At Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:30:05 +0300,
Ant wrote:
> Is there is any software to bypass http proxy
>
> --- --{Inet} -
>
> and win client after such proceess could work with any TCP/IP Services.
>
> Some kind of pptp via http $-).
http://sourceforge.jp/projects/stone/ stone
Description:
At Mon, 3 Mar 2003 18:30:05 +0300,
Ant wrote:
> Is there is any software to bypass http proxy
>
> --- --{Inet} -
>
> and win client after such proceess could work with any TCP/IP Services.
>
> Some kind of pptp via http $-).
http://sourceforge.jp/projects/stone/ stone
Description:
> I'd just like to say something. I began this thread purely because I
> didn't see Debian listed in the CERT advisory. So let me be clear about
> some things:
Sorry for some offtopic.
My english isn't excellent and so may be that You misunderstood me.
I'm using Debian more than 3 years and
I'd just like to say something. I began this thread purely because I
didn't see Debian listed in the CERT advisory. So let me be clear about
some things:
1. I was not ragging on Debian.
2. Debian as a organization does an amazing job and gets way too much
criticism. If you don't have anything
> I'd just like to say something. I began this thread purely because I
> didn't see Debian listed in the CERT advisory. So let me be clear about
> some things:
Sorry for some offtopic.
My english isn't excellent and so may be that You misunderstood me.
I'm using Debian more than 3 years and
Hi, All !
As I see, at this moment we have update for sendmail for "woody" (for "potato"
i not checked). :) So, Debian was vulnerable too (nothing strange, it must
be).
Damn, now i must replace just updated (by me, from sources) sendmails by
updated Debian packages. ;) But that's not a prob
I'd just like to say something. I began this thread purely because I
didn't see Debian listed in the CERT advisory. So let me be clear about
some things:
1. I was not ragging on Debian.
2. Debian as a organization does an amazing job and gets way too much
criticism. If you don't have anything
Hi, All !
As I see, at this moment we have update for sendmail for "woody" (for "potato"
i not checked). :) So, Debian was vulnerable too (nothing strange, it must
be).
Damn, now i must replace just updated (by me, from sources) sendmails by
updated Debian packages. ;) But that's not a prob
We use following: user connects to firewall (kind of a commercial
software firewall) using VPN client. And after authentication some
firewall rules are applied. Session is encrypted. User can do some job
on an internal network. PPTP is something like and free:
http://project.terminus.sk/wmpptpd/
Hello,
I applied the patch on Sendmail's web page to the sendmail
sources for potato (8.9.3). I put the compiled package
here:
http://www.sci.fi/~pfp/sendmail-deb-ca-2003-07/
I haven't tested this (does an exploit exist yet?),
other than confirming that sendmail itself works...
--
p f p @ i k
Hello Martynas,
Monday, March 3, 2003, 7:21:32 PM, you wrote:
MD> Try this: http://www.htthost.com/ , but use it on your own risk. It is a
Thanks, this could help me.
MD> real security hole. Better is to ask system administrator open some
I am a system administrator, and my users want to work wi
We use following: user connects to firewall (kind of a commercial
software firewall) using VPN client. And after authentication some
firewall rules are applied. Session is encrypted. User can do some job
on an internal network. PPTP is something like and free:
http://project.terminus.sk/wmpptpd/
Hello,
I applied the patch on Sendmail's web page to the sendmail
sources for potato (8.9.3). I put the compiled package
here:
http://www.sci.fi/~pfp/sendmail-deb-ca-2003-07/
I haven't tested this (does an exploit exist yet?),
other than confirming that sendmail itself works...
--
p f p @ i k i .
13 matches
Mail list logo
