[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Full-disclosure] (no subject)
- To: <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [Full-disclosure] (no subject)
- From: <hatless@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:17:53 +0200
Jason wrote:
> Matt Burnett wrote:
>> You really think this would be hard to design. Think about how
most spam
>> solutions work, if you get 25 posts in hour with 100k
attachments from a
>> new user, do you think they are talking about security or are
they
>> posting porn. Anything a spam filter would consider suspicous
could be
>> flaged for moderator approval. Its not 100% fool proof but do
you really
>> think some 16 year old kid whos posting porn here would take the
time to
>> try to defeat it, in order just to post crappy porn?
> Wonderful. I suggest that you get or develop this technology for
> yourself and offer it to others.
> Have you done the analysis of the images yet? I quote the
challenge
> again for your and the lists benefit.
> "Are you an expert? Have you done an analysis of the porn? What
were
> your findings? Are there any hidden messages? Disclosures?
Patterns?
> Trends?"
> The next target of a terrorist plot could be embedded in there
somewhere
> just waiting for you to discover it.
What's your problem? Who cares about that?
A simple filter would do the job:
example 1:
mail contains attachment -> attachment is image (WE HAVE FILE
EXTENSIONS - GUYS) -> let mod approve it or delete them
How often do you send images to a security related list? Not often,
i
guess.
example 2:
more than 10 mails per hour -> let mod approve it/ delay delivery
>>
>> If implemented properly it would not limit the free exchange of
SECURITY
>> RELATED information, but would limit the exchange of porn on FD.
You
>> dont think a couple thousand security people, most of whom are
strong
>> supporters of privacy rights/civil rights/etc couldnt devise a
proper
>> system that would not impead the exchange of security related
information?
>> Anyways what legal issues are you talking about, be specific.
For one i
>> know that it is against nearly all American corporate internet
use
>> policies to look at porn. So some 16 year old kid could
potentialy get
>> someone fired for sending porn on FD. Hows that for a legal
issue.
> If you are on a corporate network and subscribed to FD using
corporate
> resources without the authority and justification to do so then
you
> deserve to be terminated. It has nothing to do with porn and is
just as
> likely to have the same effect for downloading copyrighted
content,
> exploits, "dangerous material", viruses...
In my country it's absolutaly legit to check their own e-mails as
long as your work is not disturbed. Hint: Check mails while you
take a
break. Btw. mails are treated as private so nobody cares what they
contain. Virii, trojans, spam, ... are usuallly filtered.
< removed other crap, nobody cares about >
Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account
required
http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480
Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail
https://www.hushssl.com?l=485
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/