Re: DCOM RPC exploit (dcom.c)

[Nick FitzGerald <nick () virus-l demon co uk>]

tcpdumb <tcpdumb () it-bytes org> wrote:

> Well that's not entirely accurate. At least RaMeN had some nice features
> such as fixing the security hole it used to gain access to the vulnerable
> Host. ;) (Even if it's just a feature to prevent multiple attacks, it's
> basically a good idea)

Could you please explain in some detail how something that is both 
unethical, at least under all professional computing "codes of conduct" 
and/or "ethical codes" I know of and under the personal ethics of most 
"security professionals" (altering the contents of a computer one does 
not have suitable authority to alter in that way), and illegal in most 
countries ("computer [data] tampering" or similar) is a "good idea"?


Regards,

Nick FitzGerald

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