-
April 12th, 2003, 09:39 PM
#1
Hacker Challenge Anyone..
Hi guys/girls,
Anyone of you wanna try your skill... to break it.... it's legal:
Rules:
Anyone with even the mildest interest in I.T. security is asked to try to infiltrate the machine at IP address 62.4.71.36. If you succeed in your efforts, you will find one word, a 128-character key, in the file /root/hacked. If you think you have found it, please send your solution to result@sysdoor.com, stating the date and time of your discovery. To avoid any subsequent disputes, we have deposited a sealed envelope containing the same word with a bailiff, namely, SCP Senges Michel-Baroni Marc, 92800 Puteaux, FRANCE.
Check it out http://kernel.sysdoor.net/eng/
Annya
Not an image or image does not exist!
Not an image or image does not exist!
-
April 12th, 2003, 10:36 PM
#2
Information Technology's 21st Century Challenge: An Invulnerable, 100% Secure System.
from experience I know these things always seem to fail... especially if they call it like this
For obvious reasons involving confidentiality, we cannot disclose details of these methods, but SYSDOOR is determined to show that the methods exist and that they do work. SYSDOOR has therefore chosen to implement them in a demonstration system that possesses the only known invulnerable "system" kernel. A challenge is issued to all comers: discover the word stored on the one and only machine that has never been broken into and is waiting to be attacked at IP address 62.4.71.36
if it will get used, don't they think those "methods" will leak ? It's not a real fair comparison... it's like easting a banana when it's actually an apple, you'll find out why it tasted so funny after you found out what you were eating.
I might even try it... I probably will fail... I think it's arrogant to say it's uncrackable with the information they give...
possesses the only known invulnerable "system" kernel
Well see... An invulnerable kernell doesn't mean a 100% secure system... There's other software and people just make mistakes the first time...
edit: as a second thought I think it won't get cracked... many well setup systems won't get cracked... 99% secure is secure enough to keep everyone out... it's not worth to invest time in this, and probably noone with the skill to actually do it will... I can set up a win98 box with a good firewall and say "I have a uberproof new ****, you hack it please... it's superdupersecure". My system won't get cracked probably. If you're or have a good sysamdin, your site won't get cracked. There's no special kernel thing that will do that for you, it eventually get's outdated, whatever it does...
-
April 12th, 2003, 11:16 PM
#3
Didn't Oracle make that claim sometime ago?
If I remember correctly... their system wasn't 100% secure... and within weeks... it was broke.
If you claim that something is 100% secure... there is someone out there that wants to prove you wrong. They want to be in the headlines... but then again... those with the skill also want to stay hidden (for obvious reasons). So, they never recieve the proper credit.
-
April 13th, 2003, 01:48 AM
#4
Member
teehee, i love these claims about impeccable security in the computer industry...until now! you will undoubtedly have some difficulty believing this, but i have created THE MOST SECURE COMPUTER ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET...PROBABLY ON OTHER PARTS OF THE PLANET ALSO, BUT ONLY THE FACE IS IMPORTANT!!!! check the enclosed pic for information on how you too can build this dream machine. NOTE: i'm having some trouble getting my processors to work in the two towers...
i apologize to those who don't care...in other words, humanity as a whole
Hey there, chaps! Being mexican-american, I don\'t really think I have the racial background to say that...Oh well, visit our site at www.evilcorp.tk
Don\'t expect any content...for a few weeks!
-
April 13th, 2003, 05:50 AM
#5
I can't even ping that address so whats the point?
-
April 13th, 2003, 05:57 AM
#6
Member
glad to see that at least 21 people have wasted their time downloading my silly (yet lovely) picture. isn't it nice to have me, the frivolous retard, lightening the mood in some threads that need it...or don't need it. Oops...
Hey there, chaps! Being mexican-american, I don\'t really think I have the racial background to say that...Oh well, visit our site at www.evilcorp.tk
Don\'t expect any content...for a few weeks!
-
April 13th, 2003, 06:04 AM
#7
Somebody is probably trying to DDoS the server. If you waited long enough when reading the website (It is very slow for me) you will see a section that asks people not to try and DoS the server...
I did a "ping 62.4.71.36 -w 50000" so that I'd wait 50,000 milliseconds (50 seconds?) for a reply, and I got:
C:\>ping 62.4.71.36 -w 50000
Pinging 62.4.71.36 with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Reply from 208.184.231.205: Destination host unreachable.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 62.4.71.36:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 1, Lost = 3 (75% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
C:\>
Hopefully that helps. I really wonder what this server is running. Like, is there a web server, etc. If you don't have any services running, etc., how can you do anything to it in the first place? Hopefully it really does have one (among other commonly used functions), so this challenge will have real-live production usage when they release it, and not just be something like Coder Puffin's rocks...
-Tim_axe
-
April 13th, 2003, 06:10 AM
#8
Its odd 62.4.71.35 gets a reply right away. But 62.4.71.36 takes forever. How odd
-
April 13th, 2003, 06:13 AM
#9
I can't even ping that address so whats the point
I got the same results... I couldn't ping, scan etc.
I'm just waiting for someone with the real skill...
I know they are here...
right, trojan?!?!
-
April 13th, 2003, 07:31 AM
#10
Hi,
Just in case you are interested:
# nmap -v -P0 62.4.72.36
Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
No tcp,udp, or ICMP scantype specified, assuming vanilla tcp connect() scan. Use -sP if you really don't want to portscan (and just want to see what hosts are up).
Host (62.4.72.36) appears to be up ... good.
Initiating Connect() Scan against (62.4.72.36)
Strange error from connect (13):Permission denied
The Connect() Scan took 4 seconds to scan 1601 ports.
Interesting ports on (62.4.72.36):
(The 1582 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: closed)
Port State Service
21/tcp filtered ftp
22/tcp filtered ssh
23/tcp filtered telnet
25/tcp filtered smtp
37/tcp filtered time
43/tcp filtered whois
53/tcp filtered domain
63/tcp filtered via-ftp
70/tcp filtered gopher
79/tcp filtered finger
80/tcp filtered http
110/tcp filtered pop-3
113/tcp filtered auth
119/tcp filtered nntp
123/tcp filtered ntp
137/tcp filtered netbios-ns
138/tcp filtered netbios-dgm
443/tcp filtered https
11371/tcp filtered pksd
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 4 seconds
#
It might be wasting time but.. let's say "they are" testing our skills...knowledge skills security computers in positive way.
Cheers
Not an image or image does not exist!
Not an image or image does not exist!
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|