Re: No sellout. was: RE: Lynn / Cisco shellcode

[byte_jump <bytejump () gmail com>]

On 8/1/05, Holden Williamson <limeyhaqr () gmail com> wrote:
> This is computer security 101. It's not 1992AD anymore guys.

I prefer "In the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred and
ninety two." It sounds much more distinguished and on par with a
college-level course.
 
> If anyone really sat there and thought "wow, I never thought about
> remotely executing code on a cisco before" then they should be
> probably be asking themselves why they're playing with this security
> muck in the first place.

As you jump to conclusions about the ability of your fellow list
readers, perhaps you could give us the benefit of the doubt and
explore the possibility that it was Cisco's decision to move to
so-called "virtualized processes" that surprised some of us,
effectively lowering the shellcode bar and making the execution of
code on Cisco gear something that can be achieved by those of us not
residing on security's Mount Olympus. ;-)
_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
https://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave