Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: On classifying attacks
From: "Dustin D. Trammell" <dtrammell () citadel com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 11:24:39 -0500
On Sun, 2005-07-17 at 01:58 -0700, Crispin Cowan wrote:
Yet none of them capture the distinction Derek pointed out, and so perhaps we need a new term. We could say that attacks against connected programs like BIND and Gaim are "synchronous" and attacks that involve sending now for impact later such as e-mailed malware are "asynchronous".
I have seen the terms "active" and "passive" used quite frequently to differentiate between these two conditions. -- Dustin D. Trammell Vulnerability Remediation Alchemist Citadel Security Software, Inc.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Current thread:
- RE: On classifying attacks, (continued)
- RE: On classifying attacks Bryan McAninch (Jul 15)
- Re: On classifying attacks James Longstreet (Jul 16)
- Re: On classifying attacks Derek Martin (Jul 16)
- Re: On classifying attacks Godwin Stewart (Jul 18)
- Re: On classifying attacks James Longstreet (Jul 18)
- Re: On classifying attacks Adam Shostack (Jul 19)
- Re: On classifying attacks Mihai Amarandei-Stavila (Jul 18)
- Re: On classifying attacks Derek Martin (Jul 16)
- Re: On classifying attacks Crispin Cowan (Jul 18)
- Re: On classifying attacks Indigo Haze (Jul 16)
- Re: On classifying attacks Steven M. Christey (Jul 18)
- Re: On classifying attacks Dustin D. Trammell (Jul 19)
- RE: On classifying attacks Black, Michael (Jul 19)
- Re: On classifying attacks Crispin Cowan (Jul 19)
- Re: On classifying attacks Technica Forensis (Jul 20)
- Re: On classifying attacks Crispin Cowan (Jul 27)
- Re: On classifying attacks Crispin Cowan (Jul 19)
- Re: On classifying attacks Crispin Cowan (Jul 28)