louise wrote:
> I do a shields up check on a regular basis,
Why? Except for comedian entertainment...
> I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
> and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
> own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
> assumption.
Ouch!
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. <seppi@seppig.de> wrote:
> shatter attacks
It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
into any other running application or service in the same session, that
makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
exploit.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware Website http://bearware.info
On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. <se...@seppig.de> wrote:
> > shatter attacks
>
> It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
> programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
> systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
> in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
> Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
> into any other running application or service in the same session, that
> makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
> exploit.
If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
Astonishing... ;-)
Gerald
On 16 feb, 13:06, Gerald Vogt <v...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. <se...@seppig.de> wrote:
> > > shatter attacks
>
> > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
> > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
> > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
> > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
> > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
> > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
> > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
> > exploit.
>
> If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
> not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
> Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
> up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
> wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
> that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
> would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
> Astonishing... ;-)
This is not a library, this is usenet.
FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.
On Feb 16, 9:53 pm, rodney.use...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 16 feb, 13:06, Gerald Vogt <v...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. <se...@seppig.de> wrote:
> > > > shatter attacks
>
> > > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
> > > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
> > > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
> > > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
> > > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
> > > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
> > > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
> > > exploit.
>
> > If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
> > not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
> > Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
> > up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
> > wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
> > that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
> > would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
> > Astonishing... ;-)
>
> This is not a library, this is usenet.
Correct. Google and Wikipedia are still just a click away.
> FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.
I know. It is not extremely difficult to find out if you know how to
use Google. The wikipedia article is the first hit on google. Just
like it is the first hit for "shatter attack"...
Gerald
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 06:06:37 -0600, Gerald Vogt <vogt@spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. <se...@seppig.de>
>> wrote:
>> > shatter attacks
>>
>> It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
>> programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
>> systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between
>> processes
>> in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
>> Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be
>> injected
>> into any other running application or service in the same session, that
>> makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
>> exploit.
>
> If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
> not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
> Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
> up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
> wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
> that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
> would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
> Astonishing... ;-)
>
> Gerald
LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a group
even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
it...astonishing.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware Website http://bearware.info
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:00:58 -0600, Gerald Vogt <vogt@spamcop.net> wrote:
>> This is not a library, this is usenet.
>
> Correct. Google and Wikipedia are still just a click away.
>
>> FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.
>
> I know. It is not extremely difficult to find out if you know how to
> use Google. The wikipedia article is the first hit on google. Just
> like it is the first hit for "shatter attack"...
>
> Gerald
LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a group
even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
it...astonishing.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware Website http://bearware.info
On 16 feb, 14:00, Gerald Vogt <v...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 9:53 pm, rodney.use...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On 16 feb, 13:06, Gerald Vogt <v...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. <se...@seppig.de> wrote:
> > > > > shatter attacks
>
> > > > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
> > > > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
> > > > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
> > > > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
> > > > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
> > > > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
> > > > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
> > > > exploit.
>
> > > If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
> > > not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
> > > Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
> > > up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
> > > wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
> > > that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
> > > would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
> > > Astonishing... ;-)
>
> > This is not a library, this is usenet.
>
> Correct. Google and Wikipedia are still just a click away.
I don't get the point. The wikipedia+google hint had been given before
in this thread by Sebastian G. What's wrong with another person giving
the answer ?
> > FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.
>
> I know. It is not extremely difficult to find out if you know how to
> use Google.
Actually the info was still stored in my brain. High school.
> The wikipedia article is the first hit on google. Just
> like it is the first hit for "shatter attack"...
Yes, that's how I found out what it actually meant.
Speaking of attacks: Microsoft is trying to make something positive
out of worms.
I'm already looking forward to the MS-worm-SDK
http://technology.newscientist.com/a...are-fixes.html
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:20:47 -0600, Straight Talk <b__nice@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:07:57 -0600, "Bear Bottoms"
> <bearbottoms1@gmai.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:10:23 -0600, Straight Talk <b__nice@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think anyone questioned whether you take responsibility for
>>> your own security. Some might have indicated though, that the
>>> countermeasures you seem to have taken somehow shows that you may lack
>>> the knowledge to do so properly.
>>
>> I wouldn't know if she does or not. It doesn't really matter as she is
>> demonstrating willingness to communicate. I do see you lack
>> communication
>> skills, which loses knowledge.
>
> Talking about communication skills... What are you trying to say?
It's ok...some such as yourself are impossible to communicate with.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware Website http://bearware.info
On Feb 16, 10:09 pm, "Bear Bottoms" <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
> LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a group
> even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
> up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
> it...astonishing.
??? I never said that everyone nor anyone in the group should go and
look something up which is easily available. What you want is: If
someone asked a question in a library to a group you would expect
everyone in the group to go look it up for themselves rather than have
the person who asked easily look it up...
It is the expectation of many people in forums and the usenet that if
they have a question which could be easily answered by looking up in
the manual, google, wikipedia or similar they expect all people in the
group to look it up and at least a few of them present the answer.
Some even complain if you write them "see page 10 of the manual".
Gerald
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
