Re: [Full-disclosure] “We keep wiping it off, and it keeps coming back”

[Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@xxxxxxxxx>]

Since it very much discredits and puts the AA to shame, isn't it quite
plausible that some department's lawyers fall over this guy's claims?


Maybe the article has been written specifically for people to draw the wrong
conclusion - happens too often - but still...






On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Thor (Hammer of God)
<thor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  Consider the source.  It’s “someone close” to the operations, and that
> only according to this guy.  It could very well be a slot-puller in the
> casino across the street…   I’m always dubious of the reporting of this type
> of thing where the source is some “secret” person, and where there is never
> any ability to refute claims.****
>
> ** **
>
> t****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* full-disclosure-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> full-disclosure-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Christian
> Sciberras
> *Sent:* Monday, October 10, 2011 7:05 AM
> *To:* Michael T
> *Cc:* full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* Re: [Full-disclosure] “We keep wiping it off, and it keeps
> coming back”****
>
> ** **
>
> I'm talking more about their engineers than their network.****
>
> ** **
>
> If I had my network infected with a virus, I'd immediately deploy some form
> of logging/monitoring tool (eg, wireshark).****
>
> ** **
>
> Honestly, it all sounds like they're employing inexperienced engineers.
> Which is again strange, considering the field they're in.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regarding your bet, see that's already something. Why exactly can't they
> verify your bet? It isn't like viruses suddenly became invisible, is it?**
> **
>
> ** **
>
> I'm just curious to these questions. It's strange to hear someone saying
> "we basically have no idea what's going on".****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Michael T <mt2410689@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:***
> *
>
> It's a network that's 'detached', or 'segregated', or whatevered from the
> rest of the world, so it's 'largely immune to viruses'.  That likely means
> they have:
> 1. NO logging
> 2. NO anti-virus
> 3. NO hardening
>
> The very fact that these systems are on a segregated network means they are
> probably more frail, and more susceptible to viruses, than a normal person's
> laptop.
>
> Immune to viruses...  What a crock of shit.  My bet is that it's coming
> from the planes.
>
> Mike****
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:****
>
>   http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/10/virus-hits-drone-fleet/****
>
> ** **
>
> This is news to me.****
>
> ** **
>
> Moreover, I'm a bit confused as to how they don't track how it's coming
> back.****
>
> I mean, how is it possible that no one stepped in and analyzed how the
> virus acts and where it came from?****
>
> ** **
>
> It sounds fish if you ask me.****
>
> ** **
>
> Chris.****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/****
>
>  ** **
>
> ** **
>

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