Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: It's not that simple...
From: Micheal Espinola Jr (michealespinola_at_gmail.com)
Date: 08/17/05
- Previous message: Miseo Sub Level: "[Full-disclosure] Sub_level attaq!"
- In reply to: Kurt Seifried: "Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: It's not that simple..."
- Next in thread: Jason Coombs: "Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: It's not that simple..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 17:54:50 -0400 To: full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk
Surely. Disabling Null Sessions is recommended security practice. I
have been doing it for at least 10 years now.
I think I first wrote about it in "The Hardening of Windows NT", which
IIRC, was in 1995.
On 8/17/05, Kurt Seifried <listuser@seifried.org> wrote:
> Actually it really is that simple. Disabling Null sessions is entirely
> possible, quite easy, and doesn't break a lot (at least in my previous
> testing years ago it didn't break anything noticeable).
[snip]
> -Kurt Seifried
> http://seifried.org/freescan2/
> https://lists.seifried.org/mailman/listinfo/security
-- ME2 <http://www.santeriasys.net/> _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
- Previous message: Miseo Sub Level: "[Full-disclosure] Sub_level attaq!"
- In reply to: Kurt Seifried: "Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: It's not that simple..."
- Next in thread: Jason Coombs: "Re: [Full-disclosure] Re: It's not that simple..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
