Forwarded from: "McCarthy, Robert F" <RMCCART1at_private> The DOJ fellow is correct. There was no compromise. What he fails to point out is that he means that none of the information contained on the PC's was compromised, which, in and of itself, is difficult to fathom until the information surfaces somewhere else and/or the FBI finds out "exactly" what was involved in the process. How a spokes person/DOJ representative could have made that determination, that no information was comprised, so quickly, is baffling. But then, smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors, always seems to work. -----Original Message----- From: InfoSec News [mailto:isnat_private] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 9:13 AM To: isnat_private Subject: Re: [ISN] Internet Attacks Hit U.S. Attorneys' Offices Forwarded from: H. Morrow Long <morrow.longat_private> Ummm... No security was compromised? Isn't the fact that 40% (an astounding number) of federal prosecutor's PCs were running a particular virus or worm just the definition of 'compromised'? 'It just slowed the network down." Hm... No biggie :-) InfoSec News wrote: > The bugs affected 40 percent of the federal prosecutors' desk and > laptop computers around the country, said Justice spokesman Mark > Corallo. "No security was compromised, and it had no effect on > evidence," he said. "It just slowed the network down." - H. Morrow Long, CISSP Director - Information Security Yale University, ITS - ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org To unsubscribe email majordomoat_private with 'unsubscribe isn' in the BODY of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Sep 03 2003 - 06:22:05 PDT