Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 08:08:47 -0600 (CST)
From: Tina Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IRC security (was Re: One size fits all (was Re: [LIB]

Dude, you should be teaching!

Of course, I don't run Outlook Express on my Librettos
either -- as Nimda proved, even turning off auto-download
on some Microsoft products won't protect if the worm/virus
writers do their job "right" -- and Raymond took the time to 
explain all the issues.

Thanks!

On Sat, 27 Oct 2001, Raymond wrote:

> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 18:34:08 -0700
> From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Libretto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Libretto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: IRC security (was Re: One size fits all (was Re: [LIB]
> 
> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 09:24:38 +0800
> From: Raymond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: IRC security (was Re: One size fits all (was Re: [LIB]
>   Libretto Beer Club, Middle East))
> 
> At 10:19 AM 27/10/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 09:59:54 -0500 (CDT)
> >From: Tina Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: One size fits all (was Re: [LIB] Libretto Beer Club, Middle East
> > chapter)
> 
> ...
> 
> >On a slightly more serious note -- not to drop a rain cloud
> >on the IRC initiative, but if you join the channel, you'll want
> >to be REALLY REALLY careful about how you install and use the
> >client on either Windows or Linux.  Both mIRC and BitchX have
> >horrible reputations in the security world for their tendency
> >to provide unintended access to random users on IRC. Security
> >geeks like myself avoid IRC altogether...but hey, they pay me
> >to be paranoid.  For more information, search on either
> >BitchX or mIRC at http://www.securityfocus.com
> 
> OK first things first, I'd like to point out that in my brief scan of the articles 
>that a search on mIRC returns at securityfocus, the ONLY problems that occur stem 
>from users doing dumb things. These include running scripts from unknown sources 
>(unfortunately many users don't realize that running a script has the same ability to 
>cause damage as running an unknown executable) or users autoaccepting files (or 
>manually accepting files) then running them without thinking twice. Both these can 
>happen equally through email or newsgroups through attachments (just look at the love 
>bug - does that mean we all shouldn't use email? ... and before someone points out, 
>the love bug is designed for OE but absent minded users can still have problems on 
>any Windows based email program if they run the attachment anyway). As one of the 
>users on SecurityFocus said, "Ultimately, you just can't trust scripts that other 
>people hand you without looking at the code yourself.. this is just common se!
nse.".
> 
> I dunno about BitchX as I haven't used it much (I just mentioned it for any Linux 
>devotees out there) but I do know that versions of mIRC newer than about a year or 2 
>at least are quite safe as long as you don't do dumb things like auto-accept 
>everything and you don't run scripts from unknown sources ("Polaris" is a classical 
>example of a script which many people use but not so many realize has a back door). 
>In fact, the golden rule should really be don't run scripts at all - if you need a 
>shortcut write it yourself. If you don't know enough about mIRC to do so and you use 
>it enough to need something like that then perhaps its time to learn - its very very 
>easy anyway.
> 
> A DEFAULT installation of mIRC (no scripts, no tweaking of settings except for 
>inputting details) is extremely safe, certainly more so than a default install of 
>Outlook Express, as it warns you about anything and everything anyway and won't do 
>things behind your back, the worst thing about it is that anyone on the same network 
>can find out your IP address so if you really annoy them (or if they're up to no 
>good) they can use that to mount an unrelated attack on your computer (but then that 
>comes down to what other software you have on your computer). Note that such an 
>attack can be mounted if they get your IP from a newsgroup post, an email or even a 
>web based newsgroup - its not a problem specific to IRC.
> 
> IMHO this is a small risk as NOT using IRC effectively becomes security by 
>obscurity, not something that lasts very long with the number of people (or 
>compromised machines) that just randomly scan for IPs to attack anyway and the number 
>of places that record your IP address for public viewing. Even if you don't use IRC 
>you should really take precautions like running an up-to-date virus scanner, don't 
>enable sharing on your external interface, keep your installation well patched, run a 
>personal firewall (www.zonelabs.com has a freeware one) and so on. These measures 
>will also counter anything a malicious IRC user could do to you as well short of a 
>flood attack (if you're on a dialup modem or if the adversary has an amplifying 
>network), but that could happen with any medium anyway (for instance many web based 
>newsgroups and newsgroups in general display your last known IP address as do some 
>email services as anyone who's recieved a direct email from me would know). 
> 
> So thats my 2 cents ... just like anything else on the Internet, as long as you 
>don't do dumb things, IRC is just as safe as any near-real-time communications 
>channel on the Internet, except its considerably more real time than others. Don't 
>let Tina frighten you from visiting #Libretto!
> 
> 
> - Raymond
> 
> 
> P.S. in case anyone is interested, in one of my many roles in life, I too am a 
>security geek ... locking down computers such that they can withstand attacks from 
>University level Computer Science students gets interesting ;-)
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\
> |                 | "Does fuzzy logic tickle?"                |
> |   ___           | "My HDD has no reverse. How do I backup?" | 
> |  /__/           +-------------------------------------------|
> | /  \ a y b o t  |          [EMAIL PROTECTED]             |
> |                 |          HTTP://www.raybot.net            |
> | ICQ: 31756092   |   Need help? Visit #Windows98 on DALNet!  |
> \~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **************************************************************
> http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list
> http://libretto.basiclink.com/archive - Archives
> http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/portable/faq.html - FAQ
>                  -------TO UNSUBSCRIBE-------
> Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be
> addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text
> on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe
>               --------TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST------
> Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest
> **************************************************************
> 

"I was being patient, but it took too long." - 
                                Anya, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer"

LogAnalysis: http://kubarb.phsx.ukans.edu/~tbird/log-analysis.html
VPN:  http://kubarb.phsx.ukans.edu/~tbird/vpn.html




**************************************************************
http://libretto.basiclink.com - Libretto mailing list
http://libretto.basiclink.com/archive - Archives
http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/portable/faq.html - FAQ
                 -------TO UNSUBSCRIBE-------
Reply to any of the list messages. The reply mail should be
addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Then replace any text
on the message's subject line: cmd:unsubscribe
              --------TO UNSUBSCRIBE DIGEST------
Do above but with this on subject line: cmd:unsubscribe digest
**************************************************************

Reply via email to