LinuxPPC Challenge: Crack the Box and Keep it! 161
Jeff Carr from LinuxPPC was
so amused by yesterday's MS W2k crack challange that he figured
he'd play too: By setting up a LinuxPPC box challanging the adept
out there to get in... but if you can get in, you get to keep the
box! Its a stock LinuxPPC install, and he even left telnet on.
The url is crack.linuxppc.org.
You must be able to reproduce your entry to win. Have fun.
Re:uh.... real nice (Score:1)
I mean it does not seem as if it is impossible to crack if the "crack guestbook" shows several people actually cracking the system.
Even the computer cracked itself! (127.0.0.1)
Seriously, tongue in check and all, I believe the list should be removed to avoid any excess traffic on other sites (I would not believe
Where do you want to go today? http://www.windows2000test.com seems off bound to me
Re:hahaha (Score:1)
nmap scan :-) (Score:1)
Host (169.207.154.108) appears to be up
Initiating SYN half-open stealth scan against (169.207.154.108)
Adding TCP port 23 (state Open).
Adding TCP port 111 (state Open).
Adding TCP port 80 (state Open).
The SYN scan took 108 seconds to scan 1483 ports.
For OSScan assuming that port 23 is open and port 30569 is closed and neither are firewalled
Interesting ports on (169.207.154.108):
Port State Protocol Service
7 filtered tcp echo
19 filtered tcp chargen
23 open tcp telnet
80 open tcp http
111 open tcp sunrpc
TCP Sequence Prediction: Class=random positive increments
Difficulty=3004658 (Good luck!)
Sequence numbers: 56980630 56E19E58 5757E55E 56A2583F 5758D1B1
Remote operating system guess: Linux 2.1.122 - 2.1.132; 2.2.0-pre1 - 2.2.2
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 121 seconds
================================
check out that sunrpc port
enjoy
Re:It's slow... as was /. (Score:1)
No response,
slow response.
prove don't run important w/o (Score:1)
Re:MS site is down (Score:1)
Re:Mistake! Mistake! (Score:1)
Turning on Telnet on a server that you are trying to get secure seems a bit exterme... why have telnet enabled when you can have something like ssh enabled just when you need it. Of course if you are going to leave telnet enabled, you can at least use
(Not to say that populuar sites around the web do have telnet enabled for everybody on any machine as long as you know the login/pass, for example www.macnn.com).
This should be interesting to see what flaws (since we know they are not perfect) we learn about in RedHat Linux 6.0 and spefically LinuxPPC R5.
Re:Odd cgi-bin behaviour (Score:1)
So they changed some things that would be typically changed on the server to make it 1) easier to use 2) more services 3) added services locked down better.
Re:Security of default install (Score:1)
Obviously, LinuxPPC has made a few changes to the server, for example they disabled some scripts and enabled telnet (by far a fair compremise).
Trust me, enought people have asked why telnet and FTP are disabled with the default install, if you don't believe me, see:
http://www.linuxppc.com/updates/telnet-ftp-not-
That's also true with RedHat 6.0.
Win this NT 4.0 box with SP1 (Score:1)
Microsoft will make you CEO if you can crack this out of the box config NT 4.0 computer.
Win this NT 4.0 box with SP1 (Score:1)
Microsoft will make you CEO if you can crack this out of the box config NT 4.0 computer. this box is stand alone and our engineers have assured us we cannot loose.
Re:Mac or CHrP/PReP? (Score:1)
That machine was a great, state of the art, 90mhz 601 machine, I think a PowerMac 7200.
In the past, that machine seemed to lag quite often with all of the stress it had on it, and was partcally due to all of the load.
NT is the most secure OS (Score:2)
"Windows NT is the most secure operating system. It has a feature called IntelliCrash, which causes the operating system to crash when it detects high network traffic. Such traffic is always caused by hacker's activities, but, since the system is down, any attempts to break in will be unsuccessful. This innovation puts us years ahead of the competition."
Re:buffer overflows and script kiddies (Score:1)
I know that there are also buffer overflows on the heap, but I don't know how that works.
Re:Maybe this server will actually be up... (Score:1)
I think someone REALLY got a suckerpunch in on them judging by its current reaction (or lack there of apparently). Probably is bandwidth flooding though.
(The no-DOS attack method their rules were saying not do was for just swamping by the power of bandwidth. We just aimed at making it run out of ram and/or blue screening with as few packets as we could from multiple sites.)
Re:At least it's there... (Score:1)
Re:This could turn into King (Score:1)
Re:This could turn into "King of the Hill" (Score:2)
Nope, you're wrong. Someone has already hosted many servers just for the intent to be hacked. Check out http://www.happyhacker.org/hwargame.html . Yep, a real life hack that box challenge that never goes away. [happyhacker.org]
-BrentRe:hahaha (Score:1)
Mistake! Mistake! (Score:1)
There is no way in hell that the W2K server MS is putting up for this challenge is stock installed. It's probably been tweaked by MS engineers over the past two weeks to lock out any possible attack.
When this server is cracked and theirs isn't, they will point to this as an example of W2k being more secure than Linux (which I doubt very much). This can't be allowed. Someone (maybe from Red Hat or from Debian or from *BSD) should take a week and secure one of thier servers and then let anyone go at it. Then we'll see whose server lasts longer.
Interesting responses so far. (Score:2)
Of course, the Linux guys didn't make their web page incompatible with Netscape (or include unnecessary Javascript anyhow)...
