Re: [Full-Disclosure] Why is IRC still around?

[Danny <nocmonkey@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:10:13 -0500, Tim
<tim-security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > My mistake; I was referring to the discussion, collaboration, and
> > creation, not the spread.
> 
> You mentioned DDoS attacks below.  I don't believe that use is a form of
> discussion, collaboration, or creation.
> 
> > Some say we should, but I am not one of those. My point was to get rid
> > of the most well established tool (and easiest to use) for these types
> > of activities.
> 
> Any tool can be used by anyone for good or evil.  If one knows the
> kiddies are all hanging out on IRC, then you can get a lot of good info
> about what their new attacks are by loitering on their channels.
> 
> 
> > What's the difference? IRC is so well established for the type of
> > activity I am referring to.
> 
> As it is established for many productive things.  Ever check out
> freenode?
> 
> 
> > I'll leave the piracy battle for someone else - I just mentioned it as
> > a part of the problem.
> 
> If you aren't prepared to defend it on this list, better not mention it.
> =)
> 
> 
> > Sure netcat is an alternative, but which one is easier to use?
> 
> Um... netcat, or raw tcp sockets.  I would argue it is easier to write
> something that just opens a connection, and listens for commands to come
> back, than something that has to speak IRC.  Speaking IRC has its own
> advantages, but in the absence of it, it is still trivial to manage a
> bot net.
> 
> > I thought I would throw out the idea. If you want to call me a troll,
> > then so be it, but don't get your panties in a knot over the whole
> > thing
> 
> Pardon my harsh reply.  It wasn't personal, and is directed only at your
> reasoning.  It is a similar reasoning that leads to the slippery slope
> toward censorship.

No worries. Case closed. :)

...D

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