full-disclosure - Re: Interesting idea for a covert channel or I just didn't research enough?

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: <di3662$58j$1@sea.gmane.org>
Date: Thu Oct  6 14:13:09 2005
From: Mario.Holbe at TU-Ilmenau.DE (Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe)
Subject: Re: Interesting idea for a covert channel or I
	just didn't research enough?

PASTOR ADRIAN <M123303@...hmond.ac.uk> wrote:
> It works like this: the backdoor enables logging in the host-level =
> firewall for all dropped packets, say Windows XP SP2 Firewall. Then the =

Well, if the backdoor is able to enable logging in the packet filter
(i.e. configure the packet filter) it should also be able to add some
(as qualified as needed) pass rule, shouldn't it?
This should be far less noisy, far less performance consuming and
not more noticeable than the modification of other settings.

regards
   Mario
-- 
As a rule, the more bizarre a thing is, the less mysterious it proves to be.
                                    -- Sherlock Holmes by Arthur Conan Doyle