home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- .oO Phrack 50 Oo.
-
- Volume Seven, Issue Fifty
-
- 3 of 16
-
-
- // // /\ // ====
- // // //\\ // ====
- ==== // // \\/ ====
-
- /\ // // \\ // /=== ====
- //\\ // // // // \=\ ====
- // \\/ \\ // // ===/ ====
-
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- ----<>----
-
-
- =--=--=--=--=--=--=--=
- Portable BBS Hacking
- by: Khelbin
- =--=--=--=--=--=--=--=
-
-
- This hack basically has little to do with the BBS software itself but
- with the archiver which is being used. I've used this technique on a
- mock Renegade setup and with pkzip/pkunzip as the archiver. I'm sure
- that this same type of technique will be successful on many other BBS
- platforms and with other archivers as well. While explaining this, I will
- use Renegade and pkzip/pkunzip as my example.
-
- A Renegade setup is most likely vulnerable if it will pkunzip any user
- supplied zipfile. This is because Renegade's default command to unzip files
- is "pkunzip -do <filename>". The -d flag unzips the file retaining any
- directories which were included into the zip file and the -o flag will
- automatically overwrite any file.
-
- Suppose the remote system is also setup in a normal Renegade fashion.
- Let's use this file tree as an example:
-
- C:\RENEGADE\
- C:\RENEGADE\TEMP\
- C:\RENEGADE\DATA\
-
- The other subdirectories are unimportant for our discussion. Suppose
- that C:\TEMP is where our uploaded file will go for it to be unzipped and
- then scanned for viruses. C:\RENEGADE\DATA\ is where the USERS.DAT file
- is stored, containing all the users login information.
-
- Wouldn't it be nice if we could put our own USERS.DAT in there instead?
- To do this, you must first generate a USERS.DAT file. This is easy enough.
- Just download a copy of Renegade which is the same version as the target
- machine and then use the user editor to make a "SYSOP" account with the
- password "SYSOP" (this should be the default anyway on the USERS.DAT file).
-
- Here's how we prepare the zipfile on our own machine:
-
- C:\>md tmp
- C:\>md c:\tmp\ddsdata
- C:\>copy c:\renegade\data\users.dat c:\tmp\ddsdata
- C:\>cd tmp
- C:\TMP>pkzip -pr evil.zip
-
- Now we get out our trusty hex editor and edit evil.zip. Change every
- occurrence of "ddsdata" in evil.zip to read "../data" and make sure that the
- slash is a forward-slash and not a back-slash. Now when you upload
- evil.zip to this particular BBS, it will expand to "../data/users.dat"
- and your USERS.DAT file will overwrite their USERS.DAT file since the -od
- flag is default on Renegade.
-
- Now you can login as SYSOP with a password SYSOP and do as you please.
- You could also overwrite virtually any file on a BBS like this and believe
- me, many do have this vulnerability or something very close to it. You are
- only limited in how much you can traverse up and down directories by DOS's
- maximum file length of 12 (8 plus "." plus 3 = 12). I quickly tried
- inserting a few blocks into the zipfile in order to produce a limitless
- amount of traversing which but it seemed to corrupt the file for some
- reason.
-
- Removing the -o flag is not a fix for this bug. Without the -o flag,
- you can "hang" the system in a denial of service attack. By again hex
- editing the names of the files within your evil.zip, you can make it have
- two files with the same name. When it tries to unzip the second file, it
- will prompt locally whether to overwrite the file or not and "hang" the
- board. Instead, the -d flag is what should be removed.
-
- This is just an example as I'm sure many other BBS systems do this same
- type of uncompressing. I'd also bet that arj, lha, and several others, can
- also be hex edited and yield similar results. Either way, it's either take
- out the "restore/create directories within archive" option or pay the price.
-
-
- ----<>----
-
-
- German Hacker "Luzifer" convicted by SevenUp / sec@sec.de
- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
- SYNOPSIS
- ========
- On February 5th, 1997, Wilfried Hafner aka "Luzifer" was sentenced to
- three years incarceration - no parole, no probation. I've got the story
- for you right from the courtroom in Munich, Germany. This is one of the
- first ever cases in which a hacker in Germany actually gets convicted, so
- it's particularly interesting. (Although the court and I use the term
- "hacking", this is actually a case of unethical electronic fraud.)
-
-
- LUZIFER
- =======
- Wilfried Hafner (Luzifer) was born on April 6, 1972, in Breschau Italy.
- According to his own circulum vitae, which he quoted in court himself,
- he's been a pretty smart guy: He started programming at 8 years,and cracked
- about 600 Commodore programs, at 14, got a modem and then started a BBS.
- In 1990 he was blueboxing to some overseas partylines to communicate with
- others. But he didn't seem to use any other "elite" chat systems like x.25
- or IRC, so most people (including myself) didn't know him that well. In
- 1992 he moved to South Germany to goto school.
-
-
- WHAT HE DID
- ===========
- Luzifer set up some overseas partylines in the Dominican Republic,
- Indonesia, The Philippines, and Israel. Some lines included live chat,
- but most were just sex recordings. Then he used a local company PBX (a
- Siemens Hicom 200 model), from his homeline, which was only "protected"
- by a one digit code, to dialout to his partylines and his girlfriend in
- Chile. He also was blueboxing (which the prosecution calls "C5-hacking")
- from five lines simultaneously, mostly via China. To trick the partyline
- provider and overseas telcos (who are aware of computer-generated calls)
- he wrote a little program that would randomize aspects of the calls
- (different calling intervals and different durations for the calls).
-
- He got arrested the first time on 03/29/95, but was released again after
- 13 days. Unfortunately he restarted the phreaking right away. If he'd
- had stopped then, he would just have gotten 1 year probation. However, he
- was arrested again in January 1996, and has been in prison since.
-
- Here are some numbers (shouts to Harper(tm)'s Index):
- - Number of logged single phone connections: 18393
- - Profit he makes for 1 min. partyline calls: US$ 0.35 - 0.50
- - Total Damage (= lost profit of telco): US$ 1.15 Million
- - Money that Luzifer got from the partylines: US$ 254,000
- - Paragraph in German Law that covers this fraud: 263a StG
- - Duration of all calls, if made sequentially: 140 days
-
-
- THE TRIAL
- =========
- This trial was far less spectacular than OJ's. While 7 days had been
- scheduled, the trial was over after the second day. The first day went
- quite quick: The court didn't have enough judges available (two were present,
- but three required), so it had to be postponed after some minutes.
-
- At the second day, both, the prosecution and Luzifers two lawyers, made
- a deal and plead guilty for three years prison (but no financial punitive).
- In Germany, all sentences over two years cannot be carried out on probation.
- But he has been allowed the use of a notebook computer. Rumor has it that
- he might be get an "open" execution, meaning that he has to sleep in the
- prison at night, but can work or study during the day.
-
- The deal looked like the prosecution dropped all counts (including
- the one abusing the PBX in the first place) but two: one for the blueboxing
- before getting arrested, and one count for blueboxing afterwards. They don't
- treat all 18393 connections as a separate count, but just each start of the
- "auto-call-program".
-
-
- QUOTES
- ======
- Here are some interesting and funny quotes from the trial:
- "Just for fun and technical curiosity" - Defendant
- "Wouldn't one line be enough for technical experience"? - Judge
- "I ordered 21 lines, but just got 5" - Defendant
- "Lots of criminal energy" - Prosecutor
- "He's obsessed and primarily competing with other hackers" - Lawyer
- "A generation of run down computer kids" - Prosecutor
- "He may keep the touchtone dialer, but we cannot return his laser fax,
- because the company's PBX number is stored in its speedial" - Prosecutor
- "Myself and the Telekom have learned a lot" - Prosecutor
- "New cables must be installed, new satelites have to be shot into the air"
- - Prosecutor about the consequences of used up trunks and intl. lines
- "The German Telekom is distributing pornography with big profits" - Lawyer
-
-
- ----<>----
-
-
- Yet another Lin(s)ux bug!
- By: Xarthon
-
- IP_MASQ is a commonly used new method of traffic forwarding which
- may be enabled in newer Linux kernel versions. I have been doing some
- research into this new feature.
-
- IP_MASQ fails to check to make sure that a packet is in the non
- routable range. If you are able to get any packet to its destination, the
- header of that packet is rewritten.
-
- Because of the lack of non-routable ip checking, the same tactics
- that would be used a gateway machine, may also be used on a machine that
- uses ip_masq.
-
- So in conclusion, you are able to spoof as if you are on the
- inside network, from the outside. But hey, what can you expect from
- Linux?
-
-
- ----<>----
-
- 11.22.96
-
- daemon9 and w0zz's adventure into warez-pup land...
-
-
-
- *W|ZaRD* u there?
- -> *W|ZaRD* yes?
- <w0zz> d9
- <d9> hi w0zz
- *W|ZaRD* r u the prez of BREED?
- *** |COBRA| invites you to channel #supreme
- <d9> I am hungry
- -> *W|ZaRD* yup
- *_e|f_* hi there - you got a minute?
- *W|ZaRD* alright.. i got a question for u...
- *** d9 (plugHead@onyx.infonexus.com) has joined channel #supreme
- *** Topic for #supreme: [SpR] Still in discussion phase! [SpR]
- *** #supreme _e|f_ 848703589
- *** Users on #supreme: d9 @{Imagine} @BL|ZZaRD @W|ZaRD @|COBRA| @_e|f_
- <_e|f_> re d9
- *** Mode change "+o d9" on channel #supreme by _e|f_
- <|COBRA|> today is going to be a bad day :(
- *W|ZaRD* would you be interested in merging with like 4-6 other groups to become 1 group.??
- *W|ZaRD* i mean. all the other groups have like 11 sitez and 8-10 suppliers like NGP
- *W|ZaRD* and if we merge we could be up there with Prestige, and Razor
- <_e|f_:#supreme> hello d9
- <d9> *W|ZaRD* i mean. all the other groups have like 11 sitez and 8-10 suppliers like NGP
- -> *W|ZaRD* hmm
- *** Inviting w0zz to channel #supreme
- <_e|f_> we got a discussion going on here for big plans for a lot of us "smaller" groups (smaller as
- compared to razor, prestige etc) :)
- <d9> ah
- *** Mystic12 (NONE@wheat-53.nb.net) has joined channel #supreme
- <_e|f_> this is all still in discussion stages
- <w0zz:#!r00t> hahahaha
- *** Mode change "+o Mystic12" on channel #supreme by W|ZaRD
- <_e|f_:#supreme> but would you be interested in a joint venture between a few of us smaller release groups
- to combine into one large release group - to challenge razor and prestige?
- <d9> w0zz
- <w0zz> you've been sucked into warez kiddie conspiracies
- <d9> join me
- <w0zz:#!r00t> where are you?
- *** Inviting w0zz to channel #supreme
- *** w0zz (wozz@big.wookie.net) has joined channel #supreme
- <d9> well...
- *** Mode change "+o w0zz" on channel #supreme by d9
- <w0zz> werd
- <_e|f_> re wozz
- <d9> hi w0zz
- <w0zz> hi there
- <_e|f_> i can send u a log to flesh out a few more details if you like
- <w0zz> i've got mackin' warez
- <d9> hmm
- <d9> sure
- *w0zz* you recording this for line noise ?
- *w0zz* ;)
- -> *w0zz* indeed...;)
- *w0zz* heh
- <d9> the thing is, I have all this porn I want to unload...
- <w0zz> yah, i got da mackin porn too
- <d9> but, no good place to distro it...
- *** ^DRiFTeR^ (~Drifter@203.30.237.48) has joined channel #supreme
- *** Mode change "+o ^DRiFTeR^" on channel #supreme by _e|f_
- <_e|f_> hey drifter
- <d9> I was using this panix account, but all that SYN flooding stopped that cold...
- <_e|f_> drifter is muh vp :)
- <RAgent:#!r00t> do you even know what BREED is, route?
- <d9> warez pups?
- <_e|f_:#supreme> drifter: d9 and wozz are from breed
- <_e|f_:#supreme> blizzard and wizard are from NGP
- <^DRiFTeR^:#supreme> k
- <d9:#!r00t> HAHAHAhahahaha
- <Mystic12:#supreme> I am also from NGP
- *** Signoff: Mystic12 (Leaving)
- <W|ZaRD:#supreme> so is Mystic12
- <RAgent:#!r00t> well, looks like it. just wondered if you knew them at all
- <d9> w0zz... you get the new shit I send you?
- *** Mystic12 (NONE@wheat-53.nb.net) has joined channel #supreme
- <w0zz:#supreme> yah
- <_e|f_:#supreme> sorry mystic - didnt see yew there
- <d9:#!r00t> nope!