However, look at the situation from another angle--look at how shoddy the crack.linuxppc.org webpage is. Imagine if the Windows site had looked remotely like the LinuxPPC site does. Microsoft would have had a hard time finding enough extinguishers for THAT one.
Imagine if the Windows guys had posted IP addresses on the main page.
Do Linux users expect less of themselves? Do they not mind sloppy work? Does this make them feel more comfortable? The LinuxPPC site is definitely not designed to appeal to anyone in a "commercial" sense--is this why it's acceptible?
In any case, it's good advertising for LinuxPPC I suppose...
Oh well. I just think it's interesting how much our biases get in the way of logical thought.
Re:PR (Score:1)
almost-competition between linuxppc and the W2K bug-- if one gets hacked and the
other doesn't, that means that that OS is more secure.
I don't quite agree... in the August 4th part 3 log entry on crack.linuxppc.org it is mentioned that portmap, sendmail, and ftp will be turned on eventually.
So now we have a win2k machine that is supposed to be secured to the max on one side of the arena and a linuxppc machine which will be gradually opened up on the other side.
Clever move of linuxppc because first of all turning on more services keeps people interested. Let people have their fun! Having fun and learning a thing or two on the way. What more do we want?
Another benefit could be that the two machines cannot be compared that way:
The linuxppc machine is willingly set up in a way that increases the risks of anyone getting in.
So if the linuxppc machine gets compromised it is not a big deal, it is more or less intended.
That makes it kind of hard to brag that the win2k box remained intact (in some sense anyway) while the linuxppc has been hacked.
Besides that: there is much more to learn from a box that does get broken into. Something to do with "learning from mistakes" I believe... and I quite like the idea of other services getting a nice pounding too.
hahaha (Score:1)
hahaha..
ha
Hmm... (Score:1)
Note, their server is down. I wonder if it's a DoS attack. Against the rules, but funny though.
Re:NT is the most secure OS (Score:1)
5.0 (aka Win2000) would reduce the need for
"administrative reboots". Now that is a great
term if I ever head one.
Mo
MS's server, that is.... (Score:1)
I meant Microsoft's is down.
Re:This could turn into "King of the Hill" (Score:1)
Doesn't work that way, at least not in this instance. The game ends with the first person to break into the box, so there's no opportunity for one-upmanship. The first person breaking in will probably put up a big ol' page with gaudy graphics splashed on it saying "I DID IT HOO HA HA" and it will be all over.
If it ever happens, that is.
uh.... real nice (Score:1)
No thanks. I already got stung by the last wuftpd exploit.
Re:"Tiger Team Australia" (Score:1)
Re:MS site is down (Score:1)
my site didn't go down.
You break it, you keep it. (Score:4)
SirSlud
Maybe this server will actually be up... (Score:2)
Now they've switched nameservers totally, but the site's still out for the count. I think this is a pretty shoddy deal if you ask me.
--- pinging www.windows2000test.com, please wait...
--- sending to www.windows2000test.com [207.46.171.196],
error, ping 1 timed out...
error, ping 2 timed out...
error, ping 3 timed out...
error, ping 4 timed out...
error, ping 5 timed out...
--- ping statistics for www.windows2000test.com
5 packets transmitted, 0 received
At least it's there... (Score:1)
Re:nmap scan :-) (Score:1)
$
program vers proto port
100000 2 tcp 111 rpcbind
100000 2 udp 111 rpcbind
not much there other than bind... but that can be useful. i leave it as an exercise on what to do with that info.
Re:MS site is down (Score:1)
Not very many services didn't crash, including IIS and SMTP (not good on a webserver!)
Only way to fix it was change the log settings and reboot....
Tim
Re:You break it, you keep it. (Score:2)
Re:NT is the most secure OS (Score:2)
Hard to beat the name "IntelliCrash," though
They're just being cocky... (Score:1)
In any case they win. If their system dies, they can still say, "but ours was a stock install," and they'll avoid most of the flack. The free toaster offer is good PR as well.
If their system survives, they get to shout out, "our stock installation was more secure than the Redmond boys' machine." Of course, that probably won't happen.
It doesn't look like they've got much to lose. Plus they're catering to the Linux crowd, not the Microsoft crowd, so they don't have to try all THAT hard to impress, I don't think.
Re:buffer overflows and script kiddies (Score:1)
The short version: It's possible to execute arbitrary code even if the stack is marked non-executable. Oh, and Alan Cox says Intel machines can't mark the stack non-exec anyway.
So your point may be true, but it's of limited value.
Re:Mistake! Mistake! (Score:2)
Besides, if this server is cracked, then we will have found another hole to patch, which is the point of cracking, right?
You talk about taking a week to secure a server, but it could be done in a few minutes by turning everything off except Apache (and disable CGI). "Secure" is kind of a tradeoff in that case.
Re:MS site is down (Score:1)
Re:uh.... real nice ...not anymore (Score:1)
Dan-
Re:Interesting responses so far. (Score:1)
We _do_ want to take over the world, but we're going to share the spoils with our friends. ;-)
Re:nmap scan :-) (Score:1)
Re:buffer overflows and script kiddies (Score:1)
In redmond... (Score:1)
LOL! This is great. Actually, I'd love to see the W2Ktest machine do ANYTHING right now. It's been down most of the day.
Looks like they finally got the router loops fixed though, but the machine is still not up. I wonder who's head is gonna roll in Redmond for this one? I'm sure the marketing genius who came up with this one didn't clear it with ole Billy-Boy...
