Full Disclosure mailing list archives

RE: Administrivia: Binary Executables w/o Source


From: Person <devon () lithiumnode com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 15:54:38 -0700 (PDT)

Top-posters kind of suck too ;)

[d]

(Personally, I have never cared about binaries nor pictures being sent
as long as their size were small... It is just html email which I hate.)

Just some food for thought from a contrary viewpoint.


-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of
S . f . Stover
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:06 AM
To: Len Rose
Cc: Raj Mathur; full-disclosure () lists netsys com
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Administrivia: Binary
Executables w/o Source


On 18 Aug 03 03:40:34PM Len Rose[len () netsys com] wrote:
: My message was not about the size ofd
: the file but rather about the sheer useless re-transmission
: of a binary (any executable) that no one in their right mind
: would actually run which is why I suggested that source code
: should be included next time.

Would that really matter though?  I mean, how would I know
that the binary included came from the attached source?

Plus, I do have quarantined machines I blow away and rebuild
regularly that I don't mind putting unknown binaries on from
time to time.  Any my mileage definitely does vary  ;-)

Just my 0.02.  I figure there's no list like FD for unknown
binaries...

--
attica () stackheap org
GPG Key ID: 0xF8F859D0
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0xF8F859D0&op=index


"There is no such thing as right and wrong, there's just popular
opinion." -Jeffrey Goines

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Current thread: