Re: Another panix.com scenario? Hushmail this time

[Adam Jacob Muller <adam () gotlinux us>]

Not quite the same thing,
it looks as though they just changed the DNS records and didn't  
change the actual ownership of the domain.
It also seems to have been resolved quite quickly. I wonder how much  
of this is due to increased awareness
following the panix.com issue, and how much is due to the fact that  
this happened on a monday, verses the panix
issue happening on a friday, sadly, it's probably the latter. Though  
it's also probably the fact that this seems to
be pretty clear-cut, when the panix.com issue happened, no one was  
quite sure what had happened, and how
it had occurred.




Adam






On Apr 27, 2005, at 11:28 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:

> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/25/hushmail_dns_attack/>
>
> "Surfers trying to visit the web site of popular secure email service
>  Hushmail were redirected to a false site early Sunday following a
>  hacking attack. Hush Communications said hackers changed Hushmail's
>  DNS records after "compromising the security" of its domain registrar
>  (Network Solutions). These changes were undone after a few hours on
>  Sunday and normal Hushmail services have now been restored."
>
>
> !DSPAM:426fafa9105791677319536!