Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment
From: mudge () l0pht com (What we're dealing with here is a blatant disrespect of the law!)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 12:33:18 -0400
Appologies to all for this non-charterish posting but there were mis-informational errors in Vin's post that I want to fix. On Fri, 13 Sep 1996, Vin McLellan wrote:
PeiterZ also expressed umbrage that I had referred to his associates as "elite hackers." I willingly apologize to PeiterZ, *Hobbit, Adam Shostack, and the associates of LHT Industries: Brian Oblivion, Space Rogue, Tweety Fish, Kingpin, Tan, Tom Icom, Veggie, Alice, Weld Pond, Dr. Who, Jerry Omaha, Big Brother, Hotrod, Silicosis, Cybernetik, and Mudge (whom Peiter thanks for their invaluable assistance in his Paper.) Is this sensitivity a generational thing? I still use the term hacker with respect. I don't know anything about PeiterZ, nor most of the colorful folk listed as "the boyz and girlz of LOpht Heavy Industries," -- but it was an honest mistake, the LOpht web site positively wallows in its Underground status. (The curious might check out <http://10pht.com>;-) I also doubt that *Hobbit, Adam, or Mudge would mind the label... nor let it get in the way of their very considerable talents.
1 - Who the hell is LHT Industries? Brian Oblivion, Weld Pond, Tan, King Kingpin, Space Rogue, Stefan (whom you didn't mention), and I are the 7 members of l0pht. I do know the names of the other people you mention as they all have accounts on the l0pht machine - that's about it. 2 - We were not thanked or mentioned in the white paper you refer to. The only one that you list that I saw thanked in the paper was Hobbit. [yes we are a bit chagrined as it's obvious that some of our ideas were in the paper] 3 - We, the l0pht, have no affiliation with SNI (those are the people who put out the paper). Asa matter of fact we have no affiliation whith any company that has money. Sad but true - we foot everything out of our own pockets and little doo-dads that we manage to sell to defray our costs. Simply because we love hacking (in the old sense :-) 4 - our URL is http://l0pht.com (or www.l0pht.com) -- NOT 10pht.com. (that's little L number zero - not the numeral ten). 5 - No - I don't mind the handle 'hacker'. But I probably will mind the phone call from another company bitching about being associated with our name when You and Security Dynamics should be getting the call instead. (Don't ask me why people are ass backwards) We don't want to be associated with other companies probably as much as they don't want to be associated with us <grin>. I hope you do better research on sefcurID discussions normally than you did on this last post <wink>. .mudge
Current thread:
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Vin McLellan (Sep 10)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Adam Shostack (Sep 10)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Alan Cox (Sep 11)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Mike Neuman (Sep 11)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Vin McLellan (Sep 13)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Alan Cox (Sep 16)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment carson () lehman com (Sep 16)
- Vunerability in HP SAM ? John W. Jacobi (Sep 16)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Elliot Lee (Sep 16)
- CERT Vendor-Initiated Bulletin VB-96.15 - SCO Security Bulletin CERT Bulletin (Sep 16)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Alan Cox (Sep 16)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment What we're dealing with here is a blatant disrespect of the law! (Sep 16)
- SecurID Peiter Z (Sep 17)
- Re: SecurID White Paper - A Comment Vin McLellan (Sep 16)