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: Re[2]: Solaris telnet vulnberability - how many on your network? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:28:29 -0500 |
Spectulation over whether Microsoft, Sun, or any other vendor intentionally put in backdoors just makes our industry seem unprofessional. The likelihood that either vendor did is near zero. Could be, but most likely not. Unless you find a hard coded password, code comments indicating a built-in backdoor, or an insider speaking out, you'll never prove it. It's much more likely just a human mistakes. And contrary to what was said below, by someone I respect, code audits and reviews are not even close to near perfect. If they were, Microsoft, Mozilla, and all the other open source projects would never have another buffer overflow. Security people running around maliciously spectulating on vendor motives, when there are absolute no facts known either way, is unprofessional. Our profession has enough black eyes without this type of wasteful dialog. Get back watching your Anna Nicole news updates. Roger A. Grimes -----Original Message----- From: Thierry Zoller [mailto:Thierry@Zoller.lu] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 7:32 PM To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com Subject: Re[2]: Solaris telnet vulnberability - how many on your network? Dear Casper Dik, I wasn't crying wolf about a Backdoor, heck I am not Steve Gibson. I was asking whether somebody will investigate why this hasn't been caught by audits or simply Q&A ? CDSC> And one which was too easy to discover; You said it, it's "easy to discover", so who has discovered it? Sun ? Considering it's that easy to catch, why hasn't SUN ? Maybe you can give us a heads up on that ? CDSC> real back doors are better I like that tautologie, "real backdoors", what makes a backdoor more real than another one ? Is it the coolness, the stealth ? Or is it simply the fact that it gives back door access ? CDSC> masquared as buffer overflows you might not chance upon. Nobody doesn't that anymore, everybody does code audits now and catches bufferoverflows, right? I think other overflows are more interesting to hide access. -- http://secdev.zoller.lu Thierry Zoller Fingerprint : 5D84 BFDC CD36 A951 2C45 2E57 28B3 75DD 0AC6 F1C7
| Previous by Date: | Re: Solaris telnet vulnberability - how many on your network?, Leandro Gelasi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Full-disclosure] Firefox: serious cookie stealing / same-domain bypass vulnerability, Michal Zalewski |
| Previous by Thread: | Re[2]: Solaris telnet vulnberability - how many on your network?, Thierry Zoller |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Re[2]: Solaris telnet vulnberability - how many on your network?, Gadi Evron |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |