Messages in this thread |  | | | From | "Jeff Millar" <> | | Subject | Re: vger rejecting messages from mediaone (ORBS is evil) | | Date | Sun, 16 Jan 2000 20:45:44 -0500 |
| |
I'll go with 2) Probing is always OK (unless it becomes a denial of service). That's why we have crack, et al.
The web will be a better place if the good guys "check the doors" extensively. Otherwise, you're relying on a variant of security by obscurity.
Other possible bumper stickers...
If probing is outlawed, only the outlaws will have probes.
If you don't want probes, keep off the net.
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "Jeff Millar" <jeff@wa1hco.mv.com>; "George Bonser" <grep@shorelink.com>; "Khimenko Victor" <khim@sch57.msk.ru> Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2000 8:35 PM Subject: RE: vger rejecting messages from mediaone (ORBS is evil)
> > > A very convincing line of argument, _if_ you assume that a mail > > probe of a net service constitutes a search. It's closer > > to looking a public behavior than an invasive search. > > The best analogy I can think of is that it's like twisting and pushing on > someone's door to see if it's locked. The problem is really that you only > have three choices: > > 1) A probe for a vulnerability is wrong no matter what. This makes ORBS > immoral. > > 2) A probe for a vulnerability is okay. This makes probing completely > justified and makes it very hard to deal with people who probe for > vulnerabilities in order to exploit them. > > 3) A probe for a vulnerability is okay or not okay depending upon a variety > of factors including what the prober did or intended to do with the results > and what the effect of the probe is on the probed site. > > Unfortunately, it pretty much has to be the third option. > > DS > >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |