Re: The 'good worm' from HP

[Maarten <fulldisc () ultratux org>]

On Saturday 21 August 2004 16:00, michael williamson wrote:

> This is a _lot_ more responsible than running exploit code of any sort,
> even for a good purpose.  I admin one particular windows server that I
> must actually wait for vender approval before applying any hotfixes.
> I'd be extremely pissed if some do-gooder net admin tried to patch my
> box via sploit code and ended up breaking it.  (it is that fickle)

Except that the scenario you describe isn't near complete.  What will happen 
is either it will get attacked by a benign worm (possibly breaking something) 
or a malicious worm (definitely breaking something) only a short while later.
Which would you prefer then ?

I think it is _your_ responsibility to shield your box from the internet (AND 
the internet from your box) if it is that fickle and that important to you.  
Otherwise, all bets are off.  I.e. to stay with the human virus analogy: 
you'll be hospitalized against your will cause you pose a health risk.

Maarten

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html