|
Re: Hacker opsec case study: msg#00042security.dailydave
I think Dave's point was related to how far they got once they had their foot in the door on one workstation. I have a lot of experience related to assessing the risks associated with workstation compromise through client-side/data-driven exploits and first-hand experience seeing how far a skilled adversary can get. Dave seems to be saying this serves as a good case study to that affect, which I would agree with. Dom On 4/19/07, Pete Herzog <lists@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think this says more about the poor defensive technique of "patching" and > reliance upon it than about the 0day itself. > > -pete. > > > Dave Aitel wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070419/ap_on_hi_te/hackers_state_department > > > > This is a great article from the perspective of "How long in the State > > dept. does one Word 0day buy you." > > > > It's like a hacker opsec case study. > > > > - -dave > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) > > > > iD8DBQFGJwA5tehAhL0gheoRAvbmAJ9YSgtu9fBKuJqoCkbrBWSeEbtIngCdEn/R > > YL/rw3zpGJS5FCY3h2/zW4A= > > =ydkC > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Dailydave mailing list > > Dailydave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dailydave mailing list > Dailydave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave > |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Revision control is great.: 00042, Dave Aitel |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | .sg has cold beer!: 00042, Dave Aitel |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Hacker opsec case studyi: 00042, Pete Herzog |
| Next by Thread: | CFP it1tk1 '07: 00042, El Nahual |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |