Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
Re: [Full-Disclosure] SNMP Broadcasts
From: Barry Fitzgerald (bkfsecsdf.lonestar.org)
Date: Fri Jul 16 2004 - 09:29:55 CDT
J.A. Terranson wrote:
>>Oh, I get it. So if root executes "sshd -p 45522" --this is not
>>*technically* ssh, right?
>If sshd is running on 45522 it's a back door Marty :-) And no, in this
>case, pedantic or not, it's not "ssh" as is commonly accepted.
(Responding to essentially the only on-topic issue in this e-mail...)
I disagree. It may not be completely standard compliant (in so far as
the standard assigns a common usage port), but it sure as hell is the
When you say "that's running on this port, but it's not SSH" you're not
sending the message to people that it's not SSH because it has to be
compliant, you're sending the message to people that it's *not the SSH
protocol at all*...
I think the fact that you're being pedantic with this issue confuses the
point and is, pretty much, worthless. No one, frankly, gives a sh*t if
you consider it to not be SSH because it's not on the port that makes
you happy -- especially if you're not happy about it because you woke up
on the wrong side of the bed or because someone pissed in your cheerios
or whatever reason.
Saying what you said above is counterproductive and will only serve to
confuse people. Perhaps you should wratchet up your pedantic nature and
instead of saying that it's "not SSH because it's on the wrong port" say
"it's non-compliant SSH because it's on the wrong port".
Otherwise it's a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
p.s. This is the end of that issue as far as I'm concerned. If you
continue to claim that it's "not the SSH protocol", you're just being
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.