Slashdot Mirror


AOL Still Working On AIM Security Hole

TeacherReviews.com writes: "According to this article at Newsbytes, AOL has been aware that users' screen names and credit cards can be stolen from not only AIM 4.3, but earlier versions of the instant messenger as well. This problem, which allegedly can happen to any AIM user, was first made public by Inside-AOL.com months ago, but AOL decided not to respond until this Thursday under increased pressure from Inside-AOL.com and other media." This is just the kind of news I could do without, having recently been persuaded to register with AIM and give GAIM a try.

46 of 118 comments (clear)

  1. Why Prosecute at ALL??? by bhalvors · · Score: 5

    This may be seen as O-T but, why do companies insist on prosecuting the "illegal entrant" who just plays around on the system, and does no damage other than, possibly, to a company's reputation? In fact, most of the hackers would just explore what they could do, and then send a post to people like Kevin Poulson, or Adrian Lamo describing a WEAKNESS that then allows the company to make a BETTER product? I think that companies that get cracked should prosecute FULLY and VIGOROUSLY, but companies that get hacked should say, "wow, that kinda sucks, thanks for letting us know and not being a thief!" Anyway, just a thought.

    1. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by Shimbo · · Score: 2
      If you claim that the company doesn't know what went on, then it is implied that there isn't any evidence that the hacker did something "bad." What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

      Nothing. The individual involved committed a crime; that he did no damage and had no malicious intent is an argument for a lenient sentence, not a defence.

    2. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by Crixus · · Score: 2
      This may be seen as O-T but, why do companies insist on prosecuting the "illegal entrant" who just plays around on the system, and does no damage other than, possibly, to a company's reputation?

      The answer to this question is actually quite simple:

      Corporations, and even the government are finally learning that the net is the great equalizer, and they nave no control over it. In the beginning both the gov't and the corps thought they could control and manipulate things, but over time they learned that they had zero control.

      This is a frightening thing to learn for a person or organization who thought they had utlimate power. So in order to gain back some of the power they lost by entering the internet community they will prosecute to the hilt in an attempt to set examples, because there probably are one or two people who won't hack or crack after they read those Time and Newsweek cover stories about the 14 year old kids who lost their computers and went to jail after hacking the KFC website looking for their secret-sauce recipe.

      The same thing goes for the gov't as well. They ALWAYS over-react... and it's policy. Look at history. Recent examples being Ruby Ridge, Waco, and removing Elian Gonzales from that house in Miami. They go in full force to set examples in the hope that citizens will toe the line and be good little citizens and not do anything except sit around, watch Jerry Springer, and gain weight.

      Rich...

      --
      Ignore Alien Orders
    3. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by sjames · · Score: 3

      This may be seen as O-T but, why do companies insist on prosecuting the "illegal entrant" who just plays around on the system, and does no damage other than, possibly, to a company's reputation? In fact, most of the hackers would just explore what they could do, and then send a post to people like Kevin Poulson, or Adrian Lamo describing a WEAKNESS

      There are a variety of reasons. For example, you arrive at home and find a note on your fridge:

      'You really need to get a better lock on your front door. Also, you forgot to carry the two when you balanced last month's bank statement, your milk expired yesterday and you're paying way too much for car insurance. P.S. Purple underwear? What were you thinking? Signed, Mr. 1337'

      Now, as a regular reader of urban myths, the question you have to ask yourself is: 'Did that guy stick my toothbrush up his butt?' or 'Will that embarrasing home video in my underwear drawer end up on a porn site?'

      On the other hand, if all Mr. 1337 did was get into your back yard and have a swim in the pool, it's probably not a big deal.

    4. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by dirk · · Score: 4
      This may be seen as O-T but, why do companies insist on prosecuting the "illegal entrant" who just plays around on the system, and does no damage other than, possibly, to a company's reputation? In fact, most of the hackers would just explore what they could do, and then send a post to people like Kevin Poulson, or Adrian Lamo describing a WEAKNESS that then allows the company to make a BETTER product? I think that companies that get cracked should prosecute FULLY and VIGOROUSLY, but companies that get hacked should say, "wow, that kinda sucks, thanks for letting us know and not being a thief!" Anyway, just a thought.


      The answer is simply because you can't let anyone get away with it (in general). If someone hacks your system, doesn't seem to break anything, and simply sends you an anonymous message saying so, you REALLY don't know what went on. He may have taken data that you didn't notice, put a trojan or something else you didn't notice, opened up other security holes, etc. Just because someone says that they didn't do anything doesn't mean that they didn't. I think AOL went a bit far in prosecuting this guy if he actually did help them patch the hole, but it doesn't change the fact that he shouldn't have been mucking around on someone else's network to begin with.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    5. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by dirk · · Score: 2
      Ahh, you bring up the question that I have on my mind. Really, why shouldn't he have been mucking around? Because you're not "supposed" to? Seriously, what's a good reason for him not to? I think it really comes down to why he was mucking around. If he was doing it because he was trying to see how secure his own private information was, I think he has a right to check that.


      In theory this is true, but try it in real life. I have my money in the bank down the street. I still can't try to break in "just to see if my money is secure". To me, computer systems aren't really any different than property for this type of thing. You aren't allowed to muck around in either of them if they aren't yours, simply because we can't factor intent into it. If you get caught before you have done anything wrong, does that mean you weren't going to do anything? Or you just didn't get the chance to? It doesn't matter, because you shouldn't have been there in the first place.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    6. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by jesser · · Score: 2
      otoh, the site could guarentee that all logs will be publically avaailable after 7 days, so anyone can check whether users are being malicious.

      --

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    7. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by jesser · · Score: 2
      True enough. So, why can't people who love doing this sort of thing be registered, have to physically show up somewhere with several pieces of ID, and a 1M$ Bond, and get a Registered Systems Hacker ID#. Then they could play around and leave their ID#'s as proof of their white-hattedness?

      How about a creating a (free) system like zeroknowledge where you're anonymous unless the maintainers of the system agree that you've done something bad? Wait, I already see a few problems with that idea:

      - I'm not sure I would want to go through even that little bit of trouble after thinking of some random possible security hole. I just want to see if it's there and if it is, tell the people who own the system.

      - Malicious crackers would probably take a hint and decide to use zeroknowledge (but at least they would become aware of the idea of the idea of white-hat hacking, and they'd still have to pay for zk (I think)).

      - Setting up that kind of service might legitimize the idea that "hacking other people's computers is bad".

      - There's a huge incentive to crack one of the routers for this system: you get to watch people crack other systems, and then you can either "make" them do bad things on the systems they've cracked (and get them in trouble) or crack the systems yourself.

      --

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    8. Re:Why Prosecute at ALL??? by sjames · · Score: 2

      When someone breaks into a computer, they can at most delete files or use your DSL for a DoS.

      Or steal banking records, customer lists, credit card numbers, personal email etc. Businesses can easily be seen to live in their computers. That's where all of their information resides. The question was actually why do businesses see a need to prosecute, I just used a home analogy since many people can relate to that better.

      Besides, this person didn't even damage anything. Manslaughter has a much lower sentance.

      I do disagree with the harshness of the penelty. It certainly shouldn't exceed manslaughter or rape.

      So get decent security and don't fret when someone breaks in to your computer. Besides, merely exploring a network (a la nmap etc) is interesting and educational.

      Nmap is more like driving through a neighborhood seeing how many people have decent locks and alarms and who doesn't. At most it is like trying a door knob w/o opening the door (note that in the real world, even that can get you in trouble, especially if you have a record). To me, it isn't cracking until an exploit is tried.

  2. Re:2 questions by GMontag451 · · Score: 5
    How can you get credit cards, AIM doesn't use credit cards

    The reason everyone is talking about this hole allowing people to get credit cards is not because you can somehow find out the credit card number used to open an AOL account. In fact, if there is an AOL account with the same name as an AIM account, it won't work. People are talking about credit card fraud because with someone's AIM password and buddy list, it is a hell of a lot easier to do some social engineering, and that is exactly what some people are doing.

    The way this hole works is by changing a couple variables during runtime in AOL while creating a new screen name. Apparently, there is a variable corresponding to the screen name you want to create, and also a variable that contains two characters which are later prepended to the first variable. The hole is that if you put the first two characters of the name you want to steal in the second variable, and the rest of the name in the first variable, AOLs server will only check the first variable against its user name database.

    A much more detailed explanation here

  3. Re:So use Jabber by RobFlynn · · Score: 2

    If someone takes the password to your screenname then it doesn't matter HOW you connect to the service -- whether over AIM, Gaim, or Jabber -- the screenname's password has been compromised and you no longer have it.

