Dailydave mailing list archives
Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems
From: "Katie M" <k8ek8e () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:48:45 -0800
What is this, full disclosure? I thought we were on DailyDave! ;-) No, it wasn't them and I won't tell who since they were my client and I am under NDA. The point of my post wasn't to expose any particular company, but to comment that older OSes, less-than-fully-patched current OSes, and other older software are still very relevant in terms of security today. We not only need to remember the exploits, but also look for practical ways to protect what is really out there. -Katie. On 11/14/07, Adriel Desautels <adriel () netragard com> wrote:
Kaite, The company with all of the old systems wouldn't be CFI by chance would it? Regards, Adriel T. Desautels Chief Technology Officer Netragard, LLC. Office : 617-934-0269 Mobile : 617-633-3821 http://www.linkedin.com/pub/1/118/a45 --------------------------------------------------------------- Netragard, LLC - http://www.netragard.com - "We make IT Safe" Penetration Testing, Vulnerability Assessments, Website Security Katie M wrote:Hey Dave, Lots of places have older OSes deployed, perhaps only internally as you mentioned, but companies are rife with them, and sometimes closer to the perimeter than you'd expect. On a consulting enagagement, I met a Fortune 50 company that had a massive internal deployment of Windows 98 (yeah, I know, weird but here's why) because they had some biz critical crapplication that nearly everyone needed to use that would only run on Win98. I told them to hire some developers or interns or somebody, anybody, to rewrite the thing from scratch. :-) Of course they and all those other places that run old OSes *should* welcome themselves into this millenium's operating systems -- we all agree there. No need to start arguing the obvious. But the point is that more than enough orgs (won't or) don't have the resources to upgrade (or to update) due to app compatibility. That's the reality and the reason why attacking older OSes at a CTF-like event is still pertinent and practical. My 0.01 pence. -Katie On Nov 12, 2007 3:03 AM, Dave aitel <dave () immunityinc com <mailto:dave () immunityinc com>> wrote: So every CTF I've played recently (like the one at CSI last week) has a target set of Windows 2000 and extremely old Linux (say, RedHat 8). I'm pretty sure that on any modern network you don't find a whole lot of either of these. There's always the people who still run NT4 and SCO OpenServer, but you have to look pretty far for them. But yet, no real remote exploits exist for Fedora Core 1, much less 7. Solaris has XFS and a few other remotes, but no one runs Solaris any more except the US Government, that I can tell. Even assuming you see some Solaris or AIX or whatever, you end up being so deep in the network already to find it that you've already got all the passwords and don't need exploits. But old operating systems will continue to live forever in CTF, I assume. Sort of as a sign of the times, while I was playing CTF on the Windows machine provided, I browsed the web briefly and my machine was immediately taken over by some really annoying spyware. So for the rest of the game I got to spend a lot of time clicking "close" on IE windows that kept popping up. Anyways, if you want to chat about it or grieve the pain of lost 0day, and you live in London then you should come to Immunity Pub Night In London Saturday Nov 24 at 6pm at the Price Arthur 80-82 Eversholt Street. I'll put 200 quid on the bar to help you drown your sorrows. RSVP to admin () immunityinc com <mailto:admin () immunityinc com>! -dave_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunitysec com <mailto:Dailydave () lists immunitysec com> http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave <http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave>------------------------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunitysec com http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunitysec com http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
Current thread:
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems, (continued)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Sebastian Krahmer (Nov 14)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Lance M. Havok (Nov 15)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Dude VanWinkle (Nov 13)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Thomas Ptacek (Nov 13)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Matt Hargett (Nov 15)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Steve Shockley (Nov 13)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Katie M (Nov 13)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Darryl Luff (Nov 14)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems dan (Nov 15)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Adriel Desautels (Nov 14)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Katie M (Nov 15)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Adriel Desautels (Nov 15)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Darryl Luff (Nov 14)
- Re: The long tail of vulnerable operating systems Weston, David G. (Nov 15)