Re: [Full-disclosure] Just Asking

[Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@xxxxxxxxx>]

Nothing is more impressive than some anonymous twit attacking someone who 
does their research under their own name with stolen information they 
should not have to begin with and then selectively publishing only that 
which bolsters their supposed case.

--On August 2, 2009 12:03:18 AM +0100 Ew0k <sekuritymatter@xxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:

> A friend of mine observed something that I believe should be put on the
> table.
> While reading the e-mails sent back and forth by Dan Kaminsky, illegally
> published on zf05 one of the e-mails caught his eye:
>
> """
>
> Dan,
>
>
> This is another of our clients and you do not have the permission of the
> client to perform this kind of scanning.
> You have triggered over 22,000 events for us in this range alone as well
> as caused a few other minor aggravations.
> While you may believe you are a researcher and doing good, performing
> your unauthorized testing on live production platforms is a reportable
> offense.
> I am going to kindly suggest you seek permission from various targets
> before you continue your "research".
> Please note I am under contractual obligations to report your
> activities, we have recorded your "scans" on over 26 devices globally
> and none of our clients have given you permission to perform these
> "tests"
>
> """
>
> Now, according to this e-mail should Dan's CISSP certification be
> revised?



Paul Schmehl, If it isn't already
obvious, my opinions are my own
and not those of my employer.
******************************************
WARNING: Check the headers before replying

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/