Slashdot Mirror


Ask Fyodor Your Network Security Questions

Fyodor is the driving force behind Insecure.org and the top-rated Nmap network exploration and security auditing tool. He's also involved in The Honeynet Project (and is a coauthor of the project's book, Honeynet: Revealing the Security Tools, Tactics, and Motives of the Blackhat Community). One question per post, please. We'll run Fyodor's answers to 10 of the highest-moderated questions as soon as he gets them back to us.

272 comments

  1. My Question... by tx_kanuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As networks become more complex, and hackers become more sophisticated, how do you see the use of honeypots evolving? Do you think they will have to become mini-networks that can actually be used in-order to prevent them from being detected as honeypots? Or do you think the use of honeypots will just be phased out like many other security tools in the past?

    --
    Now, if that makes sense to anyone, could you please explain it to me? I think I've confused myself.
    1. Re:My Question... by artbellismyhero · · Score: 1

      I think an even more important question to ask Fydor is: Who will win between Ottawa & NJ tonight?

  2. Work guidelines? by eaddict · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How do you find what you do surviving the likes of DCMA/Patriot Act II/etc???

    --
    "If you are on fire you can just stop, drop, and roll. If you fall into Lava you are just dead." - my 5yr old daughter
  3. If you could change one thing. by Neck_of_the_Woods · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you could get the computer world to agree to change one fundamental thing in computer security on all OSs across the board what would it be?

    --
    Neck_of_the_Woods
    #/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
    1. Re:If you could change one thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      POWER SWITCH TO OFF POSITION.

      It's the latest craze in blanket security contracts offered by major firms!

    2. Re:If you could change one thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To set their root password to one of his choosing?

      I mean really, what do you expect him to say? He's a guy that spends his spare time writing a program that most people use to -break into other computers- :>

  4. What is your favourite tool? by Noryungi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have just read your top 75 security tools list. Thank you for posting all this information, which I am going to study very carefully.

    One question though: in all these tools, which one is your personal favourite? (This excludes Nmap, of course).

    Thanks in advance!

    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
    1. Re:What is your favourite tool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In that list only two "information management" or "intrusion management" applications are listed. GFI Languard (actually mentions lanscan but calls it Languard) and possibly etherape. There is no mention of any commercial products (Contego NetIQ Tivoli Risk Manager ArcSight NeuSecure) or free (ACID SnortSAM) products.

      What is your opinion of this class of products in their ability to allow a network admin to be knowledgable about the security of their own network and respond to threats?

  5. DMCA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Has the DMCA hindered your company in any way, do you see it as working against security professionals around the US or helping those of us who are interested in security as a career path?

  6. Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would be nice to have the functionality to simply say "yes" to a question like "unknown OS - would you like to submit it to submit.insecure.org" and have it automatically send the information. A compile-time option to enable or disable this would be idea.

    1. Re:Idea by zeeble · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How crazy is the idea of having a hardware based(where all security tools are hardcoded to the chip, and there is some way of updating, lik BIOS flashing) security system installed on machines, rather than using software to detect flaws? Also, do you see buffer-overflow related problems decreasing? As a followup, is gcc a secure enough compiler, or are commercial compilers like say Intel's C++ compiler more effective?

  7. libnet by sfraggle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why doesnt nmap use libnet?

    --
    were you expecting to see a sig here? perhaps you'd rather see the inside of an ambulance!
  8. What's your ratio of love:hate mail? by lewp · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On any project like this where there's potentially evil uses mixed in amongst the various good ones, you're bound to get a few angry people who don't understand how helpful your work is to the community at large.

    How much criticism do you have to deal with? And how does it compare to the kudos you receive, quantity-wise? Has it ever made you doubt what you're doing?

    PS- Thanks. nmap proves its usefulness to me every day.

    --
    Game... blouses.
    1. Re:What's your ratio of love:hate mail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What's your ratio of love:hate mail?

      He probably doesn't know - all the spam drowns out everything else :)

  9. My security question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    What's your account name and password? I'll trade you a two color, ballpoint pen with a logo on it for it.

    1. Re:My security question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not very useful without the name/IP of a machine somewhere. Having those would be like having a key without knowing where the lock is.

  10. Security Problem by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 4, Funny

    I keep getting connections to my box from this bastard, at all sorts of ports. What can I do to find out where he is?

    His IP address is 127.0.0.1

    Any advice from Fyodor or the Slashdot community?

    1. Re:Security Problem by ianjk · · Score: 0, Redundant

      That same guy was snooping around one of my servers.

    2. Re:Security Problem by Eberlin · · Score: 2

      I say ping flood the bastard!

    3. Re:Security Problem by xchino · · Score: 5, Funny

      See if you can make a CIFS/SMB connection to his box, try your username and password (He probably stole those too!) and then go crazy deleting stuff.

      --
      Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
    4. Re:Security Problem by rixster · · Score: 1, Funny

      If that doesn't work, then make sure you firewall yourself against those attacks. Probably best not to do it via the console, but telnet in via another machine. Watch out though - if (s)he's sharp (s)he'll probably block that firewall the moment you can those network connections - I'm afraid you may have to rebuild your machine if (s)he's that far entrenched

      --
      Two wrongs may not make a right, but three ....
    5. Re:Security Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Bwahahahahahahaha. His name is local host. Do a google search for him. He shouldn't be too hard to find.

    6. Re:Security Problem by Quill_28 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Flood 127.134.232.121

      That always stops the 127.0.0.1 hacker

  11. Security Updates by rf0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems that the numbre of security exploits and updates seems to be growing as more people start experimenting with trying the break systems. Now I'm subscribe to BugTraq et all but find it hard to keep on top of what is going on and what I need to update. What would you say are good tools for keeping up to date across multiple systems and platforms?

    Rus

  12. Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Zeriel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's been a marked increase in system administrators thinking that anything even remotely resembling a network scan is eeeeevil (case in point, last year I almost got kick out of college for scanning port 80 on my dorm subnet looking for interesting websites to read)...

    What do you think can be done to make scanning IP addresses/ports have less of a negative stigma? This is in the same sort of category as legit vs. illegit uses of anything else (P2P, whatever)--what's the rationale for punishing something that could maybe lead to criminal activity, and how can we make network scanning tools have practical uses again?

    --
    "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
    1. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by CausticWindow · · Score: 1

      This is interesting. I hate it when people put a computer on the internet, but freaks out when harmless packets reach it's network interface.

      --
      How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    2. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      hint:

      • scanning your own network/network you are authorized to administer: legit
      • scanning other peoples networks just looking for "interesting stuff": not legit

      HTH.
    3. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Zeriel · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Well, why not legit? If I scan all of my dorm's IP range (well-documented) on port 80 (the offense that nearly got me in trouble except for knoweldgeable judicial affairs types in the office), there are three possible results for any given IP address.

      People who have a webserver on port 80, which is out and open to the public because they had something to say. (unless they password it)

      People who have a default web server install with a default page (the most common in those days of (not necessarily legal) Win2k Pro/Server boxes everywhere)

      People with nothing running on port 80.

      Now, if I was scanning for open BackOrfice or SubSeven ports, or open ssh/telnet servers, then I might be suspect. But in reality, my problem came about because many of the no-server types had BlackICE running, and it decided to interpret nmap's scan (using the politest settings I could) as an "attack".

      One packet to each machine on your LAN does not an attack make, and I don't understand why this should be considered not legit.

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
    4. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by thrillbert · · Score: 1

      What do you think can be done to make scanning IP addresses/ports have less of a negative stigma

      Get root, use -sS TCP SYN stealth port scan (best all-around TCP scan).

      ---
      While money can't buy happiness, it certainly lets you choose your own form of misery.

    5. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Zeriel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I HAD root (at least on the machine I was scanning from =P).

      As I recall, I'd elected to use a less stealthy TCP scan because I wanted to be as aboveboard as possible, sorta like the LAN equivalent of yelling "Hey, anyone home?" from the sidewalk as opposed sneaking up and trying the doorknobs with a stealth SYN scan. =P

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
    6. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by arcade · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is exactly the kind of anal-retentiveness he is commenting on. If you put a box on the internet, it will receive packets. As long as it isn't flooding the network, nor tries to exploit anything - shut up about it.

      --
      "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
    7. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Electrum · · Score: 2, Informative

      As I recall, I'd elected to use a less stealthy TCP scan because I wanted to be as aboveboard as possible, sorta like the LAN equivalent of yelling "Hey, anyone home?" from the sidewalk as opposed sneaking up and trying the doorknobs with a stealth SYN scan. =P

      But it's better to not be detected at all. Plus with a SYN scan you have deniability. The source address can be spoofed (even nmap will do it -- see decoy scan). Thus, it wasn't necessarily you that sent the packets.

    8. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Zeriel · · Score: 1

      I suppose it was important to me (At the time) that I be clearly not performing anything even remotely like an attack.

