For those who feel concerned with website/webapp security, I'm gonna post here a few hints to :

- find the technology behind a website/portal (based on the fingerprinting idea, within the URL itself)

- check that the default admin URL is still accessible (leading to the questions: accessible for everyone? with default password?...)

This comes from my own experience, and also from the work of the guys owning the Nikto project (BTW: great job for the tool!).

Obviously, you may complete that with a real (HTTP?) headers check: very often the website will tell you its version and even what's running on it!

Here is the list, first version, and to my knowledge, there is not equivalent list on the web:

/backend_dev.php
/admin
/admin/login.php
/admin/phpinfo.php
/admin/system.php3
/administrator
/administration
/.admin
/stats
/server-status
/phpinfo
/phpinfo.php
/phpmyadmin/
/manager/list
/cfide/administrator
/wp-login.php
/?q=admin
/cgi-bin/printenv
/.htaccess
/bin/fpadmin.htm
/iisadmin
/_vti_bin/fpadmin.htm
/webadmin.nsf
/admin-serv/config/admpw
/servlet/AdminServlet
/lists/admin
/server
/siteminder/smadmin.html
/forum/admin/wwforum.mdb
/hostadmin/?page=
/sips/sipssys/users/a/admin/user
/simplebbs/users/users.php
/SiteServer/Admin/knowledge/persmbr/vs.asp
/IDSWebApp/IDSjsp/Login.jsp
/signon

/wp-admin
/login_form
/phpmyldap

/misc/drupal.js

And to finish with, I have been told that a well know french website hoster uses this port for the admin interface: 10000...
(so the URL to test could be something like subdomain.domain.tld:10000 ....)

I'll do my best to update that bill (update 1, done).

Please note that I can't be held responsible if you use that piece of information without having the right to assess security level (I mean auditing a system/app).

Once again, Chrome jumped to a new version. It is now at 9.0.597.84.

But what I find interesting to point out is that:

- the new version detection is silently done, without any user agreement nor notice

- the download of the new version is also being silently and automatically done 

In short, the next time you restart Chrome, the new version is there. And whereas Chrome is a quite recent browser, it has already had 9 versions... (remember: IE 9 is still a beta version, Firefox 4 too, Safari still a v5... and yes Opera v10)

The thing is, if you use G Chrome as a lightweight client, this kindda "forced update" may lead to compliance issues, for instance application not being tested/validated with the new Chrome version before it is being deployed.

Furthermore, there are only a few details about this update, except: 

http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2011/02/stable-channel-update.html  

But who owns this blog? is it really an official "G Chrome" web blog? sorry, I don't find any proof of authenticity.

There is also http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=4125a7f102c8ae9e&hl=en , but this is a forum, not an official portal...

In a nutshell, Chrome updates itself without (almost) any notification... therefore it is a software that a company does not manage completely, thus I do not recommend to use Chrome as a default web browser for production applications... (unless the firm has got real efficient proxies with filtering layer and reports...).

I hope this helps.

Seuls les imbéciles ne changent pas d'avis... Je vais relater ici mon expérience personnelle avec la dernière Freebox en date, la V6 Revolution.

Tout d'abord, je me dois de préciser que dans une autre vie, j'étais réparateur et que donc des Box en rade, j'en ai réparé quelques unes... A cette époque, Free n'avait pas forcément bonne réputation (entre le service clientèle, les délais de livraison, et les dysfonctionnements techniques...).

Malgré tout, j'ai décidé de sauter le pas. L'appel au service client est une bonne surprise, avec un Bordelais sympa et compétent au bout de la ligne.

Bien que l'on m'ait annoncé une livraison dans une fourchette sur 2 jours, de 8h à 19h (c'est plus une fourchette, c'est un rateau, comme diraient certains) j'ai réussi à récupérer le [gros] carton.

Je déballe donc les cartons qu'il contient, car oui, il y en a 3. Clairement Free a fait des progrès sur l'agencement et la présentation.

Je mets en place la nouvelle installation. Et là, surprise....

- Aucun des 4 ports RJ45 de la Box ne semble marcher (aucun voyant allumé), que j'y branche mon portable et/ou le Player. Donc, le player ne se synchronise pas et l'affichage à la TV me dit gentiment d'attendre pendant la synchro avec le "Server Freebox"...

- la Box reste coincée en étape 5, lors de la tentative de connexion. Ce n'est pas le fameux chenillard interminable, mais c'est pas loin avec le graphique en cercle qui tourne.

- l'utilisation des Freeplugs pour la connexion réseau, ou du câble RJ45 classique, entre la Box et le Player, ne change rien.

- malgré 3 redémarrages de la Box (et du Player), rien n'y fait.

Evidemment le filtre ADSL est en place... comme pour l'ancienne Box. Au démarrage de la Box, on voit bien l'allumage des voyants sur les différents ports RJ45, ils sont donc en état de marche... mais une fois la Box démarrée, les ports RJ45 semblent aussi inertes que leurs témoins lumineux.

Bilan, plus d'accès Internet, ni TV (ni téléphone, probablement). La fonction commutateur (Switch) de la Box semble en rade, ce qui pourrait ménaliser bon nombre de petits réseaux LAN domestiques...

L'installation automatisée échoue. La connexion échoue (sans indiquer pourquoi, si ce n'est "attente PPP")... et le lecteur multimédia /TV n'est évidemment pas opérationnel.

C'est un bon début... qui me rappelle malheureusement quelques souvenirs.

To my knowledge, this will be the pnly (or almost) guide about that particular file type: .tpa.

You may find them on recovery CD/DVDs. You may want to restore the image, but sometimes the automated script will fail (as it happened to me).

Without doing any reverse engineering, that could be illegal, I will explain the needed command lines to restore those TPA files.

First, contrary to what some of you may believe, you don't need Ghost, I mean the whole application. The reason is quite simple: the batch files you may find on the backup CD/DVD only refer to Ghostwin or Ghost32.exe (when creating the image, in a TPA file)...  But these Ghost files seem to be absent on the backup CD/DVD you have.

Here is the trick, in fact you don't need them!

 Browse the folders around the TPA files, you'll find a "recounpack.exe" one, which is only what you need.

Here is the command line that works:

recounpack.exe %file%.tpa f: 

Where   %file%  is the filename of the fine which extension is ".tpa", and F: the letter of the drive where the whole image will be restored.

Et voilà :) 

NB : please be careful as this operation will destroy all data on the destination drive you set up.

At the time AV vendors tend to complain about theiir difficulties to maintain a base of malicious software definition (20 millions in 2009, according to Kaspersky?), some people may remember old ideas of creating a "whitelist" of harmless / well known / trusted applications.

I would not start a troll by saying that the whitelist of electronically signed files, not being scanned by AV engines (that not being very well documented... anyway), could lead to problem worse than W32.Stuxnet...

However, AV vendors now actively work on whitelisting applications. Recently, for instance, Comodo Sofware got in contact with the Pidgin developers team, and asked them to whitelist their software (which was accepted), even providing FTP if needed.

They aim to alert each time an "unknown" software is to be run, so they whitelist "known" softwares.

Therefore, AV updates are not only getting more and more important to protect computers against malicious software, but to also avoid blocking harmless software (at least, a warning with context isolation untill the user validates or denies it...).

To be known fot the next future...