Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Hijacking a Macbook in 60 Seconds or Less

  • Subject: Re: Hijacking a Macbook in 60 Seconds or Less
  • From: JEDIDIAH <jedi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 15:58:29 -0500
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: Superfeed.net
  • References: <1154672009.513707.79090@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <2531889.OEGiB8sodE@schestowitz.com> <87mzakc3ki.fsf@mail.com>
  • User-agent: slrn/0.9.8.1pl1 (Debian)
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:1137427
On 2006-08-04, Hadron Quark <hadron@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> __/ [ nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] on Friday 04 August 2006 07:13 \__
[deletia]
>>>
>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/08/hijacking_a_macbook_in_60_seco_1.html
>>
>> I think that some subsequent articles argued the vulnerability could
>> potentially expose all platforms. This also reminds me of:
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/02/intel_wireless_vulns/
>
> And should go a long way to stop people thinking that all *IX
> deriviatives are somehow attack proof.

	A system is vulnerable in proportion to the degree to which 
it goes out of it's way to expose itself. To anyone with a shred of
pessimism, nevermind paranoia, wireless anything is simply the 
equivalent of putting a kick-me sign on your back.

	This is not at all interesting.

-- 
	Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is!      |||
								   / | \

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index