full-disclosure - viruses being sent to list

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: <BAY9-DAV17BL69g9XuE000024f4@hotmail.com>
From: se_cur_ity at hotmail.com (morning_wood)
Subject: viruses being sent to list

Tamas Feher wrote...
> 1., First Amendment defines free speech. Source code has been proven
> free speech. Executables are not covered by free speech

this statement is illogical.
what exactly makes string of characters "executable" ?

MZ? elf? contained in the first few bytes / bits?
please define exactly WTF you mean here.
you can convert a windows executable to a vbs...is this still an executable?

just because some order of words in a computer "file" is somehow "compiled" by a
higher
language interpeter to run naitvly on some processing type of device,
under some "operating type computing system" that this is automagically
different in some aspect??
please please explain this to me in simple, logical terms.
how about wormwriters only target persons with compilers installed???
then they can just send source code and then its compiled on the target
 ( dont many *nixy viri do exactly this? )
if i renamed a viri.exe to viri.exe.txt, then this is not in "executable" form,
but yet contains the same information, in the same order of bits.. ..

there is only one difference i see, someone without the ability to produce
native code
from a language source to run on said processing type of system, can't "run"
said "code"  VS one who does and can.

are you being serious here???

m.wood