Re: [PEN-TEST] OT: Lotus Notes name service (was: penetratingtrojan)

["Hoelzer, David" <David.Hoelzer () SMSC COM>]

Simon is quite correct.  Notes prefers to do an internal Notes name lookup before it will resort to whatever your
underlying protocol is.  This can make for quite an interesting day when you need to build a server or client remotely
and are not able to resolve names with spaces and other doo-dads via the underlying resolution protocol (which is always
used for the initial config).




Simon Waters <Simon () wretched demon co uk> on 12/06/2000 11:12:32 AM

Please respond to Simon () wretched demon co uk

To:   PEN-TEST () SECURITYFOCUS COM
cc:    (bcc: David Hoelzer/SMC)

Subject:  Re: [PEN-TEST] OT: Lotus Notes name service (was:              penetratingtrojan)




Michael Rowe wrote:
> On 00/12/05 01:53 +0000, Simon Waters wrote:
> > Anyone know whether Lotus Notes usage of an seperate name service was a
> > clever design decision, or just a result of historical accident?
>
> What do you mean by "seperate name service"? Notes uses the name
> resolution of whatever protocol you are using.

I just meant that it typically does replication with servers it has a
connection document, which contains an IP address (In my limited
experience). I may have seen atypical servers, but most didn't fall back
to the DNS, or didn't need to as the connection information was
complete.

Thanks for the clarification.

If I'd understood Notes completely I'd never have replicated when my
laptop date was mistakenly ten years behind the server date 8-)