Printable View
Offense? I'm just commenting on a vocal minority :DQuote:
Originally posted by petemcevoy
why did Terr and yourself take offence at this, do i smell an attack of the green eyed monster?
Green eyed monster? AIEE! Maybe it's that liver-eating guy from the X-files! :eek:
:p
This is the first time I hear you speaking about not using third party software... If that was what you meant, you were right.Quote:
I've got a better idea, why don't you tell me how you would define those rules in a wondows box, how you would close down all ports apart from those you specify, or how you'd tell your windows box what to do to a packet that arrives at a particular port (DENY, DROP) - without the use of third party software
And about your script: I'm not a *NIX-guru, but I do know some basic programming stuff. And there just seems something wrong with yours...
Damn, I guess this is what my flame-attitude got me: everything I ask or say, will be mistaken as a flame...
Well, I guess I'll have to live with that...
"There's an ugly green monster in my head, won't leave me alone until it's dead..." (Kapperdog: I know! You don't have to remind me of it ;) )
And Terr, I bet you'll post a reaction before I even finish this...
Goddammit!
Windows comes with all kinds of problems that have nothing to do with setting it up properly!
For example: your hacking the planet, so you grab their nametable and such, and find their lan manager.
Now, If it tells you that they are using win9x, or WinME,
THEN THEY ARE VULNERABLE TO ALL THE BEST ATTACKS!
For example!!!:
In *nix you can share filez and ****, and they are safe,
IN WINDOWS 95,98, or ME, NETBIOS SHARES ARE NOT SAFE!
their passwords can be easily cracked in a matter of seconds!
I'd like to see you do that to a Samba SMB type share!
Mind you, i know that anyone that uses Netbios is asking for it,
but everyone does! People shouldnt have to worry that because of thier OS's crappy programming they cant use the built-in features that were written right on the back of the Win98 box!
Another example,
DoS attacks, almost any DoS that works on both linux and windows generally works a hell of a lot better on Windows!
ip fragments for example. Windows is so crappily written that it will actually lock-up from resource exaustion, where linux will almost always save enough strength to allow the user to at least find out what the hell is goin on.
The amount of serious problems with windows that are exploited every-day is disgusting.
-8trak
8trak, I think the problems that come with NetBIOS have already been dealt with on those forums... You stating that everybody does use NetBIOS, is a stupid generalisation. I know you're a dual-booter, so stop bitching about Microsoft.
What are those 'best' attacks? The ones that inflict the most damage? Grow up, man.Quote:
THEN THEY ARE VULNERABLE TO ALL THE BEST ATTACKS!
At least Windows supports my modem...
Best means Best, nothing else
You assume that i mean most destructive, I mean most effective.
Such as the OOB attacks a few years ago.
You cant say that there was ever a "better" DoS then that.
It caused users to BSOD immediately, what more do you want.
What operation system was effected??? Windows of course!
Why would you ever want somthing to use the "Most Destructive" Attack,
when with 'Microsoft Windows' you can download all their personal filez.
As for the modem thing,
Mabey if people didnt make such shitty modems then they would be
supported. Asking linux to support win modems is like asking Windows
to fully support hardware out of some ibm ps/2. (granted the architecture
was actually compatible).
And as for people who think that their USB crap should be supported,
their USB stuff should burn! USB is the spawn of all that is evil!
haha,
I've personally had some compatibility problems, but its my own fault for
having crappy hardware. And it's microsoft's fault that that crappy
hardware exists in the first place.
I do dual boot, but its only because i have to.
All of these programs could have been just as easily written
for linux, and if they had been, then i would never use windows.
-8trak
Its quite accurate to say that Netbios is everywhere.
I dont know if you've taken a look lately, but home
networks are getting popular, and netbios is making
a huge comeback.
I cracked the password on my school's admin's computer
today. It had it's entire drive shared. If he was using linux,
not only would i have not been able to get that password,
they probably would have caught me.
Scan a cable or DSL subnet and you'll find as many
people with open shares as you want. theyre everywhere.
-8trak
You know what? I did as you suggested, and the scary part is that you were right... So, for all of you that still have NetBios installed, but don't even know why: http://www.antionline.com/showthread...hreadid=114601 (jansson_markus' tips on disabling Netbios)
Hahaha,
Yeah, its completely insane, Secuirity techs would be appalled.
Worst part is that most of them arent password protected.
-8trak
I don't think either operating system is more inherintly secure. I think it depends entirely upon the the system administrator and their dedication to securing their systems. The reason so many windows machines get compromised is that the system administrator has as much of a clue as a gopher.
Unix is complicated and still somewhat more difficult to set up and confiure than windows (used to be really hard :)). The average windows users buys the machine from Dell/local superstore/etc. They don't configure it, secure it, or do anything other than what is required to get their Internet connection working(and they usually need help for this).
Netbios is not insecure, using it over tcp/ip is, and is not where netbios was originally used. Configure it to use netbeiu only on a local lan and it is ok. As far as grabbing passwords from local machines, with physical access to a machine of any operating system, comprimising the system is relativly easy compared to gaining remote access to a properly configured and patched system.
The same steps and in many cases similar tools are used to lock down windows AND unix systems. Its a matter of attention to detail, I've been running both unix and windows systems on the Internet for a long time and have had both systems compromised at one time or another. No system is perfect, but with attention to detail we can minimize the effects of any system penetration and learn more to apply in the future.
cheers
Do you have any idea what your talking about?Quote:
Netbios is not insecure, using it over tcp/ip is, and is not where netbios was originally used. Configure it to use netbeiu only on a local lan and it is ok. As far as grabbing passwords from local machines, with physical access to a machine of any operating system, comprimising the system is relativly easy compared to gaining remote access to a properly configured and patched system.
I've personally never had any of my systems, linux or windows
"comprimised"
First of all, Netbios is insecure,
I never said that i was getting the passwords locally,
Give me a share address, and i'll show you how i can
crack the password in under 30 seconds for my comfortable
seat in my house.
Second of all, Netbios doesnt run under NetBEUI!
It runs under Tcp/ip or Ipx/Spx
It was originally meant to run under ipx!
Third,
Netbios is no more secure regardless of what protocol that
you run it under! The password authentication scheme is
busted! I dare you to share your drive and put your ip up here!
NetBEUI is insane! its like AppleTalk or somthing!
Microsoft just bought into it for some crazy reason!
It cant even support more then 256 computers!
Oh yeah, and its spelled NetBEUI, not "netbeiu"
Fifth:
NetBEUI....
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
-8trak