Agrajag   || http://www.magrathea.com/~ras/ || rob@...dstock.com ||
||========================================================================||
"I think fish is nice, but then I think that rain is wet, so who am I to
 judge?" - The Restaurant at the End of the Universe