    ---
    Rob Flynn

    --

    ---
    Rob Flynn
    Pidgin
  4. Didn't Microsoft Mention this? by Deathlizard · · Score: 2

    YET, here we have AOL knowing about a problem for MONTHS and not fixing it?

    If I remembrer correctly, Microsoft, Before They got out of the AIM Network to concentrate on their own IM Userbase, Mentioned that there was a huge security hole in AIM and AOL Blew it off as MS FUD. Maybe they knew about it all along and kept it a secret figuring that someone would find it eventually.

    Personally, I use MSN Messanger. I used to use ICQ then AOL Got hold of it and turned it into the ultimate example of bloatware. How many people can remember when it was a 1.4 meg download? I think it's up to 6 Megs now, has all kind of stupid things like web servers and greeting cards that are almost never used, and they made the E-mail notification into a full featured POS E-mail program that never would read E-mail because it would always screw up the Downloading of headers. and I never used AIM for obvious reasons (It's From AOL)

    The only IM Clients I would Even touch right now is Yahoo Messanger and MSN Messanger. and since MSN Messanger currently has exactly what ICQ had before it became a bloat monster, Thats the one I Use

    --

  5. Re:AIM versus other clients by generic-man · · Score: 2

    How about, "It's their own network, so let them do whatever they want with it"? AIM's protocol was never fully open; the "Open your protocol back up" is just typical open-source drivel. They have an acessible protocol, TOC, which is implemented in their Java-applet clients and most open-source clients. Their binary protocol, OSCAR, is their own property. Some hacked implementations exist for other platforms, but they're not quite perfect.

    AIM is not life-or-death. The only thing they put at risk here is their Good Name (cough). You don't like it? Start your own IM network, and make it "standards-compliant." I'll be too busy chatting with all of my AIM and ICQ buddies to care.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  6. The AIM 4.x license/TOS by yerricde · · Score: 3

    The AIM 4.x license agreement states, in effect, `By installing this software, you agree to the terms. ... You may not use client software not approved by AOL Inc. on AOL's AIM servers.' This is why I use AIM 2.1 (the fastest Win32 AIM client that AOL ever made) on my Windows 98 partition, alongside Everybuddy. I know there's Jabber, but I found its AIM gateway to be a bit unreliable.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:The AIM 4.x license/TOS by Phroggy · · Score: 2
      Hey, you use AIM 2.1? IM me; I'll make your system crash. :-)

      --

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  7. Re:Why would anyone leave IRC for proprietary? by b0z · · Score: 2

    Actually, ICQ is even better than AIM in these regards. I don't know about the newer version because I hadn't upgraded, but the older ones do not show you ads at all. That goes to another point, that you don't have to upgrade the client all the time. I am running ICQ99b right now and will not upgrade. I tried the 2000 version and I didn't like it, so I went back to the old one. Another advantage is that it doesn't pop up windows while you are working. I hate when I am typing something and then someone sends a message on AIM (I am forced to use it at work) and I end up sending them a message of some code or something. Also, the ICQ protocol is not kept as secret as AIM. There are plenty of clones out there, and I believe ICQ does have a unix version that they made, as well as a palmOS version, mac, and CE in addition to the rest. Also for AIM, there is a java applet that is not too big and you can run to connect to the AIM service. I use it at work on my Sparcstation and have no problems with performance or any lack of features.

    --
    Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
  8. Re:Hmmmm by atrowe · · Score: 4

    AOL members, by default, have the same AOL usernames and AIM screennames. By stealing the AIM account of an AOL subscriber, you will be able to change the password and gain access to all other AOL features by using the same screenname/password as that user's AIM screenname/password.

    --

    -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

  9. Re:Why not use ICQ instead by b0z · · Score: 2
    Of course, by now you must know that ICQ is owned by none other than AOL,...

    ICQ is a decent product in my opinion, and the opinions of many. Just because it is owned by AOL doesn't mean it is a horrible product. I am pretty sure you are using either Netscape or Internet Explorer. Both of these companies are hated and bashed a lot for their problems and the way they do business. However, that doesn't mean that they don't do something right once in a while.

    ...and that the company is planning on merging the services. (Don't believe me? Download AIM 4.3, and log in using your UIN and password.)

    Well, that is their choice, however, for the year or two that they've owned ICQ, I've never had to stop using the older versions. At this point I have no need to "upgrade" to AIM 4.3 so this doesn't really affect us yet. If they do merge the two and force everyone to upgrade, I see the potential for people finding something else similar to ICQ because it has a lot better features than AIM. In fact, it could be possible for a rogue ICQ network running ICQ groupware servers. I've done that before, and even though that only runs on NT, I believe there is a unix or linux clone that someone made.

