full-disclosure - Re: Information Disclosure with Invision Board installation (fwd)

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: <871080DEC5874D41B4E3AFC5C400611E03216968@UTDEVS02.campus.ad.utdallas.edu>
From: pauls at utdallas.edu (Schmehl, Paul L)
Subject: Re: Information Disclosure with Invision Board installation (fwd)

Ummm....isn't it (or at least shouldn't it be) standard practice to
remove these types of things entirely from internet exposed equipment?
Small test programs that are meant to ensure the installer that
everything is working as expected should never exist on production
servers anyway.  (Where never exist means "removed" or "chmod 000",
etc.)  Is it really the vendor's responsibility to remove them from the
distribution?  After all, they are helpful when used properly.  And any
admin worth their paycheck should know better than to leave such bits
lying around for the "bad guys" to use.

Paul Schmehl (pauls@...allas.edu)
Department Coordinator
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu/~pauls/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ka [mailto:ka@...dr.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 6:55 AM
> To: Gossi The Dog; full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com; 
> bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
> Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Information Disclosure with 
> Invision Board installation (fwd)
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Well, Gossi,
> 
> I agree with your standpoint. Some "project leaders"
> easily turn into "project defenders" when one takes
> a closer look at their project. .o)