      Of course, nowadays I WOULD use a SYN scan. =P

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
    9. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by mtahrens · · Score: 1

      What is the difference between scanning for BackOrfice/SubSeven and Web Servers? I really don't think there is a major difference, either way you're scanning.

    10. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you're just dumb.

    11. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it's like saying there's no difference driving the car on the left or the right side of the road, either way you're driving. BackOrifice/SubSeven have quite a different functionality than a web server.

      Also I really don't understand why people are so fucking paranoid about port scanning. If someone would scan every port on my computer, then I might wonder what he's up to, but just scanning one port?? What if you would do a ping sweep over the network? I don't think anyone would care, because it could just be some moron typing ping some.random.ip.number. However someone could type http://some.random.ip.number and you would start screaming, because someone is scanning port 80!!! Get a life.

    12. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Zeriel · · Score: 1

      As the AC said, it's fundamentally a question of intent.
      If I scan port 80 across the network, I could be very easily *gasp* searching for webservers. Y'know, because people put up webservers to be viewed.

      If I'm scanning for SubSeven, it's pretty much a sure thing I'm being evil. To a limited extent, that's also true of just about every port other than webservers or SMB shares.

      But why scream about someone who ONLY scans ports normally associated with publically accessible resources?

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
    13. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by TotallyUseless · · Score: 1

      If you are scanning port 80, you could also just as easily be looking for *gasp* unpatched IIS servers. Who is going to determine your motive? Should we just automatically trust anyone who says they were 'just scanning for interesting websites?' Intent is not determined by the port number. Who makes up the rules which determine what ports are ok to scan? Who determines the person's motives for scanning a particular port? Before you make a blanket statement that there can be no harm in scanning certain ports, you need to consider all the ramifications involved.

      --

      Time for some tasty Shiner Bock!
    14. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think this sums it up perfectly

    15. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Hint: Scanning other people's networks for interesting stuff: Legit.

      There are plenty of reasons that are perfectly legitimate to run a port scan on someone's network. it's no different from a search engine running bots. When you connect a computer to any network, it is understood that your computer can be scanned and possibly services will be used such as HTTP or open FTP ports. How, I ask you, is the parent of parent's port 80 scan any different from a windows box doing a NetBIOS scan, or for that matter, an nmap scan of an entire box from port 1 to port 1024? They are the same thing.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    16. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by kwerle · · Score: 1

      Before you make a blanket statement that there can be no harm in scanning certain ports, you need to consider all the ramifications involved.

      There can be no harm in scanning any ports. I'm not talking about ping death or DOS. I'm talking about a regular port scan.

      It's like knocking on someone's door to see if they're home. No harm, no foul.

      Who is going to determine your motive?

      Nobody can, and nobody should try.

      It is what you do after the scan that matters.

    17. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by intermodal · · Score: 1

      yes, but scanning is not a crime, nor should it be.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    18. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by intermodal · · Score: 1

      well, i think that's an unfair assumption. You put up a box on the internet, you learn to secure it. Sounds fair to me. Just getting port scanned does not make you a victim of a crime. I don't think it's unreasonable to perform any action on a box connected to a network that does not damage the system or take advantage of it. I recall once my wife (before I met her) was once ICQed by a white-hat who informed her of several holes in her system and moved on, while she patched them. Was this a malicious act? no, I think it was a perfectly reasonable act. If someone asks me a question about their computer online, and I ask what OS they run and they don't know, is it unreasonable for me to use nmap to find out? I don't think so. There are as many legitimate reasons to scan a box as there are illegitimate.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    19. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by intermodal · · Score: 1

      nobody should. it's a computer on a public network. Until I try something that is clearly malicious like a DoS attack or a malicious entry into their system (no, open FTP, HTTP, or other public and/or completely left open ports do not count), it's no crime

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    20. Re:Recent increases in anal-retentiveness... by intermodal · · Score: 1

      preach on, my good man.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  13. RTFM by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What are 'good' dead-tree references for the following categories:
    FNG--Fscking New Guy
    -Terminology, broad-brush concepts, checklists, good reference list
    Suit
    -Management concerns, planning
    Expert
    -Detail, performance considerations

    Categories are arbitrary; others will segment the market differently. Mainly seeking recommended authors/titles. Full-on reviews too space consumptive.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  14. The human element by mental_telepathy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Honeynet project seems to focus a significant amount of attention to the culture of the attackers (extensive logs of IRC chats, for instance.) Do you think the research the honeynet project is doing might make some headway in preventing social engineering attacks (The only hole nmap can't tell you about)?

  15. What tool(s) are we missing from our toolbox? by adturner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I saw the Top 75 Security Tools survey you did. Lots of great tools there. But I can't help but think that the security community still has plenty of tools that need to be written. So I'm curious what kind of new tools would you like to see written , re-written from scratch, or merged together to create a better tool? Basically, where do you see the missing pieces in the security community toolkit? What kinds or pieces of software would you encourage people in the slashdot community to write?

  16. Super-DMCA by ziggy_zero · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What is your opinion on the proposed "Super-DMCA" acts being proposed in several states, which would make honeypots illegal?

    Here's the article on it that ran in Slashdot awhile ago.

    Basically, the law says you can't "assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise" any device or software that conceals "the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service." - thus making honeypots, even when used to thwart illegal computer activity, are illegal.

    --
    I belong to the ______ generation.
    1. Re:Super-DMCA by greyfeld · · Score: 3, Informative

      These laws are not just "proposed", but a reality in Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Wyoming and by now is law in Arkansas (it was sitting on the governor's desk two weeks ago and he hadn't signed it, but becomes law after so many days anyway). Coming soon to a state near you - Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee and Texas! You can throw your Nat'ing firewalls, Honey Pots, routers and internet connection sharing out the window folks! Act now in those states before it is too late.
      Go to the EFF site here.

    2. Re:Super-DMCA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how is leaving a machine open to attack concealing the origin or destination of a telecommunications service????

    3. Re:Super-DMCA by stanwirth · · Score: 1

      Basically, the law says you can't "assemble, develop, manufacture, possess, deliver, offer to deliver, or advertise" any device or software that conceals "the existence or place of origin or destination of any telecommunications service."

      Good heavens, that would even make every bog standard NAT and Proxy illegal!

      Who writes these laws?

    4. Re:Super-DMCA by Doug+Neal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What do you think his opinion is? That it's a super great idea?

      FFS, what a stupid question ;)

    5. Re:Super-DMCA by Jellybob · · Score: 1

      My guess is that technically that would place the government in the area in breach of their own new law.

  17. OS Identification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    What OS am I running?

  18. Curious Yellow? by griffjon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do you think that Brandon Wiley's thought-design of "Curious Yellow" (paper at: http://blanu.net/curious_yellow.html or http://www.securiteam.com/securityreviews/6U00L1P5 PY.html) will come about as he's laid out? It seems like not an unlikely scenario once someone puts some effort into actually designing it. What are your thoughts about the evolution of 'smart' worm attacks balanced agains thre need of good network security scanners?

    --
    Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    1. Re:Curious Yellow? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In case you hadn't made the connection yourself, the Slammer worm used many of the techniques described in the "Curious Yellow" paper, so indeed, it is not an unlikely scenario, as it has already happened.

  19. How does it feel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    to haxor underaged slashdot trolls just because they pulled off a silly thing and called you a wanker ?

    Has the FBI already visited you because of this issue ?

    Does nmap have any backdoor for haxoring ?

    Are you sure that you are a white hat ?

  20. Re:NMap by andkaha · · Score: 1
    I got caught when scanning with NMap. Can I sue you?

    You didn't read the license, did you?

    --
    It's 11pm, do you know what your deamons are up to?
  21. IPv6 by binaryDigit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Since ipv6 is supposed to address many of the security issues inherent in ipv4, should there be more of an industry push to adopt it quicker? OR having many years now since ipv6 was drafted, have we learned more about the types of attacks/tactics, and therefore should ipv6 be updated. Seems like now would be the time to do it since ipv6 still has not been adopted and changes could be made without too much disruption or cost (time or money).

    1. Re:IPv6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like now would be the time to do it since ipv6 still has not been adopted and changes could be made without too much disruption or cost (time or money).

      Wow. At best I would say that is highly debatable. At worst, I would say it's just plain wrong.

      No wait. It's just wrong.

    2. Re:IPv6 by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      since ipv6 still has not been adopted

      Not been adopted by whom?

      No, most companies/endpoints haven't adopted it, but most of the major equipment manufacturers (Cisco, Lucent, etc) have and have equipment available for it. It's in use by the University/Research-only "Internet2" currently. The major backbone providers are in the process of slowly switching to it.

      Sure, it'd be cheaper to invent another standard now and move to that on a widescale basis than to adopt IPv6, switch to it, and then adopt a new standard and switch to THAT, but you're talking about another decade at this point, minimum.

      Developing new standards takes awhile, and having people actually implement them in a non-buggy fashion takes even longer. Develop IPv10 right now (yes, v7, v8, and v9 are already in development) and you're probably talking about implementation in 20 years. By which time we'll know enough about what's broken with it to make the same argument about implementation.

    3. Re:IPv6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has come to my attention that on May 12, 2003, Slashdot ran a story in which it solicited questions for one Fyodor, (in)famous author of Open Source hacker tool nmap. I am rarely roused to action anymore, but I could not let what I saw pass. Millions of innocent security hobbyists and computer enthusiasts are being duped by Slashdot into using tools and websites created by Fyodor, without knowing all of the facts:

      Fyodor is not a heroic "white hat" security expert, but a depraved, insidious hacker hell-bent on criminal intrusions into systems owned by minors!

      Please read on and review some of the facts so that you may come to your own conclusions about Fyodor and nmap.

      Beginning innocuously enough with this post by one electricmonk, supposedly a "Linux booth babe," several loney Slashdot geeks were trolled into replying, both on Slashdot itself and privately by email. One of the individuals who replied privately by email was none other than the subject of this expos, Fyodor, cruising for some hot geek-loving ass. Little did Fyodor know that electricmonk was none other than SumDeusExMachina, AKA SDEM, long-time trolling stalwart. Fyodor had let his hormones get the better of his common sense as he began an attempt to seduce electricmonk.

      Not wanting to carry his charade on any further (and understandably so, with an over-excited Fyodor on his tail), SDEM explained politely and truthfully to Fyodor about the non-existant Linux both babe who was really just a bored young man enrolled in college for the Summer. Fyodor's latest hantise femelle destroyed, he vowed revenge on SDEM no matter the cost. The word wanker echoed in his head as he decided not even the law would stop him in his unholy vengeance. In just over a week, Fyodor had owned SDEM's box and began posting about it in trolltalk.

      Luckily, on one unbelievably hot, humid Kansas City day back in August of 2002, Dame Fortune guided my hand to save a copy of trolltalk complete with Fyodor gloating at his criminal victory over SDEM. Scroll down a bit and look for posts by fv and decide for yourself. We even have a statement from one of the two parties involved and a nice summary of events by a very dependable third party who witnessed the entire fiasco. And back in the present, we have several individuals raising questions about Fyodor's morality and legal status.

      I now ask you, gentle sirs and madams, would you use a tool written by a known criminal, especially a known criminal who specifically attacks underage boys? Fyodor's endorsement by Slashdot is obviously a betrayal of simple journalistic integrity and ethics, with both the Slashdot staff and Fyodor standing to experience a significant financial windfall from their collaboration. I urge you to reconsider not only your patronage of Slashdot, but also any viewing or use of tools

    4. Re:IPv6 by miu · · Score: 1
      Develop IPv10 right now (yes, v7, v8, and v9 are already in development)

      These are all trolls from the infamous Jim Fleming (resident of killfiles round the world).

      --

      [Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
  22. will exotic OS's help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've heard that using "exotic" OSs for network security like OpenBSD on SPARC, NetBSD on SuperH, and Windows NT on Alpha will help increasing my security. Could you verify this?

    Thanks?

    1. Re:will exotic OS's help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm ... I'm not sure I call these 'exotic' OSs since anyone can download them =) I run OpenBSD on Sparc64 on my day to day desktop (unusual I'm sure, since it isn't Intel, but hardly 'exotic'; You could get one if you wanted -- they can be pretty cheap when bought used!). While it is true that the MMU implementations allow some neat buffer-overflow protection tricks, I think the biggest security gain for your 'average' person is that that Microsoft hasn't ported IE/Outlook to OpenBSD yet, and isn't expected to any time soon =)

    2. Re:will exotic OS's help? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft hasn't ported IE/Outlook to OpenBSD yet, and isn't expected to any time soon

      Those bastards!

    3. Re:will exotic OS's help? by olderchurch · · Score: 1

      Did you have a look at the insecure.org site? OpenBSD is in the Top 75 Security Tools list

      --
      Disclaimer: This opinion was created without the use of any facts
  23. what should I do? by adamnap · · Score: 0

    If I am just an academic user running my computer on a fixed IP? should I get rid of my Linux/windows/OSX boxen and run BE?

    what is the everyday user's best defense?

  24. You'll have seen a lot of breakins. by Hulver · · Score: 5, Interesting

    During your time running Honeypots, you'll have seen a lot of compromised systems. Is there any incident that's really stuck in your mind because of the audacity of the attempt, or the stupidity of the person attempting the breakin.

    1. Re:You'll have seen a lot of breakins. by gazbo · · Score: 1
      It's OK. The other site's back up now, let me just put this blanket over...Easy! Easy. There we go. We'll get you away from these nasty people and back to your friends.

      Theeeere we go.

    2. Re:You'll have seen a lot of breakins. by pacman+on+prozac · · Score: 1

      Also have you seen any really interesting/unusual/highly skilled break-ins that are worth talking about, or is it just all ./<iddies.

  25. When you are.. by ChrisNowinski · · Score: 0, Troll

    When you are hacking into a juvinille troll's computers and savagely rooting their boxes because they called you a wanker, are you thinking you would prefer to be put in federal or state prison?

    Also, do you trust yourself after you have shown a willingness to take personal disagreements and break federal laws to persue vengance? Thanks.

    1. Re:When you are.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to hear more about this please. I am unfamiliar with the incident you describe.

  26. Weakest link: Between systems and people by Simon · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "Given the choice between dancing pigs and security, users will pick dancing pigs every time." -- Ed Felten

    examples:

    * "SSH shows a warning that the host key has changed. The user ignores it and continues on."

    * "The browser warns the a SSL certificate doesn't match the host IP. The user ignores it and continues on."

    * "The browser asks if you trust the signer before running some piece of ActiveX. The user ignores it and continues on."

    * "The sysadmin warns not to share passwords. The users ignore that too."

    Now the question. It seems to me that despite all the work being done in the security field, back in reality things have gone from bad to worse. People constantly sidestep the very systems that are put in place to protect them. Is anything being done in the computer security field to address this important "Human Factors" aspect?

    --
    Simon

    1. Re:Weakest link: Between systems and people by stratjakt · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yes, you just made the argument for the TCPA, and probably understand why it will quickly become ubiquitous in the workplace.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Weakest link: Between systems and people by Simon · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Don't confuse the issue of computer security and usability with the issue of TCPA and 'securing' digital content from customers. By doing so you are being fooled by Microsoft and the media companies.

      It ain't the same thing...

      --
      Simon

    3. Re:Weakest link: Between systems and people by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Funny

      TCPA has nothing to do with Microsoft or digital content. It's a hardware spec. How it's used is up to the user.

      You're being fooled by slashbot FUD.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:Weakest link: Between systems and people by JoeBuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Users tend to ignore such warnings because similar warnings appear far too often for invalid reasons. This is not a new problem; Aesop wrote about the boy who cried wolf.

    5. Re:Weakest link: Between systems and people by CodeBuster · · Score: 2, Informative

      In response to your question Simon I would recommend the new book, "The Art of Deception", by Kevin D. Mitnick, which addresses various security scenarios and events, both real and fictional, which include the human element of security. In addition to the scenarios presented, which include transcripts of phone conversations and descriptions of actual attacks, Kevin presents several chapters on good user policies for personnel ranging from the system administrator to the secretary working at the front desk for minimizing the potential of a social engineering attack. These are not highly technical security policies, but rather simple suggestions and procedures that reinforce good security habits and make a successful social engineering attack much harder to accomplish. In fact, a main point of the book is that high tech security measures are rarely the problem when a security breach occurs...it is far easier to attack the weakest part of the system (the people using it) than to try and break in through the network via a terminal session. I was shocked especially by the phone conversations between the social engineers and the unsuspecting employees, even a person with little technical knowledge could potentially be a serious threat to your network. I had never considered that possibility before. In conclusion I found, "The Art of Deception", to be a rare and refreshing look at one of the most overlooked elements of security.

    6. Re:Weakest link: Between systems and people by Simon · · Score: 1
      Thanks for the tip, but I'm not really asking a question about Social Engineering, although it is an important aspect of security. My point is really that most security software has such bad usability that people can't even use it and hence ignore it or try to work around it. You can have the strongest encryption in the world, but it doesn't matter if it can't be used correctly... Some thing for most security software.

      --
      Simon

  27. For The Lazy by JWhitlock · · Score: 1, Informative
    I saw the Top 75 Security Tools survey you did...

    Here is the list.

  28. Stepping into a network security carerer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'll be graduating this month with a shiny new BS in Computer Science. I've done plenty of Unix sysadmin work througout college and even deployed some high-interaction honeynets. I'm very interested in network security and systems programming. Do you have any advice for people in my situation who want to head into a career in network security?

    1. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >I'll be graduating this month with a shiny new BS in Computer
      >Science. I've done plenty of Unix sysadmin work througout college and
      >even deployed some high-interaction honeynets. I'm very interested in
      >network security and systems programming. Do you have any advice for
      >people in my situation who want to head into a career in network
      >security?
      >

      I've recently landed my first job as a pen-tester. To get here I spent the last eight years reading everything I could get my hands on regarding information security: books, white papers, man pages etc. More importantly it's important to get direct experience of as much of the theory as possible. Run up a few machines as a local network. Sniff the wire. See how a Windows box looks from Linux, and vice versa. Use and understand the differences between OpenBSD and Linux. Try to download, compile and test new tools whenever you see them mentioned. Break into your own machines. Ask yourself how you would prevent that attack working. Fix it, start again. Put up an undefended default install on a cable modem with a stealth IDS / tcpdump running; watch the kiddies come running. Watch them at play (important: do NOT let them jump out of your box and attack others!) repeat with other OSes. read bugtraq, full disclosure, nanog, incidents. Read as many O'Reillys as possible. Learn Perl. Learn C. Learn Visual Basic. (no, really,.. you'd be surprised how useful that can be when it comes to ASP apps :) Always remember you have more to learn. Try to get a broad AND deep knowledge - you want to avoid the trap of becoming a guru of a very narrow field; security people have to be generalists to some extent (you know what AppleTalk looks like on the wire? NetBIOS? ftp?) Read, read, read. If you're still doing it after five years (during which time you are working in IT, but unlikely to be in a security role: sadly very few companies, except the biggest, spare resources for dedicated info-sec people) *and still enjoying it* - that is, you would still be doing it even if you weren't trying to break into the field - then you'll be good when you finally get what you want.
      Stick at it: it's soooo worth it. I've had more fun in the last six months than in the previous 8 years combined. And, to my surprise, I've found myself feeling a strange... pride? no, 'responsibility' is closer I think - when I was told that a pentest I performed on a local utility, during which I got some sensitive personel data and some highly sensitive, uh, 'test results', was being conducted due to the generalised review of security post Sept. 91. And I realised that in a a very small way, I'm making the world a better place. I really hadn't expected that, hadn't really thought about it in the context of work (Free software, yes! :) and it really did make all the fucked relationships, tedious nights curled up with a boring mad page or another vacuous commercial whitepaper on "the hacker threat!" and abottle of wine for company, worthwhile.

      Best of luck!

    2. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I'll be graduating this month with a shiny new
      >BS in Computer Science.

      The abbreviation "BS" is familiar to me only meaning "bullshit". I assume you did not mean that. So what's the real meaning here?

    3. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a bachelor of science degree

    4. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by aridhol · · Score: 1
      Reminds me of what my wife's boss said about degrees:
      • BS = Bullshit
      • MS = More shit
      • PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper
      --
      I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
    5. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so what does

      MBA mean?

      More Busy than Anyone :)

      hahaha

    6. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      me thinks

      M.B.A. = More Bullshit than Anyone

      would be better

    7. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by essdodson · · Score: 1

      So which pen is your favorite? The classic Bic throw-away, a slightly nicer Schaefer, or your generic pentel? I'm a big fan of the Pilot p-500 "extra-fine", black, never blue.

      --
      scott
    8. Re:Stepping into a network security carerer. by kinzillah · · Score: 1

      I really like the nice medium point ones, I think its like a g500 or something. The bigger point makes it really glide across the paper, it makes taking notes so much easier than dragging a pencil or fine point pen across the paper.

      --
      Douglas P. Price
  29. Re:My security question - not a troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's a reference to the story of people doing a survey going around saying "tell me you password for a free pen", and 75% did. I can't be bothered to find it, but it was front page /. a few weeks back

  30. The Relevance of Low-Level Tools by Jouster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As more and more applications are written from a standard base (servlets on a J2EE server, PHP under Apache interfaced via HTTP instead of a proprietary protocol, etc.), how relevant are low-level tools? The proliferation of high-level applications means that that OS becomes almost irrelevant--the firewall only allows HTTP through, and a load balancer tosses requests to different servers that might very well be hetrogenous insofar as operating systems and other low-level implementation details are concerned.

    Given all of this, what motivation is there for a modern CS student to learn things like the 3-way TCP handshake, or the differences in implementations in various TCP/IP stacks, when the base level of the equation is irrelevant from a security standpoint? How can I convince our network administrators that it's worthwhile to learn something other than JNDI when it comes to network protocols; that for security and network troubleshooting, nothing will ever top a simple Ethereal packet trace?

    Jouster

  31. Perception of Access by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What would you say is the line where someone's activity could be considered "unauthorized access"?

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  32. How do we preferentially improve white-hat work? by swordgeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Given that effectively ANY tool can be used for good or evil, and also given that we can't completely eliminate risk...

    How can we develop and promote the state-of-the-art in security (tools, understanding, knowledge) while giving as few gems as possible to the criminal wannabes of the world? In other words, how can we bias the work and research towards the defensive, rather than progress that's either neutral or preferentially offensive?

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  33. Assurance, not blocking attacks by Frater+219 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It seems to me that security efforts have focused too strongly on detecting and blocking known categories of attacks, rather than on creating systems which are secure against innovative future attacks. There are projects for which this isn't the case, such as OpenSSH (and OpenBSD in general), but the preponderance of security work seems to be profoundly backward-looking.

    Naturally, fighting in the dirt with the black hats is a lot "sexier" and more entertaining than building highly robust and reliable systems which will guarantee future security. The popularity of honeypots with security hobbyists (as opposed to researchers) seems to be a result of this: people enjoy seeing the attacker flummoxed, feeling superior to him, defeating him. Yet this doesn't really result in the improvement of security against new attacks, and it arguably distracts from that purpose.

    I'm interested to know where you see progress in security assurance, as opposed to scanning or blocking of old, known attacks. Who else, besides OpenBSD, is in the camp of improving the guarantees that systems provide their users: guarantees such as W^X, packet normalization, and so forth?

    1. Re:Assurance, not blocking attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elegy For *BSD


      I am a *BSD user
      and I try hard to be brave
      That is a tall order
      *BSD's foot is in the grave.

      I tap at my toy keyboard
      and whistle a happy tune
      but keeping happy's so hard,
      *BSD died so soon.

      Each day I wake and softly sob
      Nightfall finds me crying
      Not only am I a zit faced slob
      but *BSD is dying.

    2. Re:Assurance, not blocking attacks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PaX, 2.5 years before OpenBSD.

  34. Legal implications by paranode · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A recent SecurityFocus article talks about possible legal implications for people who administer honeypots (here). Do you feel that this is a legitimate concern, and have you or your colleagues run into any legal issues with honeypots or the use of Nmap and similar tools? Thank you.

  35. Interesting stories involving nmap? by Neologic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    nmap has obviously become a huge success in the *nix world. I would wager that practically all sysadmins and security folk use nmap. With this sort of use by such creative and lazy people, there must have been some interesting stories involving nmap, perhaps unusual uses of it, or funny anecdotes. Are there any you would like to share?

    --

    "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

    1. Re:Interesting stories involving nmap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

  36. What could best be done to create secure networks? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Currently attempts to secure networks depend on "band-aids" over inherent problems in the design of protocols and protocol implementations (software.) Relatively little effort has gone into solving security problems before they are created. I know IPv6 has taken some steps in the right direction - where would you start?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  37. Re:CNN: . N. Korea claims new drink for techies/ne by stratjakt · · Score: 1

    We already have that in the states. It's called Mountain Dew Code Red.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  38. Open port... what now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why do you think system administrators (more so NT) do not have the ability to figure out what program/daemon is keeping the port open on their systems?

    After a user uses nmap to enumerate open ports on their systems, what tools should they use to determine what prgram is keeping that port open?

    1. Re:Open port... what now? by caluml · · Score: 2, Informative

      netstat -planet as root for TCP connections. Change the t to a u for UDP.

    2. Re:Open port... what now? by caluml · · Score: 1

      Aaaah. It said Windows. Well, that is a good question in that case. Maybe SysInternals can help. After you've got those tools install, and the Resource Kit, you have an OS that is almost usable.

    3. Re:Open port... what now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lsof|grep TCP|grep $THEPORTNUMBER

      that is if youre on *nix and indeed have lsof ;)

    4. Re:Open port... what now? by dodobh · · Score: 1

      lsof and netstat/portstat will tell you what you need.
      lsof -i is your friend

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    5. Re:Open port... what now? by Lennie · · Score: 2, Informative

      For windows 'netstat -nap', there is 'fport'
      see: http://www.insecure.org/tools.html

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  39. Have you ever been tempted to use your gifts by Tim_F · · Score: 5, Interesting

    in a negative manner?

    Have you ever hacked into someone else's computer? Have you ever considered it? What would cause you to think of doing this? Would your tools (nmap, etc.) be enough to allow you to do this?

    And if you haven't, why is that the case?

    1. Re:Have you ever been tempted to use your gifts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can answer this -

      He hacked into SumDeusExMachina's computer, took screenshots of personal information, posted them to the world wide web. He used many of his tools in the breakin.

      The cause was the word "wanker," which can send Fyodor into fits of rage.

    2. Re:Have you ever been tempted to use your gifts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, what do you expect? Fyodor is a wanker.

    3. Re:Have you ever been tempted to use your gifts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is a moot question. In 2002, Fyodor was the victim of an impersonation attack by a Slashdot user who was posing as a woman. Fyodor sent an email to the fake "woman" in an attempt to solicit further conversation and a possible meeting. When the hoax was revealed, the hoaxer insulted fyodor (I believe the word was "wanker").

      Fyodor responded by using information disclosure vulnerabilities in yahoo email to find the originating IP address of the Slashdot prankster (SumDeusExMachine) who was at the time a college student based on the Pacific coast. SDEM was using an open X server for windows, MI/X, with no security enabled. Fyodor quickly scanned SDEM's box, found the open X server, and attached to it, monitoring SDEM's life for nine hours. He took many screen shots of SDEM's machine and posted them to his web site, insecure.org.

      A lot of personal information was revealed in these screenshots, including the existence and ip address of a "secret troll irc server", which was running an irc bot capable of tracking and posting new stories. Jamie McCarthy used the information disclosed by Fyodor's attack to log onto this server, discover the new-story-bot, and modify Slashdot to break the troll's new-story-robot.

      So in short, Fyodor has an open record of malicious entry, and Slashdot's admins have used the information he has gleaned to combat Slashdot trolling.

      What you have to understand is that illegal and malicious hacking won't land you in jail. The FBI won't prosecute interstate computer hacking unless there are $5000 or more in damages. In this case, there were no damages, rending the "crime" unprosecuteable. Whether this makes the perpetrator a whitehat, greyhat, or blackhat is an exercise for the reader.

    4. Re:Have you ever been tempted to use your gifts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  40. Kitchen-Sink-over-HTTP by Jouster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A modern firewall administrator has a very easy job, it seems--all her users care about is their DNS service and their Web access (and, with a good Web proxy, you don't even really need to have an inward-facing Internet-recursive DNS). Indeed, most users blithely assume that "The Internet" and "The Web" are the same entity.

    A modern protocol designer has to choose between efficient data representation and firewall penetration. She will almost always choose the latter. Thus we have a thousand X-over-HTTP protocols, most of which are replicating services (like RPC) that are exactly what the firewall administrator was trying to block.

    As everything becomes X-over-HTTP, how long will it be before we see stateful HTTP firewalls to block malicious kinds of data flowing over HTTP? And when firewall administrators again take the easy way out, blocking everything but "plain" HTTP, how do vendors send their data? Are we, in fact, turning the Internet into the Web? Eventually, it seems that application communication will just be a special case of a Web browser fetching a URL. By tunneling everything over HTTP, and eventually dropping even the tunneling, is the Internet in danger of becoming nothing but the Web--sure, there are other services running, but nobody but the occasional network admin on an un-firewalled network can reach them?

    Jouster

    1. Re:Kitchen-Sink-over-HTTP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "all her users care about"

      Why did you use "her"? Some people would be offended if you wrote "his", because that would be assuming all admins are men. Why is assuming that they are all women any better?

      Use the singular they.

      "all their users care about".

      Not the grammar Nazi, the common-sense Nazi.

    2. Re:Kitchen-Sink-over-HTTP by Jouster · · Score: 1

      It's not any better, but it makes my point a little more arresting; the more people that read my post, the better off I end up.

      Or, if you don't like that explanation, how about the one wherein I point out that I default to masculine pronouns, and that by switching to feminine whenever I'm thinking about it, it sort of balances out?

      Or the final option, which is that I want to use singular verb forms, and it's a pain in the ass to retrofit my entire sentence to fit in with plurality, rather than a simple 's/his/her/g', 's/he/she', and so on.

      Furthermore, don't worry, I didn't confuse you for the Grammar Nazi. I got dibs on that title the day it came out.

      Jouster

  41. Ho w low can I go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My sister (a mac user) wants to set up a wireless node in her apartment. This worried me bwecause the building is fairly large and she lives right next to a fairgrounds which, as a singnificant collection point for both those-without-links and those-with-nothing-better-to-do, may significantly increase the incidenence of war driving. I told her that if she really wanted to keep people from messing with her link and computer she would need to set up a wireless *nix server with a firewall. This has proved somewhat problematic because of the limited help i am able to give her and I am wondering if there is something simpler we might be able to get away with. The kind of intrusion she is likely to deal with is probably going to be infrequent and casual.

    1. Re:Ho w low can I go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The kind of intrusion she is likely to deal with is probably going to be infrequent and casual.

      While I would call it "casual," I don't know if 4 times a week could be considered "infrequent."

      PS she gives mad good head.

    2. Re:Ho w low can I go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Four times a week? You pansy, stop drinking Mountain Dew and you'll be up to 10 in no time.

  42. Feature for nmap by CausticWindow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been using nmap for quite some time now, and it's an excellent tool by all accounts.

    My question is, do you plan to implement firewall discovery? Instead of just reporting what ports are open, you could report:

    - closed
    - opened
    - filtered (no reply)
    - firewalled (firewall reply)

    Like suggested in the latest phrack.

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    1. Re:Feature for nmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What version of Nmap are you running?


      From the Nmap man page (v 3.20 for me):


      The result of running nmap is usually a list of interesting ports on
      the machine(s) being scanned (if any). Nmap always gives the port's
      "well known" service name (if any), number, state, and protocol. The
      state is either open, filtered, or unfiltered. Open means that
      the target machine will accept() connections on that port. Filtered
      means that a firewall, filter, or other network obstacle is covering
      the port and preventing nmap from determining whether the port is open.
      Unfiltered means that the port is known by nmap to be closed and no
      firewall/filter seems to be interfering with nmap's attempts to deter-
      mine this. Unfiltered ports are the common case and are only shown
      when most of the scanned ports are in the filtered state.

    2. Re:Feature for nmap by CausticWindow · · Score: 1

      Yes, but "filtered" does not indicated wether the packets were just dropped by a tcp/ip stack, or if it was firewalled.

      --
      How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    3. Re:Feature for nmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats the diffrence?

      Does a firewall do this via some method OTHER than a tcp/ip stack? :P

    4. Re:Feature for nmap by paranode · · Score: 1

      If they are dropped by the TCP/IP stack they are indicated as "closed".

  43. Best Security Advice? by Krieger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been doing network security for a while now, but I still have yet to find a nice single sentence summary for why security is necessary, that is easily understood by everyone who hears it from the techie to the manager.

    Do you have any suggestions?

    1. Re:Best Security Advice? by calethix · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I still have yet to find a nice single sentence summary for why security is necessary"

      Have you tried this one:

      Please give me your name, SSN, address, mother's maiden name credit card numbers/expiration dates and the keys to your home.

      If that one doesn't work then try this: Please point a gun to your head and pull the trigger.

  44. What makes a honey net enticing? by cornice · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems that many of the honey nets that the average hobbyist would run are built to attract a lesser cracker. What I mean is that ports are left open that normally would not be left open. Services are running that normally should not, etc. I that that a really smart fish would see this as nothing but a cheap lure and refuse the bait. Do you think it's possible to fool the really smart fish? Is is possible to bait with something enticing enough without tipping off the big fish? Does publication of your work make this task more difficult?

  45. And: why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't it suck if he'd just responded: ettercap.

    1. Re:And: why? by garaged · · Score: 1

      I don't know him, but ettercap is my favorite

      --
      I'm positive, don't belive me look at my karma
  46. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use blank instead. Nobody ever thinks of that one. And I mean literally "blank" not an empty one.

  47. ipv6 support in nmap by nnet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At present, nmap has limited ipv6 capabilities, are you going to add more ipv6 functionality in the near future?

  48. Trusted Computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All security experts have opinions on Trusted Computing, which goes under various names such as TCPA, Palladium, NGSCB, TCG, DRM,... The Slashdot community tends to say that this is security at the cost of freedom, and disapproves it. But not all rolemodels in the world of computers seem to agree with this. Linus Torvalds, who gave Linux its name, for example, openly blesses DRM. What do you think about Trusted Computing? Do you see it as an additional value to computers, or more as an erosion of our freedom? And even more important, why do you think so?

