Re: Cracking admin password on Win 2000; then putting it back?

From: Celtic Leroy (I_am__celtic_leroy__san_verbage_at_myhost.com)
Date: 10/09/04 

Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 03:27:02 GMT

unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh) wrote:

>Celtic Leroy <I_am__celtic_leroy__san_verbage@myhost.com> writes:
>
>]Jim Watt <jimwatt@aol.no_way> wrote:
>
>]>On 6 Oct 2004 16:47:20 GMT, unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh)
>]>wrote:
>]>
>]>>]But when you are asked - tell me how to crack the password so that no-
>]>>]one knows I've done it, what's the difference.
>]>>
>]>>He seems to be of the opinion that technical questions and ethical questions are
>]>>distinct categories. As long as things are phrased technically, ethical
>]>>(or legal) considerations are irrelevant.
>]>
>]>Actually there is a big difference, Most of the tools we might use
>]>to circumvent a password onm a system allow one to replace the
>]>existing one with a new on, rather than discover what the old one
>]>was. The difference is between picking a lock and making a
>]>duplicate key.
>
>]No, there is NO difference in the example you site...in both cases the
>]person gains access without the owners knowledge. The example of
>]replacing the existing one with a new one would be like re-keying the
>]lock, not duplicating it...a new key would be needed and the owner
>]would know that his key doesn't work anymore. BIG difference.
>
>You needed to read his post more carefully. He was not advocating the
>replacement on someone else's system. He was saying that the technical
>question asked was not answered by most of the tools available because the
>tools were designed for a different situation-- replacing lost passwords.
>And those tools were mainly developed for use on systems the person HAS
>rights to-- eg adminstrators trying to rescue user's machines or recover
>machines whose password had long been forgotten.
>
>

Oh yea, I see that now. It gets confusing sometimes to keep strait
the different paths a thread can follow. :/

Loading