nanog mailing list archives
Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc
From: Sharif Torpis <storpis () crl com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 11:16:51 -0800 (PST)
Why is that a problem? Unless somebody could execute the code on the boxthen it is not a threat - closed systems, like WWW servers (most servers like that really) should not be in any danger.
Two words: buffer overflow. You don't always have to have a shell to execute code on a closed system. What is a "closed system" anyway? Is that like "computer security"? ;-)
Current thread:
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Michael McArthur (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Vijay Gill (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Randy Bush (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Bruce Robertson (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Leigh Porter (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Sharif Torpis (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Leigh Porter (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Randy Bush (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Greg A. Woods (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Vijay Gill (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Leo Seto (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Randy Bush (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Greg A. Woods (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Robert E. Seastrom (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Randy Bush (Nov 12)
- Message not available
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc Network Operations Center (Nov 12)
- Re: Potentially dangerous Pentium bug disc David Schiffrin (Nov 12)