- *** Mode change "+o Mystic12" on channel #supreme by W|ZaRD
- <w0zz> indexed and everything
- <RAgent:#!r00t> hahaha
- <w0zz> i spanked my monkey for hours
- <RAgent:#!r00t> whee
- <d9> werd.
- <d9:#!r00t> AAAAAHAHAHahahhahaha WOZZ!
- <_e|f_> brb
- <d9> hmm
- #supreme Mystic12 H@ NONE@wheat-53.nb.net (CCINC)
- #supreme ^DRiFTeR^ H@ ~Drifter@203.30.237.48 (ReaLMS oF Da NiTe - HrD)
- #supreme w0zz H@ wozz@big.wookie.net (w0zz)
- #supreme d9 H@ plugHead@onyx.infonexus.com (Built Demon Tough)
- #supreme {Imagine} H@ BOB@199.190.110.99 (.:tORn f#E?h:. v1.45 by SLaG)
- #supreme BL|ZZaRD H@ blizzard@ip222.tol.primenet.com (hehe)
- #supreme W|ZaRD H@ m3ntal@ip201.tol.primenet.com (M3NTaL)
- #supreme |COBRA| H@ cobra@slbri3p24.ozemail.com.au (100% ReVpOwEr)
- #supreme _e|f_ H@ _e|f_@203.26.197.12 (blah)
- <w0zz:#!r00t> werd
- *** Mode change "-ooo _e|f_ |COBRA| W|ZaRD" on channel #supreme by d9
- *** Mode change "-ooo BL|ZZaRD w0zz ^DRiFTeR^" on channel #supreme by d9
- *** Mode change "-o Mystic12" on channel #supreme by d9
- <W|ZaRD> hehe
- *** Mode change "+o w0zz" on channel #supreme by d9
- <_e|f_> sigh
- <W|ZaRD> what would the new group name be.. if this happened?
- <d9> the new name?
- <W|ZaRD> hmm. nice takeover
- <W|ZaRD> hehe
- <w0zz> werd
- <d9> w0zz, what do you think?
- <W|ZaRD> new group name
- <_e|f_> d9: ops plz
- <d9> r00t? guild?
- <d9> wait
- <_e|f_> this is only a temp channel neway d9
- <W|ZaRD> guild wuz already used
- <d9> those are taken...
- <_e|f_> so its a waste to do a takeover
- <w0zz> i like r00t
- <w0zz> oh
- <w0zz> yeah
- <w0zz> those guys are eleet
- <d9> yah
- <d9> I hear r00t has this 10 year old that can break into .mil sites...
- *** d9 is now known as daemon9
- <w0zz> duod, he's like D.A.R.Y.L.
- <W|ZaRD> hehe
- <daemon9> yah..
- <_e|f_> d9: i take it by this yew aint interested?
- <_e|f_> :\
- <daemon9> anyway, bak to pr0n.
- <W|ZaRD> anywayz.. op me d00d
- <w0zz> me too
- <w0zz> must have m0re pr0n
- *** Mode change "+m" on channel #supreme by daemon9
- <daemon9> yes
- *** w0zz has left channel #supreme
- <daemon9> more pr0n
- <w0zz:#!r00t> werd
- <w0zz:#!r00t> that rooled
- <daemon9> mega-pr0n
- <W|ZaRD> porn
- <W|ZaRD> hehe
- <daemon9> kiddie-pr0n
- <W|ZaRD> op me plz
- <daemon9> wizard, you are fine the way you are.
- *** w0zz is now known as [w0zzz]
- *** daemon9 has left channel #supreme
- *** daemon9 is now known as r0ute
- <r0ute> hahaha
- <[w0zzz]> heh
- <r0ute> that was fun.
- <r0ute> good way to wake up from a nap
-
-
-
- ----<>----
-
-
-
- Large Packet Attacks
- (AKA Ping of Death)
- ---------------------------------
-
-
- [ Introduction ]
-
- Recently, the Internet has seen a large surge in denial of service
- attacks. A denial of service attack in this case is simply an action of some
- kind that prevents the normal functionality of the network. It denies service.
- This trend began a few months back with TCP SYN flooding and continues with the
- "large packet attack". In comparison with SYN flooding, the large packet attack
- is a much more simple attack in both concept (explained below) and execution
- (the attack can be carried out by anyone with access to a Windows 95 machine).
- TCP SYN flooding is more complex in nature and does not exploit a flaw so much
- as it exploits an implementation weakness.
- The large packet attack is also much more devastating then TCP SYN
- flooding. It can quite simply cause a machine to crash, whereas SYN flooding
- may just deny access to mail or web services of a machine for the duration of
- the attack. For more information on TCP SYN flooding see Phrack 49, article 13.
- (NOTE: The large packet attack is somewhat misleadingly referred to as 'Ping of
- Death` because it is often delivered as a ping packet. Ping is a program that
- is used to test a machine for reachablity to see if it alive and accepting
- network requests. Ping also happens to be a convenient way of sending the
- large packet over to the target.)
- The large packet attack has caused no end of problems to countless
- machines across the Internet. Since its discovery, *dozens* of operating
- system kernels have been found vulnerable, along with many routers, terminal
- servers, X-terminals, printers, etc. Anything with a TCP/IP stack is in fact,
- potentially vulnerable. The effects of the attack range from mild to
- devastating. Some vulnerable machines will hang for a relatively short period
- time then recover, some hang indefinitely, others dump core (writing a huge
- file of current memory contents, often followed by a crash), some lose
- all network connectivity, many rebooted or simply gave up the ghost.
-
- [ Relevant IP Basics ]
-
- Contrary to popular belief, the problem has nothing to do with the
- `ping` program. The problem lies in the IP module. More specifically,
- the problem lies the in the fragmentation/reassembly portion of the IP module.
- This is portion of the IP protocol where the packets are broken into smaller
- pieces for transit, and also where they are reassembled for processing. An IP
- packet has a maximum size constrained by a 16-bit header field (a header is a
- portion of a packet that contains information about the packet, including
- where it came from and where it is going). The maximum size of an IP packet
- is 65,535 (2^16-1) bytes. The IP header itself is usually 20 bytes so this
- leaves us with 65,515 bytes to stuff our data into. The underlying link layer
- (the link layer is the network logically under IP, often ethernet) can seldom
- handle packets this large (ethernet for example, can only handle packets up to
- 1500 bytes in size). So, in order for the link layer to be able to digest a
- large packet, the IP module must fragment (break down into smaller pieces)
- each packet it sends to down to the link layer for transmission on the network.
- Each individual fragment is a portion of the original packet, with its own
- header containing information on exactly how the receiving end should put it
- back together. This putting the individual packets back together is called
- reassembly. When the receiving end has all of the fragments, it reassembles
- them into the original IP packet, and then processes it.
-
- [ The attack ]
-
- The large packet attack is quite simple in concept. A malicious user
- constructs a large packet and sends it off. If the destination host is
- vulnerable, something bad happens (see above). The problem lies in the
- reassembly of these large packets. Recall that we have 65,515 bytes of space
- in which to stuff data into. As it happens, a few misbehaved applications
- (and some specially crafted evil ones) will allow one to place slightly more
- data into the payload (say 65,520 bytes). This, along with a 20 byte IP
- header, violates the maximum packet size of 65,535 bytes. The IP module will
- then simply break this oversized packet into fragments and eschew them to
- their intended destination (target). The receiving host will queue all of the
- fragments until the last one arrives, then begin the process of reassembly.
- The problem will surface when the IP module finds that the packet is in
- fact larger than the maximum allowable size as an internal buffer is
- overflowed. This is where something bad happens (see above).
-
- [ Vulnerability Testing and Patching ]
-
- Testing to see if a network device is vulnerable is quite easy.
- Windows NT and Windows 95 will allow construction of these oversized
- packets without complaining. Simply type: `ping -l 65508 targethost`. In
- this case, we are delivering an oversized IP packet inside of a ping packet,
- which has a header size of 8 bytes. If you add up the totals, 20 bytes of IP
- header + 8 bytes of ping header + 65,508 bytes of data, you get a 65,536 byte
- IP packet. This is enough to cause affected systems to have problems.
- Defense is preventative. The only way to really be safe from this
- attack is to either ensure your system is patched, or unplug its network tap.
- There are patches available for just about every vulnerable system. For
- a copious list of vulnerable systems and patches, check out a 'Ping of Death'
- webpage near you.
-
- daemon9
- Editor, Phrack Magazine
- (daemon9@netcom.com)
-
-
-
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- To: route@onyx.infonexus.com
- From: xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx <xxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.com>
- Subject: Re: ?
- Status: RO
-
- Actually, hang on. I've looked your story up and down looking for ways to
- make it more interesting and I can't. I think it's actually just too
- technical for us and lacks a newsworthiness that was evident in the SYN
- article. I mean, you never tell us why we should care about this, and
- frankly, I don't know why we should. So, you're welcome to take another
- pass at it, otherwise, I'll give you the kill fee of $100.
-
- xxxx
-
- [ Too techinical? Any less techincal and I would have to make everything
- rhyme so people wouldn't fall asleep. ]
-
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
- ----<>----
-
-
- Netware Insecurities
- Tonto
-
- [the rant]
-
- I realize that to most security professionals and
- system administrators who will see this magazine,
- the term "NetWare security" is a punchline. That
- unfortunately does not change the fact that many
- people in the field, myself included, must deal
- with it daily. Really, honestly, I do agree with
- you. Please don't write me to tell me about how
- futile it is. I already know.
-
- Since its release, not much security news has really
- surfaced surrounding Novell NetWare 4. A lot of the
- security flaws that were present in 3.1x were 'fixed'
- in 4.x since Novell pretty much redesigned the way
- the user/resource database worked, was referenced,
- and stored. Some flaws remained, although fixes for
- them are well-known, and easily applied. However,
- NetWare 4 came with its own batch of new security
- flaws, and Novell has done a poor job of addressing
- them, hoping that consumer-end ignorance and the
- client/server software's proprietary design will hide
- these holes. You'd figure they would know better by
- now.
-
- The ability to use a packet sniffer to snag RCONSOLE
- passwords still exists; NetWare 4 institutes client-end
- authentication to implement its auto-reconnect feature;
- the list goes on. Below are just a couple of examples
- of such bugs and how to deal with them. As new Novell
- products bring many existing LANs out onto the Internet,
- I think you will see more of this sort of thing coming
- to the surface. I hope that when it does, Novell decides
- to take a more responsible role in security support for
- its products. I'd hate for such a widely used product
- to become the next HP/UX.
-
-
- [the exploits]
-
- [BUG #1]
-
- This bug is known to affect NetWare 4.10. It's probably present in 4.01
- and other versions that support Directory Services, but I haven't
- verified this. I'm only a CNA, so I tried to verify this bug by talking
- to a group of CNEs and nobody had heard of this, although there are
- apparently other bugs in previous versions of LOGIN.EXE.
-
- The bug is a combination of some weak code in LOGIN-4.12
- (SYS:\LOGIN\LOGIN.EXE) and a default User object in NDS - the user template
- USER_TEMPLATE. LOGIN allows input fields to be passed directly, instead
- of filtered, if they are passed to LOGIN correctly -- by specifying an
- object's context explicitly (as opposed to implicitly by using CX) and
- putting the User object's name in quotes.
-
- F:\PUBLIC>LOGIN SVR1/"USER_TEMPLATE"
-
- For Server object SVR1 in an appropriate context, this would probably work
- and give a generic level of user access, perhaps to other volumes,
- programs, etc. That will vary depending on the setup of the server.
-
- The fix is simple. Load SYS:\PUBLIC\NWADMIN.EXE and disable the user
- template's login. But from now on, you will have to manually enable
- login for any new User objects created in your tree.
-
-
- [BUG #2]
-
- This isn't a bug as much as a failed attempt to add security to a DOS file
- system. But since Novell touts (and teaches) it as a file system security
- tool, it is worth addressing.
-
- NetWare comes with a tool called FLAG, which is supposed to be the NetWare
- equivalent of UNIX's chmod(), in that it controls file attributes for files
- on local and NetWare file systems. The problem lies in that Novell
- thought it would be neat to incorporate its tool into the world of DOS file
- attributes as well. So they made FLAG alter DOS file attributes
- automatically to correspond with the new attributes installed by FLAG.
- This would've been cool, except that DOS's ATTRIB.EXE can also be used to
- change the DOS-supported file attributes set by FLAG. (Archive, Read-only,
- Hidden, and System, respectively) And since ATTRIB doesn't reference NDS
- in any way, the problem is obvious; A file that was marked Read-only by
- its owner, using FLAG, could be compromised by a user other than its owner,
- with ATTRIB, and then altered or deleted.
-
- There isn't an easy fix for something that is this broken, so it is
- simply recommended that you use IRFs (carefully) to designate file rights
- on your server.
-
-
- [ 01-07-97 - Tont0 ]
-
-
- ----<>----
- EOF
-
-