Re[2]: [Full-Disclosure] KDE was hacked

• Previous message: xtrecate_at_spymac.com: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] Psexec on *NIX"
• In reply to: Seth Alan Woolley: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] KDE was hacked"
• Next in thread: Richard Johnson: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] KDE was hacked"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

To: Seth Alan Woolley <seth@tautology.org>
Date: Sat, 8 May 2004 15:22:33 +0400

Dear Seth Alan Woolley,

--Saturday, May 8, 2004, 2:14:49 AM, you wrote to full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com:

SAW> Anybody using a CVS build of KDE is taking an inherent risk for such
SAW> things as this. Anybody using an official release would of course have
SAW> a plethora of people reviewing each commit. It only took them 1.5 hours
SAW> according to the Russian article to spot the code comments. I'd say the
SAW> KDE team passed with flying colors.

It's always possible to insert "backdoor" into code in a way it will
probably never be caught during audit, if code is rather large and is
not perfectly styled. It may be a call to wrong function in a case of
some race conditions or another "unexpected" situation - things almost
impossible to catch for a person who didn't wrote this code from
beginning. It's true for both open source and commercial software, but
commercial developers at least have signed contracts. Any exploitable
bug found in software could actually be a backdoor. It's a question of
trust.

-- 
~/ZARAZA
ÝÍÈÀÊàì - ïî ìîðäå!  (Ëåì)
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

• Previous message: xtrecate_at_spymac.com: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] Psexec on *NIX"
• In reply to: Seth Alan Woolley: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] KDE was hacked"
• Next in thread: Richard Johnson: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] KDE was hacked"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]