full-disclosure - Re: Just Asking

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]

Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2009 20:00:36 -0500
From: Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@...rr.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Just Asking

Reading comprehension problems?  From what he or she posted we have no 
idea if the email he or she posted actually exists or not, whether it was 
a misunderstanding and Dan had actually gotten permission but it didn't 
trickle down to the individual purported to have sent that message to Dan, 
etc.,etc.

IOW, it's a pile of hogwash posted without attribution making a claim that 
cannot be investigated, or, as I put it, "selectively publishing on 
that.....".  Or to put it another way, typical internet bullshit.

So now you are defending a anonymous accuser posting unattributable emails 
making unsubstantiated claims that cannot even be investigated and 
claiming that I've done nothing to refute them.  The typical "so when did 
you stop beating your wife" "reasoning".

Excuse me if I'm not impressed.

--On August 2, 2009 7:28:48 PM -0500 ghost <ghosts@...il.com> wrote:

>
> and yet still, none of what you posted has anything to do with Dan
> commencing in questionable activities.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Paul Schmehl<pschmehl_lists@...rr.com>
> wrote:
>> Nothing is more impressive than some anonymous twit attacking someone
>> who does their research under their own name with stolen information
>> they should not have to begin with and then selectively publishing only
>> that which bolsters their supposed case.
>>
>> --On August 2, 2009 12:03:18 AM +0100 Ew0k <sekuritymatter@...il.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> A friend of mine observed something that I believe should be put on the
>>> table.
>>> While reading the e-mails sent back and forth by Dan Kaminsky,
>>> illegally published on zf05 one of the e-mails caught his eye:
>>>
>>> """
>>>
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>>
>>> This is another of our clients and you do not have the permission of
>>> the client to perform this kind of scanning.
>>> You have triggered over 22,000 events for us in this range alone as
>>> well as caused a few other minor aggravations.
>>> While you may believe you are a researcher and doing good, performing
>>> your unauthorized testing on live production platforms is a reportable
>>> offense.
>>> I am going to kindly suggest you seek permission from various targets
>>> before you continue your "research".
>>> Please note I am under contractual obligations to report your
>>> activities, we have recorded your "scans" on over 26 devices globally
>>> and none of our clients have given you permission to perform these
>>> "tests"
>>>
>>> """
>>>
>>> Now, according to this e-mail should Dan's CISSP certification be
>>> revised?
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul Schmehl, If it isn't already
>> obvious, my opinions are my own
>> and not those of my employer.
>> ******************************************
>> WARNING: Check the headers before replying
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
>> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
>> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Paul Schmehl, If it isn't already
obvious, my opinions are my own
and not those of my employer.
******************************************
WARNING: Check the headers before replying

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/