Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re[3]: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure
From: 3APA3A <3APA3A () SECURITY NNOV RU>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:35:30 +0400
Dear 3APA3A, --Friday, August 20, 2004, 10:21:51 AM, you wrote to mvp () joeware net: 3> Before Windows 2000 SP4 it was possible to set date far in future (for 3> example to 2038). Locked accounts, expired certificates in addition to 3> "problem 2038" (Jan, 19 2038 is maximum date value for 32 bit time_t 3> timestamp used in many C compilers). But setting date 12 hours in future 3> or 12 hours in past still can produce a lot of harm. Minor correction: because SNTP uses different timestamp format it's not possible to set date behind 2036. But it's not so important. -- ~/ZARAZA Появился новый тип элементарных частиц - шкварки. Не очень большие, слегка подгоревшие. (Лем) _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure 3APA3A (Aug 19)
- RE: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure joe (Aug 19)
- Re[2]: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure 3APA3A (Aug 19)
- Re[3]: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure 3APA3A (Aug 20)
- RE: Re[2]: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure joe (Aug 20)
- Re[2]: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure 3APA3A (Aug 19)
- RE: Security aspects of time synchronization infrastructure joe (Aug 19)