From: xtrecate at spymac.com (xtrecate)
Subject: Network Sniffing

Bear in mind my original message pertained to log files.

You brought politics into this.  So yes, I agree my response to your post
did not belong in FD, nor did your post.  Perhaps, though, your message was
more important.  After all, you are from the census bureau right?  Yes,
people line up to hear your opinion on topics ranging from Nixon to Iraq.

If Nixon's actions weren't underhanded political subterfuge, what exactly
would you call them?  Standard US Government operating procedure?  Do they
teach you those tricks at census camp?

Buhbye then.

xtrecate





-----Original Message-----
From: lee.e.rian@...sus.gov [mailto:lee.e.rian@...sus.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 6:36 PM
To: xtrecate
Cc: 'Florian Streck'
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] Network Sniffing

Your perspective sounds awfully naive.  Which is not surprising considering
you put Nixon's actions in the category of "underhanded political
subterfuge" and don't even mention J. Edgar's actions.  There's a reason
for the checks and balances we have - and it isn't paranoia.

Please take a look at the list charter.  Regardless of how important you
think your message is, if it's off-topic it doesn't belong on FD.

Regards,
Lee




|---------+-------------------------------------->
|         |           "xtrecate"                 |
|         |           <xtrecate@...mac.com>      |
|         |           Sent by:                   |
|         |           full-disclosure-admin@...ts|
|         |           .netsys.com                |
|         |                                      |
|         |                                      |
|         |           12/02/2004 04:45 PM        |
|         |                                      |
|---------+-------------------------------------->
 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |
|
  |       To:       <lee.e.rian@...sus.gov>
|
  |       cc:       "'Florian Streck'" <streck@...afloh.de>,
<full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>
|
  |       Subject:  RE: [Full-Disclosure] Network Sniffing
|
 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------|





I wasn't alive during the Nixon's reign of wtfs, but I don't think Nixon,
or
indeed anyone engaging in underhanded political subterfuge, would be
particularly worried about the log files at insecure.org, which is what my
commentary pertained to.

"This depends heavily on who decides what a felony is.
Just consider free speech in China. Brings you right into jail.
And I wouldn't go as far as to put the FBI (or any other such agency)
beyond
doubt.  Same applies to our (german) authorities as well."

I was not instilling blind faith into the FBI, more trying to provide a
perspective not so tainted by the paranoia intrinsic to many of the
messages
I see pass through FD.

--xtrecate

-----Original Message-----
From: lee.e.rian@...sus.gov [mailto:lee.e.rian@...sus.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:47 AM
To: xtrecate
Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] Network Sniffing

> People intending to commit felonies over the internet, obviously, have
> something to worry about... though I'm not sure why anyone would be
> sympathetic to their plight.

It's not only felons or even just people that intend to commit felonies
that the FBI investigates.  Are you old enough to remember Nixon & Hoover?

-----Other Original Message I'm Replying Too-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Florian Streck
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 11:57 PM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Network Sniffing

On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 08:26:41PM -0800, xtrecate wrote:
> The article states that the FBI served subpoenas for specific information
> from insecure.org, likely after finding evidence that some specific
attacker
> (who, no doubt, did something which deserves to be investigated)
retrieved
> data from insecure.org.  It would appear they are simply trying to
> cross-reference logs to discover an attacker's real IP address.  This is
> pretty legitimate, and Fyodor was apparently very diligent in ensuring
all
> information was retrieved via legal methods.
>
> People intending to commit felonies over the internet, obviously, have
> something to worry about... though I'm not sure why anyone would be
> sympathetic to their plight.

This depends heavily on who decides what a felony is.
Just consider free speech in China. Brings you right into jail.
And I wouldn't go as far as to put the FBI (or any other such agency)
beyond doubt.
Same applies to our (german) authorities as well.
>
> > Take a look at:
> > http://www.insecure.org/tools.html
> [...]
> Note: The FBI is monitoring HTTP logs from insecure.org.
>
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/25/1835238&from=rss
>

Florian

--
Memory fault -- core...uh...um...core... Oh dammit, I forget!

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists