Re: All China, All The Time

[Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>]

Physical keys. There's like over 100 different keys in the whole
complex... Sure, helpful to know about the needle in a haystack. The
question is, how much is needed to sift through that haystack.
One day "evil maid" approach is ok, a couple of days "evil
technician", possibly, but I doubt anyone wouldn't notice the
intrusion.


On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Benji <me () b3nji com> wrote:
> I'll put it this way.
>
> Im an attacker in your network, trying to get access to your "most sensitive
> information". Ive identified the server that stores this information and Im
> looking around for keys/passwords etc etc etc.
>
> Are you saying it wouldnt help me to know that I needed 5 keys, thus
> pointing me towards what to look for?
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
> wrote:
> > No, that was actually configuration description; best of luck finding
> > our facility.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Benji <me () b3nji com> wrote:
> > > Actually you were boasting, it was irrelevant to have what you have as a
> > > security precausion. Infact, one could argue that you were making your
> > > setup
> > > insecure by telling people how you're secured from the get go.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > My question was mostly rhetoric, I tried to imply the point on why
> > > > computers with sensitive information were;
> > > > 1. not fully up to date (=>from the top of my had, the exploit had
> > > > several issues in non-standard browser versions?)
> > > > 2. running internet explorer (=>more known as a target, nothing against
> > > > MSIE)
> > > > 3. used to surf the web (=>why else would you be using IE [rhetoric])
> > > > 4. not monitored correctly (=>our most sensitive information is stored
> > > > in a server locked up 5 times, the only way to get in is either
> > > > getting all the keys or through a remote exploit*)
> > > >
> > > > I think the above points violate a couple of rules in security
> > > > auditing.
> > > >
> > > > * I'm not boasting about our configuration; this is very easy to
> > > > achieve in a company of 5 and one server rack.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Peter Besenbruch <prb () lava net> wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday 14 January 2010 21:49:05 Christian Sciberras wrote:
> > > > > > "They used an IE exploit to get in."
> > > > > > The people at *Google* use *IE*?!! Besides, how does an exploit in
> > > > > > IE
> > > > > > affect the server?
> > > > >
> > > > > It would affect a person with login rights to a server.
> > > > >
> > > > > This wasn't just an attack on Google, btw, it was an attack on 32
> > > > > different
> > > > > companies.
> > > > > --
> > > > > Hawaiian Astronomical Society: http://www.hawastsoc.org
> > > > > HAS Deepsky Atlas: http://www.hawastsoc.org/deepsky
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/