    Background info: Linus Torvalds blesses DRM

    1. Re:Trusted Computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the article you're linking to. Linus is not suggesting that DRM should be added to Linux, only that it is not up to him to prevent it. He is trying to only provide the base, and whatever others do with it is their own concern, as long as they abide by the GPL.

    2. Re:Trusted Computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've read the article several times. In my post I have stated that Linus thinks DRM is OK, as you can read in the article too. Which means I don't harm the truth in my post in any way. I did not explain what his exact point of view is any further, as I just added Linus' to point out that my question is not rhetorical. Not everyone thinks the same about Trusted Computing, and even I am not completely sure on which side I should be, as I'm not competely sure what Trusted Computing would mean in practice. Some predict Doomsday scenarios, but those sound too extreme to become real. That's why I ask the question, I'm interested in knowing what security experts think of Trusted Computing. And I did not see Fyodor give any comments on it yet, please correct me if I'm wrong.

  49. Best ... question ... ever! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bravo!

  50. End User Training by truffle+pig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I spend a lot of time reading and training myself on how to prepare myself and the systems I manage against attacks and other hostile acts. I find much of this to be a fairly linear technical task.

    I often find myself at a loss as to how to help train the end users at my company on how they can help insure the security of their systems and help prevent things like social engineering attacks and what good password practices are.

    I usually run into problems of user apathy, training materials or discussions being too technical, or trying to apply to technical training techniques to sometimes non techncial problems such as the aforementioned social engineering attack.

    Have you found a good way to educate largely non technical end users on ways that they can help contribute to the overall security of the systems of the company they work for. What should be included in the training? What should be left out?

    Thanks

  51. OS fingerprinting by neoThoth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What are the latest advances in fingerprinting networked devices that seem most promising to you?
    I have started reading papers on HTTP fingerprinting and such and wonder how these will figure into the NMAP architecture.

    What are the most elusive OS's that aren't on the NMAP OS fingerprint database?

    1. Re:OS fingerprinting by cpthowdy · · Score: 1

      What are the most elusive OS's that aren't on the NMAP OS fingerprint database?

      Novell NetWare.

  52. sdem owned. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was it like to prove that sdem was a manporn loving closet faggot? Wasn't the fallout from that little incident hilarious? He was "on vacation" or "moving" or something like that for 6 months after you exposed him for the pillow-biter he is. Anyway, good job.

    A Troller

    1. Re:sdem owned. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sir, are a bed wetter.

    2. Re:sdem owned. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not urine, it's blood.

  53. NT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do I secure my NT network?

  54. Hats? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do I secure our network from black hats, white hats, fake hats, and ass hats?

    Wanna do some recon?, Maaann!

  55. LAN security in todays environment by Triode · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given the many ways in which I can make a machine
    a passive listening device on the LAN to gather information (even in a switched environment), do you
    see future security focusing on authentication mechanisims on the LAN, even for the simplest of things (e.g. to get connected to a switch, to allow a MAC address, etc)? Going to a larger scale, do you see something like this taking place on the WAN? Lets say (putting on my lets get nasty hat) Microsoft Palladium (.net, NM$FPSG, whatever they call it now) authentication + your MAC addres s just to get connected to the net?

  56. Wheee!!! by TyrranzzX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Obviously, as time goes on we'll be getting new technologies such as self-configuring networks and networks with some level of conscienceness capable of detecting and stopping break-ins as well as doing a number of mundain things such as patching automatically and updating software. The current nearly 20 year old approach to compromising these networks through software exploit or social engineering will be nearly impossible to do from right off of the bat as we've all seen them before; what kinds of attacks do you anticipate happening on these kinds of networks and what do you think the technician will be doing to stop them?

  57. The Furture (is bright, but orange!) by physman · · Score: 0

    As network and firewall systems become more and more sophisticated, do you think that the influx of hackers will fall or rise in repsonse to this new challenge?
    What about scanners such as NMAP, do you feel that tools such as this will be used increasingly more, as scanning for vunerabilities becomes more and more part of the hackers routine and sometimes the only way to tunnel an attack?

    --
    Murphy's Law of Research: Enough research will tend to support your theory.
  58. standalones and small home nets by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    --it seems like most of the emphasis is on enterprise networks, but that still leaves millions and millions of home machines and small home networks just stuck. What do you see as some of the trends and solutions for those people? Their data and system integrity is just as important to them as any corporations is, and usually not having the appropriate skill set, is even harder to implement.

  59. Illegal Activity by blaqsun · · Score: 1

    Did you really, as alleged, breach your way into a juvenile's network and alter the contents of his PC? And if so, was it really over his posing as a female wanting to meet you at a Linux convention? If these things are true, why did you not exercise restraint and turn the other cheek?

    1. Re:Illegal Activity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just above this comment, it was mentioned


      not modified, just copied. To which some might comment (of the juvenile, not Fyodor) "dumbass".
    2. Re:Illegal Activity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or both.

  60. Anti-intrusion network software by pitr256 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We've made a lot of progress with open source intrusion detection devices (IDS) in the last few years, with SNORT many times beating out similar offerings from commercial companies.

    But so far, we have only been attempting to detect and report possible intrusions into private networks or studying attack vectors using Honeypots.

    There has been a lot of talk lately about the possibility of using independent worms that fix vulnerabilities in network hosts so that those hosts aren't used as an attack vectors to compromise/disable other hosts.

    Instead of just detecting and reporting intrusions or active worms fixing vulnerabilites, how do you feel about having IDS systems reporting to a host/daemon that would then launch protective countermeasures against the possible detected intrusion?

    Thanks. BTW, Nmap ROCKS!

    --
    Your mom always said, a PB&J is better than nothing, and God is nothing, is a PB&J better than God?
    1. Re:Anti-intrusion network software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am also interested in what he thinks of SIM / Intrusion Prevention products... previous post only got to +3

    2. Re:Anti-intrusion network software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has come to my attention that on May 12, 2003, Slashdot ran a story in which it solicited questions for one Fyodor, (in)famous author of Open Source hacker tool nmap. I am rarely roused to action anymore, but I could not let what I saw pass. Millions of innocent security hobbyists and computer enthusiasts are being duped by Slashdot into using tools and websites created by Fyodor, without knowing all of the facts:

      Fyodor is not a heroic "white hat" security expert, but a depraved, insidious hacker hell-bent on criminal intrusions into systems owned by minors!

      Please read on and review some of the facts so that you may come to your own conclusions about Fyodor and nmap.

      Beginning innocuously enough with this post by one electricmonk, supposedly a "Linux booth babe," several loney Slashdot geeks were trolled into replying, both on Slashdot itself and privately by email. One of the individuals who replied privately by email was none other than the subject of this expos, Fyodor, cruising for some hot geek-loving ass. Little did Fyodor know that electricmonk was none other than SumDeusExMachina, AKA SDEM, long-time trolling stalwart. Fyodor had let his hormones get the better of his common sense as he began an attempt to seduce electricmonk.

      Not wanting to carry his charade on any further (and understandably so, with an over-excited Fyodor on his tail), SDEM explained politely and truthfully to Fyodor about the non-existant Linux both babe who was really just a bored young man enrolled in college for the Summer. Fyodor's latest hantise femelle destroyed, he vowed revenge on SDEM no matter the cost. The word wanker echoed in his head as he decided not even the law would stop him in his unholy vengeance. In just over a week, Fyodor had owned SDEM's box and began posting about it in trolltalk.

      Luckily, on one unbelievably hot, humid Kansas City day back in August of 2002, Dame Fortune guided my hand to save a copy of trolltalk complete with Fyodor gloating at his criminal victory over SDEM. Scroll down a bit and look for posts by fv and decide for yourself. We even have a statement from one of the two parties involved and a nice summary of events by a very dependable third party who witnessed the entire fiasco. And back in the present, we have several individuals raising questions about Fyodor's morality and legal status.

      I now ask you, gentle sirs and madams, would you use a tool written by a known criminal, especially a known criminal who specifically attacks underage boys? Fyodor's endorsement by Slashdot is obviously a betrayal of simple journalistic integrity and ethics, with both the Slashdot staff and Fyodor standing to experience a significant financial windfall from their collaboration. I urge you to reconsider not only your patronage of Slashdot, but also any viewing or use of tools

  61. How can I Measure, Understand and Control? by HidingMyName · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Informed design decisions in classical engineering use estimates of cost, correctness and performance to pick the best solution. In security, much of the selection seems to be "a matter of taste", but perhaps it shouldn't be. Given two competing solutions to security problems, how do you propose that the user measure the solutions fitness to make an informed design decision?

    1. Re:How can I Measure, Understand and Control? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Bearing in mind that even before we factor security into the equation, it's already an overconstrained problem:


      Good, fast, cheap: pick any two.
  62. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > The password to the root account on my server is "password"

    Not anymore!