    Furthermore, ICQ's security is pathetic. Messages are sent person-to-person directly, opening up unnecessary ports on your system. Your password is sent in plaintext (as opposed to AIM's brilliant method of XOR'ing it with "TicToc") so anyone with a sniffer could find it.

    Excluding the peer-to-peer part, the exact same could be said for pop/sendmail based email systems. However, we all know how widely used it is. Email, and to a greater extent instant messaging, should not be your main form of communication. I use ICQ to keep in touch with friends and family, not to send credit card orders or discuss top secret plans. I don't want people to read my instant messages, but if they do it will not actually hurt me. It is basically just a toy, like talking on walkie talkies or sending a postcard. If you want some form of encryption, you can encode your messages with pgp quite easily, and I believe there may be an ICQ plugin for doing that as well. Also, as far as security, you mentioned another thing...that the messages from ICQ are peer to peer and do not go through the server. That is one advantage over AIM. If my messages go directly to the person I want to send them to, how can AOL log them?

    --
    Mas vale cholo, que mal acompañado.
  10. Re:AOL...not AIM by generic-man · · Score: 4
    (2) It only applys to AOL accounts, and not AIM

    No. Is it so hard to read the damn article first?
    Indeed, Graham emphasized in an interview that the attacks were "limited to the AIM system. No one on the AOL platform has had their security compromised."

    --
    For more information, click here.
  11. credit card numbers? by Trepidity · · Score: 4

    The slashdot blurb says this could lead to credit card numbers being stolen. The articles linked to did not mention this. Furthermore, since registering for an AIM name does not involve giving a credit card number, I fail to see how this is even plausible. Is slashdot just making up news or is there a factual basis behind this allegation?

    1. Re:credit card numbers? by QuantumG · · Score: 2

      heh.. maybe if you just ask the AOLuser they will give you their credit card number. "How would I know your screen name if I wasn't from AOL?"

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:credit card numbers? by maquina · · Score: 3

      The credit card numbers that are mentioned in the article are the ones being traded to acquire more desirable screen names.

      From the Article in Security Focus:
      Credit Cards Abused
      Hackers initially discovered that they could set uni_next_atom_typed to two blank spaces and create indented screen names on new AOL accounts. When it developed that the same technique could be used to take over AIM accounts, something of a screen name gold rush ensued among a mostly juvenile group of hackers eagerly snatching up the most attractive names, according to Lamo.
      Because AOL's sign-up process requires a valid credit card number, many of these hackers have taken up credit card fraud to feed their screen name habit. "People trade desirable screen names for [stolen] credit card numbers, which are then used to make more desirable screen names," Lamo says. "It's a vicious cycle."
      For full story visit link:
      http://www.securityfocus.com/news/119

      --------
      Maquina
      http://director.chessmasters.com/maquina

  12. Maybe... by Galvatron · · Score: 2

    Maybe not. You can have different AIM and AOL passwords. Most people will probably pick the same password, but in theory there's no reason why this is necessarily the case.

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  13. hey timothy by jbridge21 · · Score: 2

    Just so you know, I, and several other people, have had lots of problems with GAIM. It crashes a lot basically. I don't really know quite where the issue is, but thankfully there's plenty of good UNIXen AIM clients out there. I myself use Tik (an emacs-lisp version :-) for those times when I need to get on, which is not too much...

    But just so you know, if you run into problems, try something else.
    -----

  14. AIM versus other clients by iamsure · · Score: 3

    AOL's argument against other companies 'connecting' or in their words 'breaking into' their database (of users) has always been "Security".

    They never elaborate, nor specify exactly what criteria have to be met, so others can meet it and get use of their network.

    The FTC was considering possibly forcing them to open up instant messaging, but seemed to back down when AOL said they refused due to security of their customers.

    YET, here we have AOL knowing about a problem for MONTHS and not fixing it?

    Smells like time for a few senators and congressmen to say a few words to AOL about "equal standards".

    Open your protocol back up, AOL.

    1. Re:AIM versus other clients by yerricde · · Score: 2

      Start your own IM network, and make it "standards-compliant."

      We already did. It's called Jabber.

      I'll be too busy chatting with all of my AIM and ICQ buddies to care.

      There are already Jabber-to-TOC and Jabber-to-ICQ gateways that let Jabber users chat with users on other servers, and they're getting ready to install MSN and Yahoo! gateways.

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
  15. ICQ by RESPAWN · · Score: 2
    Looks like it's time to use ICQ again. Oh wait, that's owned by AOL, too.


    --------------------------------------

    --

    If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  16. To protect yourself... by jesser · · Score: 3
    I just registered sseRud (my screen name minus the first two letters) so nobody can do this to my main screen name. I also registered jsserud and tried to register esserud because the securityfocus and upsidetoday articles didn't convince me that I didn't need to register them as well. Esserud turned out to already be registered, which surprised me, but it's not important that I own those userids, just that the buggy registration thingie knows they're not available.

    (Note: I'm not trying to imply that it's ok for there to be such a huge security hole by posting these instructions to slashdot. I just want to point out that it's possible to protect your account without going through too much trouble.)

    Moderators: I'm above the karma cap, but I'm still a karma whore, so do whatever you want to this post.

    --

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  17. Re:2 questions by generic-man · · Score: 2
    If you read the article linked to up there, you'll see this quote:
    Indeed, Graham emphasized in an interview that the attacks were "limited to the AIM system. No one on the AOL platform has had their security compromised."
    In other words, they could NOT get AOL members' card numbers. This is just a hack that could let people pretend to be me when talking to my buddies.
    --
    For more information, click here.
  18. Looks Like It's Closed by SkyIce · · Score: 3
    from inside aol:
    Update @ 12/1/00: Better late than never - despite missing their stated deadline for a solution, America Online has managed to put a stop to the theft of Instant Messenger subscriber screen names, according to information received by Inside-AOL.com. We hope that their fix will prove to be a lasting one, and find it greatly satisfying to see that even the largest of companies cannot ignore public pressure indefinitely.
  19. WTF by mwalker · · Score: 4

    Jay Satiro, 19, pleaded guilty Tuesday in Westchester County Court to first-degree computer tampering. He faces up to 15 years in prison.

    The average prison time served after conviction for homicide, willful murder, is 5 years, 11 months.

    First degree computer tampering? A 19 year old with obvious talent belongs in federal prison. You bet.

    The greatest crime you can commit in America is first degree curiousity.

  20. Why open source protocols would have solved this by aozilla · · Score: 3

    I've seen this happen at companies that I've worked for over and over and over again. You make a client, and a server, talking to each other over a proprietary protocol, and you forget that the client is inherently untrusted. Security through obscurity breeds in these proprietary environments. I've had heated arguments with programmers who insisted that the server was secure because the client was unable to perform certain actions. I've had managers ask me to prove that these problems were security holes by exploiting them, but without modifying the client source code because "the public doesn't have the client source code, so if you need the source code, it can't be exploited". The fact is, if you have any plans of being as big as AOL, your protocol will be reverse engineered, alternate clients will be created, and your security holes will be found.

    --
    ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  21. Re:Something I did a while back. by mosch · · Score: 2

    Well, spammers have found interesting ways to try to get these completed user lists. A standard spammer trick is take any address they get at all, and make variants of it for the big ISPs. After all, if there's a barbsmith@someisp.net, there's probably a barbsmith@aol.com. Given the negligable cost of sending spam, it doesn't matter if it only hits one in ten times.

    AT&T gets something in the neighborhood of a million or two bounces from this type of spam, per day.

    --
    "Don't trolls get tired?"

  22. Re:Something I did a while back. by nebby · · Score: 2

    Both harvesting screen names and sending unsolicited communications is against their terms.

    --
    --
  23. Re:Something I did a while back. by nebby · · Score: 2

    Well, not all e-mail addresses (most, I'm betting) are AOL screen names.

    Also, the trick is finding "active" screen names. The ones coming in and out of chat rooms are the best cases for that, afaik. Ones that have big buddy lists probably are too.

    There'd have to be a way to automate the process of "hacking" an account, getting the buddy list, and then doing the same on all of those, rinse, repeat.

    I think you need to use that AOL tool though, so it's probably an impossibility to automate such a process.

    --
    --
  24. Irony... by Technodummy · · Score: 4

    ".... Earlier this year, a hacker discovered that he had gained access to AOL's internal network. He contacted them and told them about it, then helped them fix it. After it was fixed, AOL turned around and had him prosecuted."

    if you bite the hand that helps you... will it reach again?

  25. Re:Why not use ICQ instead by generic-man · · Score: 3

    Ah yes, the typical "AIM sucks, use ICQ" response to an article like this. Of course, by now you must know that ICQ is owned by none other than AOL, and that the company is planning on merging the services. (Don't believe me? Download AIM 4.3, and log in using your UIN and password.)

    Furthermore, ICQ's security is pathetic. Messages are sent person-to-person directly, opening up unnecessary ports on your system. Your password is sent in plaintext (as opposed to AIM's brilliant method of XOR'ing it with "TicToc") so anyone with a sniffer could find it.

    ICQ and AIM are supported in Everybuddy for Linux. Good app, with no ad banners or ugly "skins" or "wings" like Odigo.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  26. Something I did a while back. by nebby · · Score: 5

    A while back I was playing with the idea of getting lists of AIM user screen names to use for sending random stuff to at my will. The only way that I knew of to get screen names of AIM users was to either do a search in the directory or look in chat rooms. I also tried generating them, but that didn't work well.

    Of course, the system had to be automated, so I decided to go the route of chat rooms. I wrote a AIM TOC client in Java (and some bot stuff too, but that's another story), hooked it up to some scripts, and before I knew it I had a list of like 500k or so screen names (acquired over a period of like 2 weeks of sitting and harvesting)

    It was fully automated, grabbing the latest open chat rooms from the web at AOL's site and parsing them out via perl script. It was pretty scary, actually. Once or twice I IM'ed a few random ones just to see if I really was getting screen names of real people, and sure enough they were always like "Who the hell is this?" .. it was freaky :)

    I did some more research and realized that was I was doing was against AOLs terms of use, so before it got out of control, I stopped. The names I had gotten, anyway, were just stupid AOL people who were usually less than 14 years old and probably asked "a/s/l" several times an hour.

    This little hole though makes me wonder if there's a way to get a list of ALL the screen names.. the college kids, the working adults, not just the AOL geeks who use the "AIM chat rooms".

    You shouldn't do it because of the legal implications, but I'm betting someone would pay a hefty sum for a list of several million active screen names for IMing advertisements to. I had a whole plan of this myself, but of course that's WAY against their terms of use.

    Or you could just OSS the whole list :)

    --
    --
    1. Re:Something I did a while back. by nebby · · Score: 2

      Well, to brute force it would take a lot of work.

      The first method is to generate every possible screen name (x characters) and do those. This is too much and too slow, impossible.

      The alternative method is to generate words off a dictionary (pseudo words) using syllables and stuff, since alot of screen names are not real words. This actually worked pretty well in guessing actual names, but again these screen names were usually not active for ages.

      --
      --
    2. Re:Something I did a while back. by Ed+Avis · · Score: 2

      What's the big deal? Why are they trying to keep the names secret anyway?

      Surely it would be better to give each user a name (which is public) and a password (which is private). Then if users don't want to receive messages from people they don't know, a simple option in the AIM client would do it.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  27. Oxy-moron? by sheetsda · · Score: 5
    The article mentions an "AOL hacker". Does this seem like an oxy-moron to anyone else?

    "// this is the most hacked, evil, bastardized thing I've ever seen. kjb"

  28. Re:ass by medicthree · · Score: 2

    are you from britain or something? "first reply"?

  29. Doesn't matter anyway by atrowe · · Score: 2

    Anyone who already has AOL is too damn stupid to figure out how to steal an account and everyone else wouldn't want an AOL account, even if it is free.

    --

    -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

  30. Not everyone who uses AIM is vulnerable... by D'Arque+Bishop · · Score: 3
    Well, true, AIM users who are NOT AOL subscribers are possibly vulnerable, but there were a couple of exceptions to this vulnerability, according to a SecurityFocus article:

    Once an AOL account exists under an AIM screen name it cannot be hijacked again--although a separate loophole allows hackers to create AOL accounts that automatically disappear from the system shortly after creation.

    Users of AOL's subscription service are not vulnerable. Because of the nature of the bug, AIM users with screen names that, minus the first two letters, are already taken are also immune: i.e., if Hn Doe has an AIM account, then John Doe's is safe.

    Makes me glad I already have an AOL account as a backup dialup...

  31. So use Jabber by yerricde · · Score: 2

    Jabber is a Free instant messaging system with a Free server and several Free clients. No AOL needed; however, there are gateways to Yahoo!, MSN, AIM, and ICQ if you have an account on those services.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?