Full Disclosure mailing list archives
RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses
From: "MacDougall, Shane" <smacdougall () idanalytics com>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 15:26:59 -0800
Puh-lease. "Having NO security is better then, security by obscurity !!" Whoever taught you that is an idiot. Some security is always better than no security. Obviously security through obscurity is not a preferred approach, but to say no security is better only proves that you are talking out your ass. And for the record, a CISSP proves nothing. When I was a white hat I repeatedly tore apart the networks "secured" by CISSP "wizards". The certification means nothing - it's the actual hands on ability of the network managers and engineers that matter. Hope this helps Shane -----Original Message----- From: bart2k () hushmail com Sent: Fri Mar 05 14:21:11 2004 To: purdy () tecman com Cc: full-disclosure () lists netsys com Subject: RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: E-Mail viruses Curt, Please tell me that your kidding about your comment: "An alternative is to allow only a proprietary extension through, like .inc Legitimate senders would rename the file, be it .exe .doc .jpg, indicate in the body of the message what the true extension is, and the receiver merely renames it." If your not kidding it furthers the arguement that all those certification characters at the end of your name are worthless. "Having NO security is better then, security by obscurity !! I would have hoped you were taught atleast that before begin handed a CISSP certification and you should disclose this view you have to your employeer so they understand who is protecting them. - = FULL DISCLOSURE REQUIRED = - On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 11:36:10 -0800 Curt Purdy <purdy () tecman com> wrote:
Ron DuFresne wrote:1. We use the Draconian technique of stripping all .exe.zip. ,gif .jpg.scr .bat .pif files.Very draconian in todays world, and not productive by the way some folks do the work they have to do with limited capabilities these days.Itseems that we might was well revert back to only allowing e-mail in plain textAh, I wish... An alternative is to allow only a proprietary extension through, like .inc Legitimate senders would rename the file, be it .exe .doc .jpg, indicate in the body of the message what the true extension is, and the receiver merely renames it. A little trouble yes, but it virtually eliminates email propagated viruses from the corporation. Curt Purdy CISSP, GSEC, MCSE+I, CNE, CCDA Information Security Engineer DP Solutions ---------------------------------------- If you spend more on coffee than on IT security, you will be hacked. What's more, you deserve to be hacked. -- White House cybersecurity adviser Richard Clarke _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get FREE encrypted email: https://www.hushmail.com/?l=2 Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger https://www.hushmail.com/services.php?subloc=messenger&l=434 Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program: https://www.hushmail.com/about.php?subloc=affiliate&l=427 _______________________________________________ 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:
- RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses bart2k (Mar 05)
- Re: Re: E-Mail viruses Curt Purdy (Mar 05)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses Paul Szabo (Mar 05)
- RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses Curt Purdy (Mar 05)
- RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses Hunter, Laura E. (Mar 05)
- RE: [inbox] Re: Re: E-Mail viruses MacDougall, Shane (Mar 05)