"Lessons learned from the Apache.org defacement of 2000" would have been a pretty good title. I still would have clicked, but my expectations would have been differently calibrated. As the title was written, I was expecting Apache.org to be, currently, defaced.
The "from 2000" is not really relevant -- all the same technologies are in use and are likely misconfigured in the same way. There are probably 100s of sites on the Internet that could be owned in the way the article describes.
mother fucking lame as fuck.... seriously!?? a post-mortem on a 2000 year hack of apache (a patches a fucking lot cause I'm fucking insecure) -- how the fuck did this shit break hackernews?! this is one of the many reasons why the 'security scene' sucked 10 years ago when I was involved in it and why it still sucks now -- this is not news -- what a crappy waste of time
6 comments
[ 0.27 ms ] story [ 26.2 ms ] thread