My issue with this is, if he didn't cause any damage, with your example of a
computer system as a door... Would ANYBODY get 60 years for walking up to a
house, testing the door handle, opening and closing the door, then walking
away?
Personally, I don't find it as criminal. I find it as human
I don't agree.
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 7:42 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nobody could be so stupid to leave their car door unlocked, ::blush::
Bullshit. Walk throughout a parking lot and try a couple door handles,
you'd most likely find more than you thought.
the u.s military did,
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:05 AM, Noel Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:42, n3td3v wrote:
nobody could be so stupid to leave their car door unlocked, ::blush::
the u.s military did, then gary mckinnon left a note on their wind
screen wiper to say, look guys, you left
I couldn't agree more. The man committed a crime, in either country. He
should be held accountable. I've also seen plenty of people claim the law
was changed to prosecute him, that's simply not true either.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/brits-us-passed.html
Enough with the 60
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:55 PM, nzerozero p [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't agree.
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 7:42 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nobody could be so stupid to leave their car door unlocked, ::blush::
Bullshit. Walk throughout a parking lot and try a couple door handles,
rPath Security Advisory: 2008-0286-1
Published: 2008-09-29
Products:
rPath Linux 2
Rating: Major
Exposure Level Classification:
Remote User Deterministic Vulnerability
Updated Versions:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:2/1.2.6-5-0.1
References:
White Wolf Labs #080922-1: Exploitation Through ActiveSync 4.x
Product: ActiveSync 4.x
Platform: NA
Requirements: NA
Credits:
Seth Fogie
White Wolf Security
http://www.whitewolfsecurity.com
August 21, 2008
Risk Level:
Medium - Full TCP/IP access via RNDIS protocol
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:44:22 BST, Kyrian said:
A message left by him on a system:
Changing the /etc/motd file or equivalent is hardly costly, and hardly
massive damage, no? Hypothetically speaking, if I wanted to do as little
damage as possible
The government has finally committed funding to a specialist national
e-crime unit, a year after a proposal was submitted by the
Metropolitan Police.
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/government-law/public-sector/news/index.cfm?newsid=11269
A new £7M police unit dedicated to tackling
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:44:22 BST, Kyrian said:
A message left by him on a system:
Changing the /etc/motd file or equivalent is hardly costly, and hardly
massive damage, no? Hypothetically speaking, if I wanted to do as little
damage as possible and make someone get the message I'd
Updates to the ageing Computer Misuse Act (CMA) finally come into
force in England and Wales on Wednesday (1 October).
Modifications to the CMA - which was enacted in 1990 before the advent
of the interweb - were included in the Police and Justice Act 2006.
These changes were then themselves
Gary Mckinnon is such an unlucky bastard, :(
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:14 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First up, the maximum penalty for unauthorised access to a computer
system (the least serious of three hacking offences covered in the
original act) has been raised from six months to
Look, Mckinnon broke into the computer systems. Under his own admission he
ran scripts to help him do this. Some of those scripts crashed systems. He
possibly deleted files and what-not in his travels, either willfully or not,
doesn't really matter. He loaded software on those systems so he
Maybe he works for the CIA/NSA/FBI or other Three Letter Agency... most
likely not, but that same tactic has been used under several
authoritarian regiemes of the past (like Soviet Russia, or the
Austria-Hungarian Empire). It's probabbly used now in China. If the
insert TLA could just demand a
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Exibar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Look, Mckinnon broke into the computer systems.
He never broke in, the door was open, he walked in.
Under his own admission he ran scripts to help him do this. Some of those
scripts crashed systems. He
possibly deleted
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:07 PM, offbitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:48 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
Proof or GTFO.
No passwords were set = public domain.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:48 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
Proof or GTFO.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:48:51 BST, n3td3v said:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
Does your house become 'public domain' because the door failed to properly
latch when you left, and a subsequent gust of wind blows it open? Under
those conditions, do you care if all and
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:48:51 BST, n3td3v said:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
Does your house become 'public domain' because the door failed to properly
latch when you left, and a subsequent gust of wind
Wow, this whole discussion with a troll has gone on far longer than it ever
should have.
Remind me next time you accidentally leave your car door or house door
unlocked that it is public domain. Even if I go in, accidentally knock over
a plant, use your loo, and have a cookie from your cookie
Here's a question, relating to the PUBLIC DOMAIN issue. I don't know
the answer, but it seems relevant.
When a http indexing bot (like those used by Google, for instance)
comes upon a hyperlink into a page that is http authenticated, does it
follow the link and try a blank password, or does it
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Michael Krymson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Remind me next time you accidentally leave your car door or house door
unlocked that it is public domain.
We're not talking about cars and houses, we're talking about the internet.
If you say something loud enough and long enough, that Does Not make it
true.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:39 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 19:48:51 BST, n3td3v said:
The systems were 'public domain' because
Michael Krymson wrote:
Wow, this whole discussion with a troll has gone on far longer than it ever
should have.
So basically what you're saying is that we should all shut up and not
talk about an actual issue, and that trolls should be trolls and stay
away from discussion of actual issues?
Oh,
===
Ubuntu Security Notice USN-648-1 September 30, 2008
nasm vulnerability
CVE-2008-2719
===
A security issue affects the following Ubuntu releases:
Ubuntu 8.04 LTS
This
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:30:09 EDT, Eliah Kagan said:
When a http indexing bot (like those used by Google, for instance)
comes upon a hyperlink into a page that is http authenticated, does it
follow the link and try a blank password, or does it not follow the
link? Is there some accepted
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:03:07 EDT, Eliah Kagan said:
Once the three-way handshake is complete, the client is in the
server's house, and may go into any room (this is application-layer
now) not forbidden by a security mechanism or law of the land. One
would be hard pressed to argue that an
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Eliah Kagan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a question, relating to the PUBLIC DOMAIN issue. I don't know
the answer, but it seems relevant.
When a http indexing bot (like those used by Google, for instance)
comes upon a hyperlink into a page that is http
I wrote:
When a http indexing bot (like those used by Google, for instance)
comes upon a hyperlink into a page that is http authenticated, does it
follow the link and try a blank password, or does it not follow the
link? Is there some accepted standard for that?
If it is considered
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:55 PM, Eliah Kagan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wrote:
When a http indexing bot (like those used by Google, for instance)
comes upon a hyperlink into a page that is http authenticated, does it
follow the link and try a blank password, or does it not follow the
link?
n3td3v wrote:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
So if I wait outside your door, when you open it, everything inside becomes
public domain
--
*
Brian L. Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 00:03, Exibar wrote:
Look, Mckinnon broke into the computer systems. Under his own admission he
ran scripts to help him do this. Some of those scripts crashed systems. He
possibly deleted files and what-not in his travels, either willfully or not,
doesn't really
excuse me? You're attempt at insults are pointed wrongly.
I've read the legal brief on his case, the UK documents on his case too,
he's ADMITTED guilt. In my book that's enough to call him a criminal, he
should be arrested and tried in a court of law to determine if that is a
fact or not.
And obvious (and interesting) use would be to generate an ePassport
that would flag the bearer as having diplomatic immunity.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Brian Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
n3td3v wrote:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
So if I wait outside your door, when you open it, everything inside becomes
public domain
All im saying is the guy didn't break into
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:50 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you can walk into a public building unchallenged, you keep walking
in. Its not the person's fault, especially if they have mental
problems which Mckinnon has. If you're an internet robot working for
the intelligence services,
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Ed Carp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:50 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you can walk into a public building unchallenged, you keep walking
in. Its not the person's fault, especially if they have mental
problems which Mckinnon has.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:25 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He is a bumble bee, a useless fucking bumble bee. Why don't you get
him psychiatric help instead of sending him to U.S and locking him up?
Surely the guy needs help, not a jail sentence? I'm leaving this
thread now I can't be
He isn't particularly evil, he seen the door was open and thought,
hell why not, big super power!!! They basically had the welcome mat
laid out for him, with goodies inside, someone might liken it to a
honey trap.
Perhaps during the trial, Gary McKinnon's lawyer
should put n3td3v on the
tons of dribble snipped
He is completely innocent until found guilty... at least in the US, UK,
and even Australia that is the way things are.
You seem to be contradicting yourself here, but maybe a little bit of light
is getting in.
Nope, he is completely innocent until he
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Ed Carp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:25 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He is a bumble bee, a useless fucking bumble bee. Why don't you get
him psychiatric help instead of sending him to U.S and locking him up?
Surely the guy needs
Wrong...dead wrong.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:07 PM, offbitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:48 PM, n3td3v [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
Dead right, you got your systems accessed by 'the public', because the
systems were 'public domain'.
Your systems were public domain, get over yourselves and stop arguing about it.
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Miller Grey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wrong...dead wrong.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at
Legally, is there any precedence that private systems owned by the
government are public domain? Furthermore, has there ever been any legal
precedent that any private system, if left unsecured, is in the public
domain?
Either way, I hark back to:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 01:25:35 BST, n3td3v said:
He is a bumble bee, a useless fucking bumble bee. Why don't you get
him psychiatric help instead of sending him to U.S and locking him up?
Physician, heal thyself.
pgpz6lziP3Rew.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Let's hope this Jacqui Smith chick stops him going... hopefully her
cyber security advisors are reading the mailing lists.
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:47 AM, Miller Grey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion...c'est tout
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:47:42 CDT, Miller Grey said:
Legally, is there any precedence that private systems owned by the
government are public domain?
At least in the US, systems owned by the federal government are considered
protected under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (18 USC 1030
Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
In the US, there have been a number of successful prosecutions in cases where
people used an unsecured wireless access point to launch attacks. You'd
probably need to show *all* of the following:
1) That it was unsecured.
2) That it was *intentionally* unsecured.
3)
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 09:21, Exibar wrote:
excuse me? You're attempt at insults are pointed wrongly.
I've read the legal brief on his case, the UK documents on his case
too, he's ADMITTED guilt. In my book that's enough to call him a
criminal, he should be arrested and tried in a court
On Wed, 2008-10-01 at 10:52, Exibar wrote:
tons of dribble snipped
They always say truth hurts the most
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia -
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:23:34 EDT, Eliah Kagan said:
Has anyone ever been prosecuted for using unsecured wireless for legal
purposes?
Not to my knowledge - mostly because all the white hats are too damned busy
dealing with bigger issues. I doubt that we, as a society, can ever get to
the point
51 matches
Mail list logo
