full-disclosure - IMLogic telling porkies about Yahoo

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: <4b6ee9310510140928q2eefdfeat8c49e473ba96f0e4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri Oct 14 17:28:42 2005
From: xploitable at gmail.com (n3td3v)
Subject: IMLogic telling porkies about Yahoo

On 10/14/05, James Tucker <jftucker@...il.com> wrote:
> Sorry for the extremety of my blunt response, but I have two things to say:
>
> 1. How the fuck do YOU know any more than they do? Just because you
> obsess over the security factors around a company with which you have
> no affiliation does not put you in any greater authority to make
> statements like those you made there.

I heard it from the horses mouth. Yahoo don't acknowledge the same
stats that IMLogic report on, and Yahoo say IMLogic's findings don't
match that of Yahoo's own stats of their network.

IMLogic can report on something and claim a worm is attacking, but
when Yahoo's people go and look at their network, nothing is actually
taking place!

How many malicious messages do IMLogic record, before they decide
theres a wide spread attack? Thats my question, because even with
reports of worms on Yahoo, none have been seen by Yahoo or users..