January 2006 - Test - lists.nanog.org

RE: WMF patch
by Fred Heutte 05 Jan '06

05 Jan '06

More info. This seems pretty reasonable: http://castlecops.com/a6445-WMF_Exploit_FAQ.html Steve Gibson is also mirroring Guilfanov's bypass, and says Microsoft's cryptographically signed but unreleased patch is floating around the net now: http://www.grc.com/sn/notes-020.htm In my reading this is a serious vulnerability, but the self- inflating agitation in the "security community" has reached a highly annoying level. I'm in the FTDT (fix the damn thing) school; let's deal with it and get on with it. Every cycle spent moaning about the faults of Microsoft is a lost opportunity for something more productive. Back to /usr/lurk . . . regards, Fred ----------------- > >On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Brance Amussen wrote: > >> >> Howdy, >> Here is the link to the unofficial patches creators site. >> http://www.hexblog.com/ This is the one sans links to. >> Sans seems to be having a hard day.. No Dshield mailings today either.. >> Isc.sans.org is sporadic as well.. > >According to isc.sans.org, hexblog.com was down due to bandwidth issues >earlier. See the isc.sans.org homepage for details on alternate ways to >get to it. >

5 4

Re: [ok] Re: WMF patch
by Fred Heutte 05 Jan '06

05 Jan '06

I understand the frustration Valdis has with the Microsoft situation. I've done my share of patching and updating and crawling under desks and wrestling with Exchange Server and all the rest, and fortunately (for my sanity) I'm not managing a few dozen M$ desktops anymore. My observation had more to do with the posturing of the "security" vendors (anti-virus, firewall, IDS, etc.) and the broad range of highly important experts who are all clamoring for attention on this and on all the other everyday security issues out there. There is certainly a need for security services and products and activities, but I am just not enamored of the "security mindset." This is just a part of what our job is so let's get on with it. And if we can convince the PHBs that moving off of Windows is (1) feasible, which is obvious; (2) manageable for them, which is not so clear, so much the better. I've broken my hammer pounding this particular nail, so having failed at moving management away from Windows, I moved myself away from management. Fred

3 2

Ilfak's WMF patch
by Gadi Evron 05 Jan '06

05 Jan '06

"securiTeam Blogs" posted an interview with Ilfak, the WMF patch author. He explains what it does, and why: http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/176 Just in case some of you don't follow security sources or need another affirmation - I know Ilfak and he is trusted. He is a Good Guy. Gadi.

1 0

Re: WMF patch
by Fred Heutte 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

Martin Hannigan quoth: Internet security problems at large haven't even reached the break of dawn yet. Wait until every phone, toaster, baby intensive care sensor, and car is hooked up. Indeed, depending on how you look at it, Vint Cerf's formulation, "IP on everything," is either a promise or a threat. Maybe both. http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/CDE/_IPONEV.GIF http://old-www.nersc.gov/aboutnersc/presentations/future/sld061.htm OK, now I'll shut up. Fred

2 1

Re: [ok] Re: WMF patch
by Brandon Butterworth 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

> And if we can convince the PHBs that moving off of Windows is > (1) feasible, which is obvious; (2) manageable for them (3) they won't end up like Peter Quinn http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/29/mass_odf_cio/ brandon

1 0

Large-Scale Manageability [Was: Re: [ok] Re: WMF patch]
by Fergie 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

A few dozen? Try >10,000. Or 20,000. Or more. Believe me -- I am glad I'm a network plumber -- I don't envy the administrative job of managing an enterpise boat-load of MS desktops -- it's a nightmare.Bbut it would perhaps be more of a nightmare if they were not MS. I've seen the scope firsthand, and I repect those folks immensely. The problems here are many, and needless to say, we shouldn't be trying to re-hash the debate on the appropriate desktop enterprise OS, etc. -- that's a dead-end. What _is_ handy is that that there nice tools available to roll out patches to each end-system in a manageable fashion. Now -- if only the patch were available... :-) And keeping users' from surfing the web and _not_ clicking on exploit web pages is an exercise left for the reader (without being a network nazi)... - ferg -- Fred Heutte <aoxomoxoa(a)sunlightdata.com> wrote: I understand the frustration Valdis has with the Microsoft situation. I've done my share of patching and updating and crawling under desks and wrestling with Exchange Server and all the rest, and fortunately (for my sanity) I'm not managing a few dozen M$ desktops anymore. My observation had more to do with the posturing of the "security" vendors (anti-virus, firewall, IDS, etc.) and the broad range of highly important experts who are all clamoring for attention on this and on all the other everyday security issues out there. There is certainly a need for security services and products and activities, but I am just not enamored of the "security mindset." This is just a part of what our job is so let's get on with it. And if we can convince the PHBs that moving off of Windows is (1) feasible, which is obvious; (2) manageable for them, which is not so clear, so much the better. I've broken my hammer pounding this particular nail, so having failed at moving management away from Windows, I moved myself away from management. Fred -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

onet.pl
by Dennis Dayman 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

Is anyone from onet.pl here? or does anyone have a contact? -Dennis

1 0

RE: WMF patch
by Fergie 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

Ilfak's server was overwhelmed -- the temporary 'path' is not being hosted by CastleCops: http://www.castlecops.com/forums.html - ferg -- Steve Sobol <sjsobol(a)JustThe.net> wrote: On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Brance Amussen wrote: > > Howdy, > Here is the link to the unofficial patches creators site. > http://www.hexblog.com/ This is the one sans links to. > Sans seems to be having a hard day.. No Dshield mailings today either.. > Isc.sans.org is sporadic as well.. According to isc.sans.org, hexblog.com was down due to bandwidth issues earlier. See the isc.sans.org homepage for details on alternate ways to get to it. -- Steve Sobol, Professional Geek 888-480-4638 PGP: 0xE3AE35ED Company website: http://JustThe.net/ Personal blog, resume, portfolio: http://SteveSobol.com/ E: sjsobol(a)JustThe.net Snail: 22674 Motnocab Road, Apple Valley, CA 92307 -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(a)netzero.net or fergdawg(a)sbcglobal.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

3 2

NANOG 36 Meeting Registration
by Carol Wadsworth 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

Meeting registration is now open for NANOG 36, February 12-15, 2006, in Dallas, Texas. The meeting will be hosted by Yahoo! and take place at The Fairmont Dallas. Registration: https://www.merit.edu/nanog/registration.form.html Hotel info: http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0602/hotel.html (special group rates expires January 27) Keep checking http://www.nanog.org/ for additional meeting details. See you in Dallas!

1 0

RE: Contact at Broadwing?
by Rump, Bryant 04 Jan '06

04 Jan '06

Tony, You can contact Broadwing Customer Care at 1.877.946.4777 (1.877.WING.777) for Carriers/Resellers or email inoc(a)broadwing.com. I will also forward you email along. Bryant Rump Broadwing Communications bryantr(a)broadwing.com _____ From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Tony Varriale Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:22 AM To: NANOG list Subject: Contact at Broadwing? Would a contact from Broadwing contact me offlist? I would like assistance with a chronic problem with packet loss through our California BW ethernet feed to another California non-BW location. Thanks! tv

1 0