full-disclosure - Re: Funny article

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: <035e01c3a9ef$4aedeb50$c71121c2@exchange.sharpuk.co.uk>
From: DaveHowe at cmn.sharp-uk.co.uk (Dave Howe)
Subject: Re: Funny article

David Maynor wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 03:20:14AM +0100, Mikael Olsson wrote:
>> I'm sorry to disappoint you, but the script kiddies don't care
>> about zealotry. I have yet to hear one say "Oh, this is a Linux
>> box, so I can't use this Apache bug to own it. That'd be rong."
> I don't think anybody said a linux box can't be owned with an apache
> flaw. My arugemnt for count of bugs is the should be counted against
> the people who actually WROTE the code. In Microsofts case it is
> becasue they wrote IIS, 2000/XP/2003, and Exchange. In contrast the
> Linux kernel projecn that just wrote the kernel. It sounds like you
> want a list of opensource bugs vs. Microsoft Bugs.
Ideally the Apache exe should be running as an unpriviledged user. but
then, ideally the IIS server should be running as an unpriviledged user
too....