Re: Windows 95 Network Security

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Peter da Silva: "Re: Re[2]: FLAME"
• Previous message: Joce: "Re: Re[2]: FLAME"
• In reply to: Alexander Fok: "Re: Windows 95 Network Security"
• Next in thread: Allwyn Crichlow: "Re: Windows 95 Network Security"

Alexander Fok wrote this...

> Can anyone detail the "Unix Samba" hole?
> Thank you in advance.

it isnt the "Unix Samba" hole, its a Windows 95 SMB implementation
bug. lets put blame where blame is due...

                        Matt
-- 
#!/bin/sh
echo '16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D3F204445524F42snlbxq'|dc;exit
  Matthew Keenan   Data Network Admin   Information Technology Division
        University of Technology     Sydney Australia

It's nice to be in a position where people apologize because they
assume there's humor in your work, based on past experience,
but they're not sure where it is. -- Rob Pike

• Next message: Peter da Silva: "Re: Re[2]: FLAME"
• Previous message: Joce: "Re: Re[2]: FLAME"
• In reply to: Alexander Fok: "Re: Windows 95 Network Security"
• Next in thread: Allwyn Crichlow: "Re: Windows 95 Network Security"