I'll make one point. Google 'oracle attack'. The only result that comes up related to your naming meaning is the one posted here. The rest are the obvious examples.
But whatever, you seem to be vulnerable to the one d eye oh 7 vulnerability. Sent from my iPhone On 15 Nov 2012, at 18:59, klondike <[email protected]> wrote: > El 15/11/12 09:47, Benji escribió: >> Sometimes when people argue over the definition of '0day', it is important >> to be clear. > I never called my attack a 0-day, did I? >> Although the bash script made it clear, I have never ever seen someone call >> 'user enumeration' an 'oracle attack'. > Turns out I have never seen anybody call an 'oracle attack' 'user > enumeration'. >> Probably because this is 2012 and the Matrix hasn't just come out. > Probably because the attack won't give you the whole list of usernames > but instead tell you which e-mails (not necessarily being an username) > on your list are on its list. Also turns out the concept of oracle has > been in use on the computation world way before you think and before the > OWASP guys arbitrarily decided such a name in, amongst others, the > complexity theorems that keep the cryptography used nowadays secure, so, > please, stop acting childishly over something as stupid as the name of > the attack and concentrate instead on the exposed issue. > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