Re:Interesting responses so far. (Score:1)
Look at how much time it took for LinuxPPC site to appear. How much time and people do you think it took to put M$'s site up?
Breace.
Re:uh.... real nice ...not anymore (Score:1)
Dan-
Re:buffer overflows and script kiddies (Score:1)
Heap based overflows are very similar but they occur in the data (bss) segment of a program. w00w00 on Heap Overflows [w00w00.org] has a pretty good explanation.
Is the guestbook a hole? (Score:1)
I'm not set up to change my hostname, but perhaps someone else would like to try changing their hostname to include a serverside include.
for instance.
Re:uh.... real nice ...not anymore (Score:1)
Hey, LinuxPPC guys, how about doing an "attempted cracks" counter?
Re:uh.... real nice ...not anymore (Score:2)
06-095.021.popsite.net
0wned.org
12.1.145.19
12.1.182.66
12.13.101.2
12.13.101.5
12.13.226.21
12.15.222.5
12.17.133.102
12.19.7.129
12.20.48.100
12.20.66.36
12.23.153.224
12.4.125.144
12.66.3.222
12.76.123.49
12.78.105.190
12.79.180.100
12.79.24.215
12.8.190.10
12.9.139.104
127.0.0.1
128.103.107.130
128.114.10.13
128.114.130.1
128.114.130.224
128.114.22.163
128.115.134.64
128.118.206.34
128.119.198.30
128.135.47.228
128.138.129.12
128.143.2.47
128.146.156.242
128.146.190.30
128.163.161.148
128.165.209.115
128.165.88.132
128.173.12.137
128.173.17.87
128.174.154.139
128.174.5.39
128.174.5.62
128.183.105.37
128.187.21.178
128.197.73.220
128.2.121.189
128.2.15.12
128.2.15.9
129.133.28.203
129.142.196.41
129.176.201.45
129.186.46.116
129.187.26.51
129.21.142.164
129.22.240.140
129.237.125.61
129.237.97.63
129.57.8.76
129.57.9.170
129.57.9.179
129.6.61.57
129.6.61.64
129.6.61.65
129.64.8.30
129.65.242.5
129.69.166.243
129.69.192.144
129.93.33.1
130.115.255.113
130.127.112.40
130.149.82.47
130.160.4.114
130.160.7.39
130.216.93.17
130.231.6.20
130.244.106.141
130.244.175.90
130.244.58.19
130.64.1.30
130.67.198.209
130.67.50.88
130.67.96.162
130.68.1.26
131.104.238.101
131.128.23.171
131.130.104.58
131.151.6.34
131.155.20.128
131.155.209.82
131.174.116.100
131.174.97.67
131.179.192.137
131.215.86.119
131.216.128.150
131.216.136.173
131.238.221.93
131.238.3.50
141.201.222.106
141.201.53.23
141.211.63.82
141.213.8.81
141.215.10.193
141.31.147.253
141.44.136.32
141.69.150.240
141.82.18.72
142.104.124.69
143.166.173.56
143.195.1.4
144.15.26.94
144.32.178.46
144.41.19.78
144.74.19.216
144.74.69.107
144.74.69.67
144.92.108.95
144.92.112.142
145.228.129.71
145.253.2.35
145.253.2.36
145.253.71.163
145.253.72.145
145.253.74.131
145.253.76.21
145.253.94.137
146.145.249.135
146.186.226.167
147.11.41.19
147.253.80.10
147.26.62.159
147.86.141.72
148.100.215.108
149.136.185.159
149.138.16.3
149.225.11.73
149.44.3.33
150.135.83.151
150.216.63.62
151.140.22.53
151.198.200.161
151.199.124.10
151.23.0.215
152.1.9.115
152.174.207.47
152.19.5.73
152.2.205.95
166.72.196.67
166.84.144.9
168.122.16.231
168.159.218.165
168.175.254.62
168.191.209.196
168.191.82.165
168.191.91.103
168.58.110.4
169.197.54.146
169.207.131.61
169.207.134.6
169.207.154.107
169.207.62.79
169.207.85.200
169.229.92.67
169.237.129.161
169.237.7.61
169.244.19.131
170.142.111.15
170.65.40.28
170.94.194.189
18.215.0.52
190.newark-23-24rs.nj.dial-access.att.net
192.100.81.126
192.101.159.1
192.124.43.73
192.127.94.7
192.131.1.4
192.135.215.35
192.138.149.4
192.148.249.74
192.150.11.14
192.160.145.62
192.17.17.130
192.195.249.21
192.195.85.210
192.197.71.189
192.219.29.174
192.233.136.11
192.245.102.11
192.246.229.214
192.25.214.6
192.28.2.11
192.31.106.1
192.33.12.69
192.68.228.2
192.76.134.33
192.9.51.3
194.152.172.114
194.162.145.35
194.17.41.1
194.18.101.34
194.197.215.2
194.198.101.1
194.208.80.90
194.208.92.67
194.221.140.149
194.222.63.202
194.222.8.242
194.231.246.180
194.231.50.144
194.236.213.123
194.236.215.94
194.242.196.203
194.252.1.200
194.51.167.7
194.64.39.28
194.65.230.81
194.65.231.252
194.7.44.225
194.7.44.226
194.72.42.56
194.94.24.15
194.94.27.35
194.94.72.124
194.94.72.126
194.94.79.146
194.95.210.55
194.97.8.164
195.114.68.138
195.14.233.244
195.143.133.82
195.143.28.45
195.144.66.11
195.162.211.19
195.162.214.217
195.166.139.131
195.166.17.18
195.17.73.6
195.179.182.249
195.179.84.182
195.186.49.140
195.188.192.3
195.190.20.5
195.190.20.8
195.193.71.12
195.2.169.34
199.179.168.21
199.217.179.162
199.222.102.24
199.232.225.18
199.232.56.155
199.240.131.6
199.34.138.5
199.44.121.100
199.45.180.168
199.72.63.2
199.77.241.57
199.80.64.7
1Cust246.tnt9.mobile.al.da.uu.net
1Cust254.tnt2.new-port-richey.fl.da.uu.net
200.246.133.232
200.30.36.4
202.175.36.13
202.239.129.98
203.101.8.186
203.141.89.167
204.101.128.170
204.116.105.201
204.116.105.203
204.120.86.79
204.123.9.76
204.133.76.235
204.143.88.170
204.146.167.237
204.157.28.119
204.171.56.12
204.186.132.220
204.200.26.249
204.201.36.60
204.209.13.16
204.209.13.50
204.233.149.15
204.233.33.63
204.244.79.129
204.247.248.254
204.254.20.134
204.254.26.24
204.26.82.5
204.50.58.21
204.50.73.2
204.57.230.98
204.71.94.223
204.73.77.78
204.92.192.254
204.92.92.4
206.235.208.2
206.239.230.70
206.243.225.122
206.246.132.18
206.249.10.9
206.25.87.88
206.250.128.222
206.251.162.36
206.251.228.219
206.29.141.237
206.32.221.66
206.40.108.228
206.48.122.153
206.58.2.63
206.58.25.245
206.6.238.10
206.66.13.105
206.66.99.144
206.68.204.37
206.86.154.23
206.97.151.44
206.97.175.184
206.97.65.17
206.97.88.159
207.108.173.122
207.110.37.52
207.111.212.178
207.126.105.147
207.127.69.20
207.134.168.101
207.135.116.245
207.135.131.153
207.136.14.73
207.138.231.95
207.138.232.149
207.139.178.34
207.140.74.130
207.15.170.31
207.153.9.81
207.155.143.117
207.155.96.37
207.159.105.131
207.159.93.20
207.16.153.157
207.16.5.140
207.161.224.43
207.161.225.114
207.168.73.180
207.171.209.66
208.15.173.3
208.150.70.131
208.151.7.175
208.152.101.253
208.152.187.140
208.152.187.163
208.152.24.17
208.157.22.219
208.16.29.139
208.16.9.92
208.161.201.178
208.165.34.242
208.166.162.61
208.17.58.196
208.19.193.169
208.201.134.2
208.204.227.13
208.205.182.1
208.206.247.152
208.207.65.236
208.207.65.6
208.207.65.7
208.21.27.6
208.210.111.70
208.210.85.198
208.219.4.235
208.219.70.3
208.220.46.111
208.221.102.251
208.228.132.188
208.229.121.42
208.229.229.167
208.241.97.130
208.242.126.233
208.242.162.61
208.243.144.10
208.244.148.253
208.246.233.5
208.249.36.2
208.251.243.254
208.253.11.185
208.254.169.221
208.26.231.61
208.3.135.29
208.32.204.3
208.32.204.5
208.44.102.21
208.8.63.7
209-122-217-50.s50.tnt1.atn.pa.dialup.rcn.com
209.182.66.6
209.185.85.59
209.186.43.132
209.192.217.21
209.195.11.176
209.197.144.15
209.197.144.33
209.198.142.194
209.213.94.232
209.214.88.43
209.214.98.118
209.215.153.34
209.218.241.162
209.218.67.132
209.218.86.11
209.219.204.2
209.220.27.250
209.224.199.240
209.226.46.92
209.226.82.199
209.232.222.1
209.239.142.234
209.241.234.5
209.242.84.12
209.242.9.3
209.245.5.148
209.250.40.237
209.250.78.231
209.251.79.107
209.30.101.230
209.31.36.209
209.36.104.6
209.36.105.132
209.45.132.3
209.49.1.57
209.49.185.208
209.5.245.146
209.5.75.40
209.50.4.73
209.54.54.166
209.57.142.27
209.57.145.206
209.57.224.15
209.57.91.134
209.58.32.49
209.58.5.165
209.58.5.166
209.6.0.151
209.63.10.104
212.32.172.115
212.43.207.16
212.49.139.18
212.53.197.174
212.63.145.237
212.7.167.253
212.7.167.6
212.72.80.74
212.72.85.148
212.76.145.211
212.81.150.228
212.81.159.190
212.81.171.145
212.81.172.169
212.83.79.166
212.94.193.116
212.97.194.55
215.morristown-06-07rs.nj.dial-access.att.net
216-32-34-252.irv0.flashcom.net
216-53-137ppp144.mpinet.net
216.1.114.68
216.101.194.195
216.103.105.213
216.118.25.150
216.13.50.10
216.132.201.1
216.132.81.82
216.14.11.106
216.155.28.194
216.168.238.199
216.180.14.7
216.180.30.62
216.192.59.132
216.206.203.245
216.207.212.160
216.208.135.237
216.211.97.40
216.221.32.68
216.26.5.45
216.27.11.84
216.3.68.2
216.32.34.252
216.34.100.231
216.41.30.77
216.53.137.144
216.61.88.225
216.70.158.187
216.78.144.14
216.78.184.96
24.64.185.179.on.wave.home.com
24.64.28.172
24.66.41.94
24.66.41.94.mb.wave.home.com
24.66.45.250
24.7.131.186
24.8.188.136
24.92.239.104
24.93.12.164
24.93.22.133
24.93.242.192
24.95.24.108
32.100.141.128
33-29.H.dial.o-tel-o.net
35.8.4.89
36.51.0.54
38.151.156.129
38.182.104.66
38.183.48.74
38.202.145.254
38.222.98.240
38.246.96.2
38.28.97.248
39-116.egginc.com
4.17.192.55
4048b06.specent.com
45.frankfurt.dialup.cybernet-ag.de
48-216.B.dial.o-tel-o.net
49.columbus-05-10rs.oh.dial-access.att.net
53.122.2.31
62.0.150.20
62.104.64.66
62.108.24.27
62.136.28.22
62.144.250.67
62.156.16.68
62.157.19.250
62.157.202.242
62.157.21.6
62.157.68.21
62.158.120.205
62.158.126.94
62.158.18.117
62.158.20.99
62.158.85.222
62.172.107.140
62.52.129.145
62.52.130.143
62.52.138.48
atmax-4-9.enter.net
av209x177x21x43.aero-vision.com
avalon.dpc.com
b61580.STUDENT.CWRU.Edu
baycity-0164.wcnet.net
bc77-253.jacksonville.net
beavis.eng.techline.com
begate.boeing.com
bftir.lanl.gov
blacker-119.caltech.edu
blah
blndi4-145-253-076-021.arcor-ip.net
bo.oca.udayton.edu
boeing.infocom.com
br-d-215.agrinet.ch
brain-dead.pa.uky.edu
brenne.swm.uni-mannheim.de
burns.cmf.nrl.navy.mil
bw6.bivwood.com
c221812-a.olmpi1.wa.home.com
c71114-a.potlnd1.or.home.com
caard1-p29.telepac.pt
cable-195-162-214-217.customer.chello.be
cacta95.phil.unc.edu
catv6100.extern.kun.nl
cc493382-b.whmh1.md.home.com
chef.ecs.soton.ac.uk
chevrons.demon.co.uk
ci594222-a.ruthfd1.tn.home.com
client-151-199-124-10.bellatlantic.net
cm116-2.evhr.net
cobol.mtsu.edu
coke.imsa.edu
coredump.novagate.com
corp.stamps.com
cow.imv.de
cr342197-a.hnsn1.on.wave.home.com
creature.Crew-KG.NET
crescent.bitwrench.com
cronus.oanet.com
cx275569-a.msnv1.occa.home.com
cx337747-b.wwck1.ri.home.com
cx38442-a.santab1.ca.home.com
cx87325-a.nwptn1.va.home.com
d142-h036.rh.rit.edu
d185d0ca4.rochester.rr.com
d185d1685.rochester.rr.com
d8-31.dyn.telerama.com
dante.gsfc.nasa.gov
firewall.weltman.com
foxboro-bh.foxboro.com
fw-02.microage.com
fw240.smed.net
g76.jlab.org
gate.mcc.net
gatekeeper.tripos.com
gatekeeper.westar.com
gateway.dievision.de
geekport.be.com
geminga.Berkeley.EDU
gemini.clide.howard.edu
get
gleung.llnl.gov
global.mactemps.com
global.sl.se
glympton.airtime.co.uk
gow068.graddosten.ac.se
gps-fddi.leeds.ac.uk
greenbay.shoreland.com
gtng-m130-143.pool.mediaways.net
gw-31.wh.uni-stuttgart.de
gw.varesearch.com
h135-3-84-10.outland.lucent.com
ha1.ntr.net
hadrian.guardian.co.uk
handi4-145-253-094-137.arcor-ip.net
harold.sierraweb.com
hawk-a-047.resnet.purdue.edu
hdcnet.com
helium.dcs.kcl.ac.uk
hephaestos.cs.ucdavis.edu
hercules.regi.ubc.ca
heretic.Sunquest.COM
hitchhiker.ltnb.lu
hlt8-m156-51.pool.cww.de
hmbdi3-145-253-071-163.arcor-ip.net
host-15.edinc.org
host-209-214-88-43.atl.bellsouth.net
host-209-214-98-118.sav.bellsouth.net
host-212.121.137.56.de.colt.net
host-212.121.137.60.de.colt.net
host-62.96.13.148.inetservice.de
host.159-142-112-5.gsa.gov
host113-sub66.symantec.com
host178.wbg.logicon.com
i48-13-45.pdx.du.teleport.com
indigo3.igpm.RWTH-Aachen.DE
ip23.boanxr11.ras.tele.dk
modemcable011.85-200-24.mtl.mc.videotron.net
modemcable148.13-200-24.que.mc.videotron.net
moe.apci.com
monsoon.ssec.wisc.edu
ms02-377.tor.istar.ca
mueata-e1-wan029.citykom.de
n016.nijmegen.telekabel.euronet.nl
n1-h254.isgtec.com
n20057.telekabel.chello.nl
n23-c209-c149-c50.bs.xlate.ufl.edu
nas1-03.dialup.neca.com
nat3.densonreed.com
nd026094.global.medtronic.COM
netblk-10-152.netapp.com
netcom14.netcom.com
newport32.aiconnect.com
node181b.a2000.nl
obsession.logics.de
onh1-168.twcny.rr.com
orion.linuxbox.com
oub.daytontbrown.com
outbound.seic.com
p249.n03.fra.access.is-europe.net
p3E9C1044.dip.t-dialin.net
p3E9D13FA.dip0.t-ipconnect.de
p3E9D1506.dip.t-dialin.net
p3E9E1275.dip.t-dialin.net
p3E9E1463.dip.t-dialin.net
p3E9E78CD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de
p3E9E7E5E.dip.t-dialin.net
p798.as1.adl.dublin.tinet.ie
pC19F3868.dip.t-dialin.net
pC19F7E1C.dip.t-dialin.net
pC19F7FAD.dip.t-dialin.net
pa1.cantor.com
packetway.MPI-SoftTech.Com
pages.sssnet.com
paix-alg-gw9-51.ncal.verio.com
panache.ernie.org
panther.uwo.ca
paris.ncsl.nist.gov
pc15.cybersurf.net
pc33.cybersurf.net
pc70.escient.com
pc83010.stofanet.dk
pcBaby.ACNS.Carleton.edu
pcbellet.imag.fr
pdx-0104.dip.internetcds.com
pec-11-73.tnt1.hh2.uunet.de
rocco.ngdc.noaa.gov
rodan.apollotrust.com
router.ddd.de
rtowster.state.lib.la.us
rz111.rz.hs-bremen.de
rzpc23.uni-trier.de
s152.paris-90.cybercable.fr
s4m097.dialup.RWTH-Aachen.DE
s5n81.hfx.andara.com
sass.thecomplex.com
saturn.bt.com
scuttlebutt.linuxcrypt.com
sdn-ar-002florlaP077.dialsprint.net
sdn-ar-002florlaP325.dialsprint.net
server.penfieldsmith.com
servo.msln.net
seven.cvconline.com
sg20.york.ac.uk
shell-sprint.global2000.net
shell.one.net
shell1.ncal.verio.com
shl-host1.shl.ca
siebert.kawo2.RWTH-Aachen.DE
skovarik.engl.iastate.edu
slip166-72-196-67.fl.us.ibm.net
socks1.clearlake.ibm.com
spjork.handeye.com
spmhc.org
staff.feldberg.brandeis.edu
station-132.vm.com
staudir7.cc.univie.ac.at
stgdi3-145-253-074-131.arcor-ip.net
surf0004.sybase.com
surf15-158.hhe.adelphia.net
swift.ukc.ac.uk
swizzle.imergy.com
swtc19.cc.swt.edu
system3.chordant.com
t3o35p3.telia.com
tarsis.ncsa.uiuc.edu
tcp-relay-4.adobe.com
therest.wholefoods.com
thunderclap.g-web.net
ti12a61-0066.dialup.online.no
tigger.splwg.com
times.cmgi.com
tlo40f9.swm.uni-mannheim.de
tnt1-182.toolcity.net
tnt2-28-119.iserv.net
tob0364e.is.rpslmc.edu
tpk-ppp-b63-KMC.networksplus.net
triton.uqtr.uquebec.ca
trustnoone.erols.com
ts03-116.dublin.indigo.ie
twoface.sep.com
tycho.osc.edu
u105-132.rose.net
ultra13.cs.umr.edu
unique.outlook.net
unknown
unknown-225-148.connectix.com
unknown-41-19.wrs.com
unknown.nbrhood.udayton.edu
unspacy.demon.co.uk
user.neteng.com
user2.infinet.com
users.newsregister.com
usi-phl-2.usinteractive.com
usr410-edi.cableinet.co.uk
vernetzt.at
walapai.telematik.informatik.uni-karlsruhe.de
wc153.ccsn.nevada.edu
we-24-130-86-171.we.mediaone.net
website.naples-online.com
wiley240h066.roadrunner.nf.net
wndnsvr02-26.mnsi.net
wnpgas10-p73.mts.net
wo-d-152.agrinet.ch
wo-d-171.agrinet.ch
wo-d-209.agrinet.ch
world-f.std.com
wrench.toolcity.net
www.linux.de
x149.mcis.de
xania.demon.co.uk
xlsa.kwantlen.bc.ca
xmission.xmission.com
zappa.neis.net
zelgadis.mich.com
zen.webmedia.co.nz
ziggy.bitstream.net
zoom11-106.telepath.com
Moderated Down? (Score:1)
-ElJefe
Re:Somehow... (Score:2)
1'M JU5T G0NN4 K33P TRY1N6 2 6U355 R00T PA55W0RD.
S0 FAR, 1 KN0W IT'5 N0T BLANK, "ROOT" OR "SECRET" BUT 1'LL K33P TRY1NG! 1 W1LL 3V3NTUALLY GU3SS IT!!!!!!111111 1 W1LL TH3N HAV3 A PPC B0X ALL T0 MYS3LF!!!!1
:WQ
------ ------ ------
ALL HA1L B1FF, TH3 M05T 31337 D00D!!!!!1
------ ------ ------
ALL HA1L B1FF, TH3 M05T 31337 D00D!!!!!1
Re:Interesting responses so far. (Score:1)
I ask again--what kind of flame would they have drawn if they had set up a "quick and dirty" page?
what kind of mac is it? (Score:1)
Open the sendmail PORT!!!
PR (Score:1)
Well, if we're going to play it like that, i think linuxppc has already won-- after all, this long after the w2k challenge was posted on
So this would seem to imply that LinuxPPC is, if not more security-friendly than w2k, at least a _lot_ more reliable. Which if you ask me is more important than "security", since total security will never really happen.
Now if only it supported HFS+.. but i guess that really isn't a huge problem if you look at it in perspective. -_-
-mcc-baka
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS THEFT
portscan of crack.linuxppc.org (Score:1)
Scanning host 169.207.154.108 - TCP ports 1 through 1024
23 (telnet) is running.
80 (www) is running.
111 (sunrpc) is running.
Re:This could turn into "King of the Hill" (Score:2)
Anyhoo, tg0d (www.tg0d.org) is going to be hosting something like this of it's own. We aren't gonna keep a log of people's IP's or anything like that. And if you root a box, it's your as long as you can defend it for. Our games aren't up yet, but we have 5 boxes that are schulded to go up soon. So bookmark www.tg0d.org and come back later for more info.
P.S. Yeah, our page sucks.. it's not complete yet, we've been busy.
schematic
The more you learn, the more you realize how little you know.
Knowledge of the penetration (Score:1)
Re:How to telnet? (Score:1)
Not knowing about telnet implies a general vacuum in the unix/ip-clue area.
I know I'd use... (Score:1)
An iBook would be even better, but I don't think anyone outside of Apple has one yet.
You realize... (Score:1)
...Macintosh.
J.
Re:NT is the most secure OS (Score:1)
>or similar.
>Hard to beat the name "IntelliCrash," though
ummm, how about "Temporarily Restrict Availabilty to Server Hardware"???
That'd make Microsoft IntelliTrash(tm)
heh heh
big
Re:uh.... real nice ...not anymore (Score:1)
SlashdoDoS (Score:1)
Odd cgi-bin behaviour (Score:1)
Connected to crack.linuxppc.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET
Host: crack.linuxppc.org
Connection closed by foreign host.
Whats the deal there? no perm-denied..no no-such-page. Is this definitely a stock install?
Re:Interesting responses so far. (Score:1)
This may seem like a minor point, but it actually points to a chief complaint towards MS; "Our way or no way". The promise of Java is cross-platform compatability; MS' implementation breaks this. A good web site can be handles by a multitude of browsers and platforms - even MS' own corporate site runs fine with Netscape. Yet, here it breaks. Did MS do this on purpose? Their past history certainly implies this is possible.
Actually, I would point out that the web page makes perfect sense. The idea of this "counter-challenge" is NOT glitzy publicity. The machine is there to be attacked - not to hand out online brochures. The marginal page is functional... even humorous ("If you get in, please submit a better webpage than thisNow, here you've made a good point. And apparently, others have made it too since the page has removed the "log". I agree. Posting these IPs is trouble and MS would definately get flamed hard for it.
In the final analysis, you have to ask yourself what are the motivations here? The belief is that MS is pulling a shallow publicity stunt (and none too origional at that). No matter what the outcome, MS will turn it into brochure fodder for PHB's. In the meantime, issues such as MS' responce times to discovered security holes are not dealt with.
The LinuxPPC guys are responding to MS' publicity stunt with a copycat stunt. They've done it in good humor. And they've done this in a way that appeals to other tech-minded people. If anything, its less dubious bait-and-switch and more lampooning. Will they get glitzy brochure fodder out of it? I don't know. Ask their marketing department.
Re:In redmond... (Score:1)
Somehow, I suspect a lot happens in Redmond that doesn't get cleared with "ole Billy-Boy". I highly doubt he's in every marketing meeting for every little stunt they come up with. Gates is probably involved in much higher-level stuff than this (although I personally have the feeling he's more of a company mascot than fearless leader at this point - think Ronald McDonald). Microsoft is way too big for one person to keep track of everything that's going on...
Re:This could turn into "King of the Hill" (Score:1)
Re:Is the guestbook a hole? (Score:1)
Re:someone, (Score:1)
Reading Music (Score:1)
Re:Interesting responses so far. (Score:1)
One way to sort of "excuse" the www.windows2000test.com guys is that they probably were trying to remain within the Microsoft web site design specifications. Perhaps they didn't feel like making the non-IE4/5 version of the page or ran out of time? When viewed from the perspective of it being part of a larger site with a required "look and feel", rather than an independant page, it's somewhat easy to justify their mistake.
That's definitely something I would agree with. I'm under the belief that it was a bad move on their part--if anything it just made them look really bad.
True, but it still seems to me that LinuxPPC is a company that is not adverse to publicity (it'd be hard to survive without it). To say that they made the site in the manner that they did just because it appeals to other like-minded individuals seems to go against the fact that in the grand scheme of things, they are trying to make money...aren't they? I profess to not knowing much about LinuxPPC, so correct me if I'm wrong and that they are a purely non-profit-oriented Linux distributor.
So, in that sense, I still wonder if professionalism is a negligible requirement of Linux users in the companies that they allow to represent themselves. Any thoughts on that, anyone? Or is this reply too deep for most people to notice? :)
Lets ping this thing to its knees!! (Score:1)
and just leave it going.
Security of default install (Score:1)
I'd like Red Hat to try to make their next release be secure by default - no Internet services turned on - and still have X working properly (maybe using Unix domain sockets?).
windows2000test dead again.... (Score:1)
they went for this. With IPv4 nothing is stable, if you fuck with it long and hard enough...
They actually.. (Score:1)
they claimed when the site was up.
But I think it is a T3e running -g version of NT
in emulation mode...
Or, well, I do not think.. Nevermind
Re:uh.... real nice (Score:1)
SirSlud
someone, (Score:1)
A very good idea to route back the efforts, indeed (Score:3)
No better way to detract from the interest that
Microsoft may have generated than to divert back the efforts of the linux community to a more
worthy cause - improving the security of our own systems.
Let's eat our own (dog)food.
Arieh
This could turn into "King of the Hill" (Score:3)
But what could really prove interesting is if someone tried to break in and steal from the stealer...knocking off the old King and resulting in a King of the Hill, and so on...
All the while, people would be stress-testing the system. And people will have an ego-incentive to discover security holes because, if they find a way in, they get to be "King of the Mountain" until someone else finds a new way to crack the box.
Oh what a game this could become!!!
--Lenny
Re:At least it's there... (Score:1)
Wouldn't that be interesting? I away to entirely shut out half of the community from your website.
Kintanon
Re:Where do you want to go tomorrow? (Score:1)
Re:You break it, you keep it. (Score:1)
Stan "Myconid" Brinkerhoff
Re:You break it, you keep it. (Score:1)
Re:Interesting responses so far. (Score:1)
Re:This could turn into King (Score:1)
What happened? Did she turn you down on a date or something?
Phil Fraering "Humans. Go Fig." - Rita
Re:NT is the most secure OS (Score:1)
"The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
-jafac's law
Re:You break it, you keep it. (Score:1)
A few months ago, when I was still in college (about a month from graduating), someone decided they needed my bike more than I did, and so they stole it. I was somewhat pissed (since I, of course, ended up having to walk home as a result), and so I emailed the campus police, only as a formality. I figured I'd just walk for the rest of the month, as it wouldn't have been cost-effective to buy a new bike so close to graduation. Ennyhoo, next day, I got an email back from the campus police stating that they'd already found my bike. Apparently it wasn't good enough for the thief, and so they left it on the lawn in front of the English building. The English building of all the places! I was incredibly insulted. But I got my bike back, and so all was well.
I think I had a point to all that, but it must have broken off somewhere...
---
"'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.
Re:This could turn into "King of the Hill" (Score:2)
--
"Tiger Team Australia" (Score:1)
I'm actually mildly concerned that people may even contemplate for more than a nanosecond giving you money.
Your web page doesn't even say who you -are-.. That's enough to turn anyone with a clue off.
Comics:
Sluggy.com [sluggy.com] - It rocks my nads.
Totally Off Topic (Score:1)
Nmap appears to be an interesting tool to use. This is good. I flipped over to the URL given in the pasted text, only to find a statement like this: "Windows was intentionally excluded from the table because I don't currently have any intention of porting to NT/95. I suggest an upgrade to one of the many supported operating systems or don't use nmap. Note that Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD are all free for download and run on pretty much any PC (as well as other platforms) so there are few good reasons not to just install one (or all) of them."
My question is this: Will all *nix users PLEASE GET OFF THEIR HIGH HORSE?! Yes, damn it, there are a few technically literate people who use Windows for whatever reason. Mine happens to be the fact that I am a technical support person for my company (we are all of 8 people, serving 350 clients) and my home machine must run Windows so that I can _do_my_job_. It doesn't bother me that people don't write useful tools for Windows anymore. If I want one, I'll crank up MSVC++ and write it myself, but it really chaps my ass to see the utter arrogance that passes off for normal in the *nix community. Yes, I like Linux just as much as many of you do. I have an account on a Linux box so that I can play with this all-mighty OS. And, the day I can actually scrape together enough money to put up a box that will actually DO something (X on a 486 is mind-bendingly slow), I will.
Please, for goodness' sake, lay off the holier-than-thou attitude. This should be in the Advocacy-HOWTO somewhere. It only makes the rest of the world believe you are half-crazed zealots who care nothing about the 85% of us who use a certain OS made by a certain company out of Washington state (US for the international folks), either by choice or by force.
There. That's my rant. Please moderate this down to -1 so that no one has to see my pitiful opinion.
Oh, and by the way, good luck to those attempting to crack this box. I'm still plugging away at it myself, but with such a crippled OS at my disposal, I doubt I'll make it.
Anonymous by Choice, not by Volume.
Re:uh.... real nice (Score:2)
Pray don't confuse firewalls with security. Machines behind a firewall are only as secure (from the big bad net, assuming they're connected to it, as most firewalls are) as the TCP/IP stacks and services that answer on ports accessible through the firewall and/or its sockets. Most firewalls that I've had experience with have closed off all ports except the ones that people needed to use from the outside -- and half the time that included stuff like pop[23], imap, smtp, etc., and on which the servers answering those ports tended to be way behind on their updates because people had this sense of security lent by the firewall.
Also, firewalls don't work from people who can emit packets from inside your firewall -- and that's surprisingly easy to do, either through coercion of the firewall box's network stack, compromise of a machine behind the firewall through some open port, or simply being behind the firewall in the first place (as in many corporate environments). If a firewall is configured to permit connections to ports 22 (ssh) and 443 (SSL http), there's no particular reason why an attacker can't arrange for a root shell to answer on one of those ports, and with most network installations no one would be the wiser.
Re: (Score:1)
No Mistake! (Score:1)
'nuff said
Re:Lets ping this thing to its knees!! (Score:1)
buffer overflows and script kiddies (Score:2)
When I set up my first Alpha box, I knew nothing about security, but the script kiddies kept failing on account of their buffer overflows just crashing and core-dumping. It bought me some time to get a clue, at least.
--
I noticed
slashdot DoS (Score:2)
Re:MS site is down (Score:3)
8/3/99 Events
3:22pm - Network connections down due to router failure, possibly related to thunderstorms and power failures in the area
2:59pm - Network connections intermittently up
12:40pm - Network connections down due to router failure
11:02am - Services restarted
10:47am - Some services failed after reboot
10:45am - Reboot because the System log was full
10:30am - Network connections down due to router failure