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: Fw: [Full-Disclosure] Google Search and Gmail Correlation |
|---|---|
| Date: | Fri, 25 Feb 2005 16:10:13 -0500 |
IIRC, only if you turn on the "advanced features" J On Fri, 2005-02-25 at 15:46 -0500, Nancy Kramer wrote:
If you run the Google Toolbar they do know where you have been surfing on the web. They do record it. That's how you "pay" for the Toolbar. Your theory sounds correct to me. Regards, Nancy Kramer Webmaster http://www.americandreamcars.com Free Color Picture Ads for Collector Cars One of the Ten Best Places To Buy or Sell a Collector Car on the Web At 04:28 AM 2/25/2005, Colin.Scott@csplc.com wrote:A little OT but I was pondering the other day about something. Remember the Axis network camera "inurl" search that exposed internet facing LAN cameras? Well I noticed that lots of those cameras are configured on high ports. 7000 for example. Now, I wondered how Google gets those cameras into its cache. Ok so there may be a web facing link _somewhere_ that references the URL... but when you search there are hundreds of these cameras in Google's cache. Now are Google going to tell us that they got there merely from web links? Is Google doing port scans when it finds an IP? Probably not.... So how about the Googlebar secretly updating Google's cache when we use these things? Just a ponder, please dont flame me if its been covered before, I havent got my flame-proof trousers on today! :) Cheers, Colin. "ÃdÃm Szilveszter dr." <adam@nhh.hu> To Sent by: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com full-disclosure-b cc ounces@lists.nets ys.com Subject Re: [Full-Disclosure] Google Search and Gmail Correlation 24/02/2005 12:12 Hello Cody, I think that what you are observing is this: the cookie you get when visiting your gmail account is valid for the whole google.com domain, and therefore will be transferred again when you do web searches as well. As you write, this is not a bug per se, the cookie mechanism is working as expected. It is also obvious that such an approach may raise privacy concerns. Now, *if* google wanted to mitigate this problem, it would be easy. They should migrate the gmail service web frontend to a subdomain (say: gmail.google.com) or even a whole new domain (gmail.com exists already but www.gmail.com merely redirects) and make the cookie only valid in that domain/subdomain. The questions is, do they want to do this? And yes, for now, if you are privacy conscious, delete the cookie before doing a Google search (or using any other Google service). Regards: Szilveszter Adam Budapest Hungary _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html *********************************************************************************** This e-mail is confidential and may contain privileged information. If you are not the addressee or if you have received the e-mail in error, it may be unlawful for you to read, copy, distribute, disclose or otherwise use the information which it contains. Under these circumstances, please notify us immediately by returning this mail to 'mailerror@csplc.com' and deleting this e-mail from your system. Any views expressed by an individual within this e-mail do not necessarily reflect the views of Cadbury Schweppes Plc or its subsidiaries. Cadbury Schweppes Plc will not be bound by any agreement entered into as a result of this email, unless its intention is clearly evidenced in the body of the email. Whilst we have taken reasonable steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from viruses, recipients are advised to subject this mail to their own virus checking, in keeping with good computing practice. Please note that email received by Cadbury Schweppes Plc or its subsidiaries may be monitored in accordance with the prevailing law in the United Kingdom. *********************************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.4.0 - Release Date: 2/22/2005
-- Esler, Joel CNTR/Sytex <joel.esler@rcert-s.army.mil>
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
| Previous by Date: | [Full-Disclosure] [ GLSA 200502-30 ] cmd5checkpw: Local password leak vulnerability, Thierry Carrez |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Full-Disclosure] Re: Firescrolling [Firefox 1.0], Stan Bubrouski |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Fw: [Full-Disclosure] Google Search and Gmail Correlation(evgpsc verify reciept please), DAN MORRILL |
| Next by Thread: | [Full-Disclosure] [TURBOLINUX SECURITY INFO] 24/Feb/2005, Turbolinux |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |