Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: [Full-disclosure] 0day: PDF pwns Windows |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:39:29 -0400 |
Crispin Cowan wrote:
This is a perfectly viable way to produce what amounts to Internet munitions. The recent incident of Estonia Under *Russian Cyber Attack*? <http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3678606> is an example of such a network brush war in which possession of such an arsenal would be very useful. Crispin
One would presume that governments across the world would have their shares of unpublished exploits but with all the incidences of government networks being compromised, I don't believe this to be the case. What happened in Estonia though was nothing more than a botnet attack on their infrastructure (http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199602023) not an 0day attack. 0day's defined as "unpublished exploit" wouldn't do much in a cyberwarfare theater as country against country as the purpose of such warfare would LIKELY be to disconnect/disrupt communications. In the cases of industrial/country vs. country espionage it might (likely) will be more effective for the long haul but in the short term, 0days will be useless in this type of "cyberfight". Think about it logically, you want to "disrupt" country X's communications, not tap them. You'd want to make sure their physical army had no mechanism to communicate. You'd want to make sure financially you would cripple them. Not worry about injecting some crapware onto a machine for the sake of seeing what their doing. Reconnaissance is usually something done beforehand to mitigate your strategy. Not mitigate what's happening after you possibly sent 1Gb of traffic down a 100Mb pipe. -- ==================================================== J. Oquendo "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta" http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF684C42E sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Full-disclosure] 0day: PDF pwns Windows, Glenn.Everhart |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | JSPWiki Multiple Vulnerabilities, Jason Kratzer |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 0day: PDF pwns Windows, Crispin Cowan |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Full-disclosure] 0day: PDF pwns Windows, Lamont Granquist |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |