-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There is a security issue in the blue coat.
> The problem lies in the "Web Filter", which lets you execute an XSS.
> This only affects the Internet Explorer browser. "
>
> as a result, could jump the antivirus scan or make s
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Tony Reusser wrote:
Have you tested this against the more current release R-62?
More important. Against which exact version and build did you test this?
NGX R60 received 5 patches which might take care of some points.
I think however that Check Point consideres everyone
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007, Ken Kousky wrote:
Zero day is a serious misnomer from vendors that suggest that the counting
of time an exposure is known BY THE GOOD GUYS is some kind of trigger date
when in reality, many serious exploits are know BY THE BAD GUYS so the day
zero is really months or maybe y
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not about lost maintainers or non-existent patches, that's been
done to death. Reporting vulnerabilities to distributions can be so
depressing - and the replies you get (if any) are so annoying, that if
it was from Microsoft, they would have
Sure, they're a lot more expensive and a lot more "high-tech" but
unless they are doing end-to-end client and server authentication and
strong crypto _AND_ have their own input and output devices that cannot
be interfaced from the host OS _AND_ are required for verifying
(virtually) every step o
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, jf wrote:
There have also been too many times in the past when they have been proven
correct to ignore the possibility any longer.
Hi, in what instances has the conjecture that a bug was a deliberate
backdoor been proven correct?
If Peter is crying WOLF all the time. Th
On Mon, 24 Dec 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#phpcms <=- 1.1.7 Remote File Inclusion
Duh. This one was released in 2002. The latest version is 1.2.2 and was
published halfway this year (2006).
See also: http://www.phpcms.de/download/index.en.html
Hugo.
PS: Anyone did a bug report on dino
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have one checkpoint NG3 in my company and verifying in Tracking i have
tousands of events with ICMP type 8 and type 17.
The events has origin in my internal networks, with one problem .. the Source
IP is my PAT address for internal hosts to inte
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The initial reverse engineering of Vascos Digipass Go3 algorithm follows in
> C++.
> I think this implementation is a "rough" approximation, if we take some
> limitations about 2006 and the calculations made into account. Or I'm just
> joking
:)
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Sec-Tec Lists wrote:
> Check Point Firewall-1 R55W contains a hard coded web server, which runs on
> TCP port 18264. This server is there to deal with PKI requirements for Check
> Point's VPN functionality.
>
> During a routine penetration test of a client, Sec-Tec discovered
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Bob Beck wrote:
>
> > And I think vulnerabilities disclosed are a much better indicator
> > of the changes to QA/development of products than any hyperbole
> > from those responsible (be it management or developers.)
>
> No, I think vulnerabilities disclosed is simply a
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Caveo Internet BV - Security wrote:
> The most easy way to stop this vulnerability is this by sepcifying the core
> dump location
>
> echo /root/core > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern
>
> This specifies /root as core dump location which makes it unavailable for
> the local user.
On Tue, 9 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We know that tcp connection will close by sending RST flag.
> I try to connect to my openssh server on
> slackware 10 from my computer fedora core 4. Then using an
> openbsd 3.7, that had same network with slackware n fedora,
> try to overwrite ARP cac
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, [ISO-8859-9] Mert Sar?ca wrote:
> http://www.packetstormsecurity.org/filedesc/Bypass.pdf.html
>
> Some people say this method works also on Trend Micro InterScan
> Messaging Security Suite and InterScan Web Security Suite. I really
> appreciate if you use one of these and can a
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Brian Soby wrote:
> >However, after a user is authenticated, anyone else may also access the
> >protected services if they orginate from the same source IP address (NAT'd
> >network). The authentication mechanism is designed to authenticate based on
> >source-ip address onl
On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, MALIN, ALEX (PB) wrote:
> Why might anybody use FWZ (CheckPoint's propriatary encryption scheme),
> rather than IKE? It's inherently less secure, as it can't use IPSec tunnel
> mode. As I see it, there's a genaral problem with using firewalls for
> encryption gateways. You do
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Mike Lewinski wrote:
> > It looks like the "Code Red" worm has the added side effect of
> crashing
> > Cisco (675/678) DSL CPEs running any CBOS prior to 2.4.1. The GET it
> sends
> > looking for IIS servers hardlocks any modem with the web management
> > interface enabled.
>
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Johan Lindqvist wrote:
> The original advisory
> (http://www.inside-security.de/advisories/fw1_rdp.html) says that a
> workaround is to "Deactivate implied rules in the Check Point policy editor
> (and build your own rules for management connections).". I've not been able
> t
is about for some time now. Is it vunerable?
If you must mention the distributions then make sure you get them right.
Hugo.
--
Alle email aan mij verzonden is gebonden aan de regels beschreven op mijn homepage.
All email send to me is bound to the rules described on my homepage.
a
slight mistake. Files check out allright if you compare the MD5 sums and
GPG key.
Hugo.
--
Alle email aan mij verzonden is gebonden aan de regels beschreven op mijn homepage.
All email send to me is bound to the rules described on my homepage.
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16;
t can't be missed.
Hugo.
--
Alle email aan mij verzonden is gebonden aan de regels beschreven op
mijn homepage.
All email send to me is bound to the rules described on my homepage.
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://hvd
ven op
mijn homepage.
All email send to me is bound to the rules described on my homepage.
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://hvdkooij.xs4all.nl/
Don't meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,
for they are
sent in v3 of the MailSweeper for
SMTP product and can not be fixed in the configuration.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://hvdkooij.xs4all.nl/
Alle email is gebonden aan de regels beschreven op mijn homepage.
All email se
Hi,
The problem reported publicly on 2000-03-21 (March 21, 2000) regarding
Esafe Protect Gateway is still not resolved.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://home.kabelfoon.nl/~hvdkooij
rces on a FireWall-1 v4.0 SP4
installed on a Nokia IP-440 with IPSO v3.2.0 to duplicate the test before
claiming to be bugfree.
I also suggest you verify things with the Dutch office where I did report
the issue some time ago.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasla
ons in the rule base. The behavior of
> the inspect code can also be modified to make it as strict or open as
> desired.
The services list is actually the list of services defined in the
objects.C file. The services do NOT need to be defined in any rulebase.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oran
or at least of workarounds.
Unfortunatly there is no usable workaround.
My customers don't just expect that they will not be harmed by a virus but
that a maximum effort is done to prevent any harmfull activities. At
present ESP does not live up to that expectation because someo
he problem lies with Esafe and
not with Check Point by using Trend Micro's CVP server instead
which did not suffer from the same problem.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We
> where able to reproduce the problem on a Nokia IP440 and NT. I've seen
> this problem on Solaris 2.6 as well, but do not have the data to back up
> the statement.
Please provide exact patchlevels. I know the problem occurs in FireWall-1
v4.0 SP4 but should be fixed in SP5 tha
der wether this is a known issue that's solved as there are changes in
the networking code.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://home.kabelfoon.nl/~hvdkooij/
--
U
e same way as netscape and internet explorer do this.
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://home.kabelfoon.nl/~hvdkooij/
--
Use of any of my email addresses for unsollicited (
Comparing with HTTP (which is only defined as TCP port 80) is something
quite differently here. The winframe definition does a lot more but it
requires you to dig into a firewall setup.
Hugo
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://home.kabelfoon.
y may suffer the same lack of logging/alerting in case incorrect
sessions are blocked.
Regards,
Hugo.
--
Hugo van der Kooij; Oranje Nassaustraat 16; 3155 VJ Maasland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://home.kabelfoon.nl/~hvdkooij/
--
Use of any
33 matches
Mail list logo
