[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <da791dc20508110106526ac496@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu Aug 11 09:06:19 2005
From: coardump at gmail.com (cranium pain)
Subject: Help put a stop to incompetent computer forensics
- Who the hell cares?
May I be so rude as to ask who the hell cares about this subject. -
This is a full-disclosure list to discuss exploits, techniques. tricks
and share the odd ~/ dump, not a "play politics about definitions"
list and quite frankly, I don't want to a) get this crap in my inbox
b) read this crap in my inbox and c) spend time replying to this *gay
whitehat* shite ..., so please be so kind as to have a cup of shut the
fuck up.
All my love,
-coardump
"hacking the whitehats for fun and profit, cos they know shit"
----
Applying the broader definition of Trojan, I can't even make sense out
of your paragraph above. But I know that you aren't using the term to
communicate the idea of malware that enables the attacker to gain
control over, and future access to, the infected system ... If that's
the definition you had in mind, then the paragraph you wrote makes
logical sense. Otherwise, not.
I agree that calling it a backdoor isn't comfortable, it just doesn't
fit. This is part of why I'm saying that the definition of Trojan must
include the access and control that a backdoor gives.
It doesn't make sense to me that "Many of the more common Trojans these
days are Worms, Trojans, and Backdoors ..." unless you are using Trojan
to communicate the feature of remote access to the infected box.
Sincerely,
Jason Coombs
jasoncscience.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists