Security Incidents mailing list archives
Re: Compromised - Port 1524
From: "switched" <switched () q-east net>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:19:52 -0600
Yes, the default install of Redhat 6.2 had the VERY VERY vulnerable version of wu-ftpd installed along with the vulnerable version of BIND if I recall correctly. Redhat 6.2 installs with out patches, etc. won't last very long on the internet :).
Does anyone know if Redhat 6.2 default install contained a vulnerable wu_ftpd? Unfortunately the machine was rebuilt before I could check the version of wu_ftpd. I went ahead and checked my exploits for it and wonder if anyone here had any default wuftpd installs of redhat 6.2 hit? If anyone has responded to a similar machine, please let me know! Eric
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com
Current thread:
- Compromised - Port 1524 Hines, Eric (Mar 06)
- Re: Compromised - Port 1524 Jose Miguel Varet (Mar 06)
- Re: Compromised - Port 1524 switched (Mar 06)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Compromised - Port 1524 blazin w (Mar 08)