Re: [Full-disclosure] SSH brute force blocking tool

Tavis Ormandy wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 10:56:33AM -0500, J. Oquendo wrote:
>   
> > Incorrect did you look at the fix? It isn't unsanitized as you state:
> >     
>
> J, you have made an attempt to fix it, but is is not sufficient.
>
> An attacker can still add arbitrary hosts to the deny list.
>
> Thanks, Tavis.
>
>   
Right... And as I stated on a different post... If an inexperienced 
admin allows that, it is on them. My attempt at making what I NEEDED and 
thought was helpful succeeded. If someone wants to nc insert arbitrary 
addresses, so be it. No different that someone spoofing random addresses 
at a firewall. What are you going to do, sift through  every single 
address touching your network. Heck for what you just claimed "An 
attacker can still add arbitrary hosts to the deny list. ... it is not 
sufficient" ... TCP/IP is not sufficient with all of its issues. Give me 
a break

--
====================================================
J. Oquendo
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743
sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net 

The happiness of society is the end of government.
John Adams

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/