  63. Question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did you manage to make nmap so goddamn slow?

  64. Security through infection and innoculation? by weregruvin · · Score: 1

    Kinda new to this, so please bare with me if this has been done/dismissed/outlawed:

    I'm the admin of a small (50+) network in a graphic design house. We've got our firewall, we use snort for NIDS, but I want to take things to the next step...a proactive defense, if you will.

    I'm interested in writing, or aquiring, a nasty little virus to live contently in all of our workstations and servers. All of our hardware would be "innoculated" to prevent the little beastie from bothering us, but once an "outsider" has compromised our attempts to keep our LAN secure, that little bugger will go to work.

    I'm not proposing anything malicious here, just a buggy (but polite) message that says "If you want this message to go away, please contact xxxxxx at yyy-yyy-yyyy. Your computer will now shut down."

    I'm already advertising that this system is in place...our clients, and vendors are aware that if they were to come across such a message, they should pop in the provided "Innoculation CD" (filled with pure gibberish). I suppose that if this were ever put in place, I would have to distribute "updates". I figured this would also buy me some time if the (insert your favorite acronym here) came knocking at our door with a search warrant.

    Been-there-done-that, or am I on to something?

    1. Re:Security through infection and innoculation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to dosmiss it right now for the hacking sector:

      What hacker would download a binary from a hacked machine and run it as their user (or run it period)?

      What this setup WOULD work in is anti-warez Kazaa "distribution". Go on ahead, download AdobeShit.exe . Look, something's being installed and put in the startup folder and auto-ran. "Insert CD or Shutdown".

      Ouch.

  65. Linux Booth Babe and Sdem by egg+troll · · Score: 5, Troll
    Fyodor,

    Thank you for taking the time to answer questions from the Slashdot community. A while back a Slashbot named Sub Duex Ex Machina (aka Sdem) created an account in the persona of a very attractive Linux booth babe. Apparently at some point there was some serious flirtation between you and this booth babe.

    Once the truth was revealed, you were understandably angry at Sdem, and you proceeded to hack into his poorly secured W2K box. Although you did nothing malicious to it, you did post screenshots of his various goings-on to your website.

    My question for you is this: Although Sdem's actions were rather sleazy, I'm wondering how far you can go to retaliate. Do you have a moral and ethical priviledge to access another persons computer? If so, how far can you go in your actions once you've accessed it? While meer screenshots are fairly harmless, would you have been justified in deleting his hard drive?

    Thanks!

    --

    C - A language that combines the speed of assembly with the ease of use of assembly.
    1. Re:Linux Booth Babe and Sdem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, no, no. Your non-existent self-proclaimed Troll High Council is just a pale wannabe imitation of the real non-existent Troll High Council, which, of course, doesn't exist either, but if it did, would have had MUCH better things to worry about that the silly little SDEM incident.

    2. Re:Linux Booth Babe and Sdem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now if you want to send the Mafia after someone, that's still cool, right?

    3. Re:Linux Booth Babe and Sdem by Davak · · Score: 1
      Holy crap. I wish somebody would address this just so the trolls would quit harping on it.

      I liked it better when the trolls didn't have actual good points.

      Davak

  66. The last chapter by CracktownHts · · Score: 1
    Why did you have to name the last chapter "Siberia"? I accidentally glanced at one of the pages towards the end and it ruined the whole book for me!

    Oh wait, what was your last name again?

  67. Netcat beats nmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry Fyodor, but I have to say that netcat beats nmap as a port scanner.
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 21
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 22
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 23
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 25
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 79
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 80
    nc -vv 10.0.0.17 110 :)

    1. Re:Netcat beats nmap by 0x12d3 · · Score: 1

      nmap -sT -P0 -p21,22,23,25,79,80,110 10.0.0.17

      hmm, I think I'll have you're whole network scanned before you finished 1 box.

  68. Secure Software Writing Guide by dominick · · Score: 0

    What would be good reference material to use as a guide to develop secure applications?

  69. How do you happen into the field? by dominick · · Score: 0

    How did you choose computer security as your main field? Many people have interesting stories or anecdotes. All for that matter, how did you happen to devle into the computer world? I find history for amusing and entertaining!

  70. IPv6 by caluml · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Do you think that with the very large address space of IPv6 that random scanning for a certain port will die off? (I notice nmap doesn't support random IPv6 address scanning - maybe you've already come to the same conclusion?) Simply put, the chances of finding a machine if it's not advertised anywhere will be very much reduced. Will this make people lazy and complacent, trusting on the large numbers involved to protect them?

  71. What should a hacker be? by djeaux · · Score: 2, Interesting
    On your 'myworld' page, you have a couple of paragraphs about "some aspects of the hacker community that disgust me", things like arrogance, information leeching & crime. Since Slashdot may have a slightly larger reader base than insecure.org, this could be your bully pulpit to expound a little more on that theme. Care to take a moment & tell us all how to "shape up or ship out?" :-)

    P.S. For everyone else, I've had the privilege to work in a small way on an information sharing project to build on Fyodor's mailing list archives & I'm here to testify that he lives up to the standards he sets.

    --
    "Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
  72. A question of trust by RLiegh · · Score: 1, Troll

    After the whole sdem incident, I have a question.

    After someone has proven that they are willing to abuse their 'skills' to settle a personal vendetta, why should anyone in their right mind trust them? To put it more generically, after some one in the 'security community' crosses over the line, how do they come back from that. Or do they?

    I lurked in trolltalk at the time, and I remember the whole thing clearly. Speaking just for myself, if I were to make the decisions about which tools were to be used in my company, nmap would be on my blacklist.

    1. Re:A question of trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not familiar with the incident you describe. Could you please give us some more details? I am curious.

    2. Re:A question of trust by CurbyKirby · · Score: 1
      After someone has proven that they are willing to abuse their 'skills' to settle a personal vendetta, why should anyone in their right mind trust them? To put it more generically, after some one in the 'security community' crosses over the line, how do they come back from that. Or do they?
      Are you sure it's trust you're thinking of?

      Trust the software?
      You can download nmap source and check for any back doors or other tricks. One person might miss something, but I'm sure many people examined the source, and someone along the lines would have said something.

      Trust the developer?
      If just downloading and using nmap makes him mad enough at you to attack you, he must not get much work done... many people use nmap. You aren't asking him to evaluate your network. You're just using his software.

      Or are you thinking about ethics?
      Maybe you don't want to use tools created by those whose worldview you don't agree with. I can understand that, but I would disagree with it. Tools made by those you consider unethical or immoral can still be useful tools.

      --

      --
      "Extra Anus Kills Four-Legged Chick" -- Headline
  73. What firewall software do you run (or prefer) by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    IpChains? Netfilter/IpTables ? Pair of wirecutters? Pair of dykes with shotguns and bad attitudes?

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  74. Re:Security Updates How how how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do I become a Karma whore?

  75. fingerprinting by strombrg · · Score: 1

    Are there any efforts afoot to combine the ip stack fingerprinting techniques of nmap -O and xprobe2? The combination would about have to be better than the sum of the parts.

  76. Moderate this up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this is true, and there's some strong evidence that it is, Fyodor needs to address it. If Slashdot is really doing interviews with criminals and blackhats-disguised-as-whitehats, that also needs to be addressed. I'd rather see this go into the interview than all the warm-fuzzy "what's your favorite color" questions that are currently sitting at +5.

  77. Evil Bit a Bit Evil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fyodor, how long did it take you to enhance nmap to support the new IPv4 security bit (RFC) introduced just over a month ago? Or will security tools such as nmap become unnecessary once this new bit has been universally adopted?

  78. Nmap delays by Old+Wolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think I speak for many people here: why is Nmap 3.0 so much slower than 2.53 ?
    For example, I use it to ping-sweep my local /24 network. 2.53 would take about 1.5 seconds, but 3.0 takes up to 3 minutes to complete. Even using the -T switch it's still much slower.

  79. Secret Troll IRC Server? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The IRC server in question was none other than Slash.net!!

  80. Security / Cleanliness. by Nevyn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As an author of a security book and of a well known security application, how much do you feel code cleanliness/quality affects security of products? ... Or do you feel that only a very few products should worry about security?

    For instance from looking at nmap-3 it's, ignoring the style, littered with magic numbers _esp_ for things like size of an array of char (which is the only concept like a "string" that nmap has) and also more than a few obvious misuses of strncpy() etc. to go along with it.

    Contrast this with other security concious programs, like vsftpd and postfix, and it's like the difference between night and day.

    Obviously anyone putting nmap at the end of a CGI is just asking for pain, but one traditional view is that this isn't wouldn't be the problem of nmap ... but of whoever decided that it was security concious, not just a "security" application.

    --
    ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
  81. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    irc.trollaxor.com

  82. Palladium by generationxyu · · Score: 1

    Overall, how do you feel about Microsoft's Palladium, and efforts in general to only allow signed code to execute on processors in order to prevent buffer overflow and other attacks? Do you think it is necessary to keep security one step above the black hat community, or does it carry to many risks as far as open source is concerned?

    --
    I mod down pyramid schemes in sigs.
  83. Please Mod Up by Meat+Blaster · · Score: 1
    This was one of the more interesting comments I've read, but it isn't likely to make it into the official interview for obvious reasons. Despite this, I think there is some seriously thought-provoking content here.

    I've been a big fan of Fyodor's nmap from the moment I discovered it in Phrack -- thought the OS fingerprinting scheme was pretty damned novel for one thing -- and it's made it into my standard security kit. But this event, if true, is pretty disturbing (from both sides!) and deserves elaboration. No other field in the computer industry requires the level of trust placed in our security professionals, the best of which ironically honing their skills on blackhat activities, and this makes me reconsider the trust I've had in nmap.

    Did this really happen?

  84. Mod points in the wrong hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who would be such a doofus to mod this down as "Overrated"?

  85. wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    northvietnamesearmy.ftso.org

    #trolls

    1. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sounds more accurate, because ftso didn't obscure the address of clients but irc.trollaxor.com did.

  86. What is your favourite FOOD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought he asked "what is your favorite food".

    Well then, I began to wonder, hey what is Fyodor's favorite food?

    Is he a classic Coke and Pizza, or is he one of these new-age Red Bull and tofu eaters?

    What fuels your brain Mr Fyodor? I ask, cause I want to be as good when I grow up!

    1. Re:What is your favourite FOOD? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      What about Bawls? Bawls supposedly keeps you awake for a LOOOOONG time, and not make you jittery like regular caffeine. (I, myself, need to buy some to see if that's true)

  87. Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Since I was featured in the screenshot of said "secret" irc server, I know what server it was on. Trollaxor.com long ago ceased to be the meeting place of Slashtrolls. We decided it would be much more ironic if we hung out on Slash.net.


    Please get your facts straight before posting to Slashdot. We'd hate to have the quality of journalism lowered.

  88. Re:Moderate this up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  89. Fyodor, what do you think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or "World's biggest biter bites back."
    Some people would leave it at "YHBT" and walk away. This is S.O.P. on Slashdot. So when I posed as a hot LinuxWorld booth babe in a Slashdot poll [slashdot.org] (if you'll read that comment, you'll see that it wasn't even remotely credible-sounding) and left an email address, I got quite a few messages from lonely Lunix geeks hoping to hook up. Wanting pictures, naked pictures, etc., the kind of tactless crap you'd expect from someone who's still alone in their mid-30s.

    And so I recieve the email from Fyodor, out looking for love. I emailed him back, letting him know he'd been trolled. "Don't feel bad, it happens to the best of us." So he emails me back telling me, among other things, that he regularly trolls mailing lists for women and that chances are, sooner or later, he'll find a willing warm body. So, like, the odds are in his favor. So he tells me. Anyway, he sounded none too happy.

    So I mentioned him as one of the respondents on Trolltalk, with something like "look at the bunch of wankers I got who actually believed me enough to email me!". Apparently, this is enough to justify hacking my computer and invading my privacy for 9 hours, according to him. This happens a week or two down the road from the original posting in Trolltalk. So I load Trolltalk one day to find out he's made an entire webpage filled with screenshots from my computer and lots of personally identifying information (my full name, home address, everything) while telling me that I'd better change all my passwords quick, because he stole those too.

    All this for getting suckered in by an obvious troll and getting called a wanker as a result. Earth to Fyodor: grow the fuck up. Sheesh, what a sociopathic crybaby.

    For reference, you can see an archive of Trolltalk from the period here [trollaxor.com]. Scroll down a little to find Fyodor's posts and the subsequent responses.

  90. Constraints and tradeoffs by HidingMyName · · Score: 1

    Sure the users of a system can't have everything, but what the designers can do is provide an analysis of what the trade-offs are. A good designer reduces uncertainty and guides the user to alternatives that best meet (or come close to meeting) a user's needs prior to deploying the solution. Knowing is much better than guessing.

  91. Objective Quality Measurement by dh5fbr · · Score: 1

    Reading much about all the exploits and patches an administrator has to apply and being aware that management knows less about security than productivity. What would you suggest them how to rate the quality of their security administration ?

    That is would you, say, be hapier if nobody breaks in, even into the honeypots, as this yields secure setups. Or is someone able to deal with incidents the better administrator ? Or the guy writing his own defence mechanism ?

  92. +5 by Hulver · · Score: 1

    Where's my Rate all button gone?

  93. Wheel Turns back to proxies? by ZWithaPGGB · · Score: 1

    In the early days of Firewalls and other forms of Internet Security devices, the Proxy was the security mechanism of choice. Then along came "Stateful Inspection" which has won out because of performance. However, it has always been known that a proxy approach was, inherently, more secure (or at least could be made so). As hardware makes the performance advantage of Packet Filtering negligible, and more and more attacks become application-based, do you see the trend returning to proxies, or something else?

  94. Spoofed UDP P2P idea by caluml · · Score: 1
    Fyodor - do you have any thoughts about our truly anonymous UDPP2P project? We are using spoofed UDP packets in a broadcast type of mechanism as this is the only truely anonymous way of P2P that we can see.

    Apart from the obvious, such as ISPs filtering UDP packets that don't match their network ranges, and broadcast mechanisms having problems scaling, do you have any other insights to offer us?

  95. How about "The Matrix:Reloaded?" by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    (Note: For those of you that haven't seen the movie, do NOT mod this down. For those of you that have and were paying attention, you'll know what I'm talking about.)

    Did you at least get some free movie tickets? :)

  96. nmap by spoonist · · Score: 1

    THE MATRIX RELOADED SPOILER ALERT

    .

    .

    .

    .

    I saw The Matrix Reloaded yesterday and, at that pivitol moment, yelled "Holy SHIT! Trinity's using nmap!".

    Other's in the theater were less than pleased.

    In this message, you say you did the "r00t dance". Can you please demonstrate the r00t dance for the Slashdot audience?

  97. Re:nmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no spoonist.

  98. Windows by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

    While *nix-based OSes are forging their way towards the desktop, Windows is the most popular desktop OS. How secure do you think users make their Windows boxes? How secure are the firewalls that people put up (ZoneAlarm, BlackICE, etc.)? How many Windows users do you think get their machines broken into?

  99. Large-Primes Encryption: What Next? by Niet3sche · · Score: 1

    I'm curious: with advances all the time in Ergonomic Theory, and with the quantum computing on the horizon, it seems that trapdoor (one-way) functions as well as large-prime encryption (RSA) are on their way out.

    Do you have any idea what the next wave of crypto will look like? Also, what are your views on the advantages (if any) of analog computing for crypto, due to the continuous rather than discrete nature of the signaling (and, hence, introduced noise becomes MUCH more problematic to an attack)? I'm curious to see what you think, because in 2 years I may well be an architect in some of these things.

  100. What's in a name? by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    Your real name is not Fyodor.

    Why did you choose this particular pseudonym?

  101. Interesting question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to hear the answer to this, as well. Was Fyodor engaged in some vigilantism, or legitimate self-defense?

    1. Re:Interesting question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Self-defense? Against what? This is a rather clear-cut case of criminal activity.

  102. Why is insecure.org inaccessible? by cms108 · · Score: 1

    Have you been slashdotted? And if so, how does it feel?

    --
    cHris

  103. Honeypot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On certain days of the month my wife doesn't let me near her honeypot

  104. Never happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taco only wants to submit boring idol-worship to Fyodor. Anything that might put him in a somewhat negative light or actually bring up an interesting discussion, well, that can't be allowed to happen!

  105. Troll Override Engaged! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    (Score:4, Troll):
    Moderation +3
    30% Troll
    40% Interesting
    20% Underrated

    Wow, Slashdot Math really rocks.

    Attention moderators: parent post is not a troll. Fyodor hacked Sdem in August of 2002.

  106. Mod parent down by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

    All these claims are uncorroberated, and conflict with other accounts of the incident in subtle ways.

    For example: the method AC claims was used to get the "victim's" IP address is different from that claimed in a different post.

    I smell trolls.

    --
    Life is too short to proofread.
  107. ...duh by 0x12d3 · · Score: 1

    they should whip up a iptables rule-set...everybody knows that!!

  108. TROLL ALERT! by ph0t0n · · Score: 1

    This question is part of a troll slander campaign. They worked together to mod it up to 5, and then when users slapped it down, they launched a coordinated campaign to bring it back up. Trolls certainly are persistent.

    -ph0t0n

    1. Re:TROLL ALERT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for informing us that the post is a troll. I had not noticed that it was moderated "Troll", nor that it was posted by "egg troll" who has a long history of troll posts such as this one.

  109. YHBT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow! You made an account *just* to post that! Well done, dipshit, well done!