| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4CA4DCA9015A6D4099DDE7026D4A5B9CC043@nettexas-xch01.nettexas.com> From: PDolbow at NetTexas.com (Dolbow, Phil) Subject: CounterAttack Andy et al.. Being of military (Infantry) origin I am quite prone to want to take the offensive and fire back at a high rate of fire on a system that is assaulting mine. I don't however do so as then I become one of the bad guys, and in my opinion, step over the line. I am interested though what the list members think about this. I would like to pose these questions: If your network is PROBED by another system, where do you draw your line? A) Log the data and otherwise do nothing. B) Probe the other system. C) Infiltrate the other system, but do no damage. D) Shut the other system down. E) Destroy the other system. F) Destroy the other system and all others around it. If your network is ATTACKED by another system, where do you draw your line? A) Log the data and otherwise do nothing. B) Probe the other system. C) Infiltrate the other system, but do no damage. D) Shut the other system down. E) Destroy the other system. F) Destroy the other system and all others around it. Thanks for your feedback. -=Phil=- -----Original Message----- From: Andy Wood [mailto:andy@...italindustry.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 20:30 PM To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] DCOM RPC exploit (dcom.c) > FYI, Incidents.org reports: "Widespread scans for unpatched Windows > machines underway (RPC vulnerability). Patch systems and block ports > 135-139 & 445". NetBIOS Scans haven't necessarily increased. I can't believe that any port is more sought out than NetBIOS. I see 139 and 445 more than any other port, and it has been that way for more than 2 years. But it isn't without good reason....if you get probed for 139 or 445, probe back; 8 out of 10 times it is open, and that system is infected with a worm. Then hit 'em with a smbclient or Winfingerprint, get that password policy and username/share list, find the weak password and welcome to their network......or dcom.c, that works too. Andy -----Original Message----- From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com [mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Knud Erik H?jgaard Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 8:14 PM To: Peter Kruse; full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com Peter Kruse wrote: > FYI, Incidents.org reports: "Widespread scans for unpatched Windows > machines underway (RPC vulnerability). Patch systems and block ports > 135-139 & 445". > > This might be caused by several tools in the hands of kiddies probing > IP?s for vulnerable systems. This could also be caused by a worm > making it?s first round crashing and exploiting boxes. I guess time > will tell. when it strikes, it won't be silent. > BTW - nothing here, it?s all quite around my firewalls. quiets? wait and see. -- kokasviiijn _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/2003 _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists