Fox News' FTP Password Anyone? 611
An anonymous reader writes "While browsing around the Fox News website, I found that directory indexes are turned on. So, I started following the tree up, until I got to /admin. Eventually, I found my way into /admin/xml_parser/zdnet/, in which, there is a shell script. Seeing as it's a shell script, and I use Linux, I took a peek. Inside, is a username and password to an FTP. So, of course, I tried to login. The result? Epic fail on Fox's part. And seriously, what kind of password is T1me Out. This is just pathetic." It's already been changed of course, but that's still pretty amusing.
Not a horrible password (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
Clinton believed they were there, because at the time Saddam was refusing to let UN inspectors do their job. By the time Bush had invaded, the UN inspectors had already been in and found nothing.
Re:Wasted chance (Score:5, Informative)
It Works (Score:2, Informative)
Re:what's wrong with T1me Out (Score:3, Informative)
In other words, yes, this password was prone to be dict'ed.
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
It's rather disengenuous to cite quotes from 1998 when he did have WMD programs to justify actions taken in 2003 when he did not have any WMD programs.
Re:what's wrong with T1me Out (Score:1, Informative)
And, as soon as you look deeper in the site structure you find better passwords, like:
ftp://Altavista_1:H1S!uwro@ftp.g.ziffdavis.com/2p
(And a host of others...)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
Not defending Bush, I didn't vote for him, but I am tired of this WMD crap also.
Re:Ridiculous summary (Score:5, Informative)
At least the story had "ftp" in it, making it slightly more "for nerds".
Peter
PS. I was against the war, I'm against Bush and I think Fox sucks, but even so (and as the parent post points out), this is a bit tenuous.
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
Yep. In 1998. Then we invaded, destroyed stockpiles, and ushered in the inspection teams.
What that has to do with GWB's claims in 2003 I don't know, but I'm sure that completely unbiased and non-partisan site you linked to has an answer.
Re:what's wrong with T1me Out (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:2, Informative)
There was a lot of bad information in the days before the invasion. The problem was compounded by the fact that the intelligence community seemed to be largely composed of yes men who were looking to tell the president what he wanted to hear. I honestly believe the president simply didn't have all the facts at hand because he was so keen on invading Iraq and none of his advisors wanted to tell him it was a bad idea.
Re:I'm no lawyer, but... (Score:1, Informative)
Cars are private property. The laws are quite clear that you can't simply take one just because you found a way to start it. Or even if it is sitting in front of a house or store with the engine running and doors open.
Cyberspace is different. A web site is a public space, with the implied permission to wander around it, and look at various items. A good analogy here would be if someone was shopping in a large store and found a "secret place" that the store owner didn't want anyone to see. But all the customer had done was follow the hallway beyond the restrooms, made a right turn, and stumbled upon the secret place. Not exactly the sort of thing to shoot a man over.
Re:Wasted chance (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:1, Informative)
I have never heard that before. Do you have any evidence of this? If so, I would like to look into it. I have no problem with people proving me wrong... but I prefer proof. The proff that people in Washington believed there were WMD's is what I was pointing to, regardless as to the veracity of the belief.
As a side note - do you mean that since the program's were finished, that the items made from those programs also were gone?
Several quotes are much more current than 1998, which is why I included that link. As I said in one of my other replies, the belief they were there was "common knowledge" among the people in Washington - but "common" is not equal to "Correct"
Re:Wasted chance (Score:1, Informative)
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002"
Maybe they're not speaking to each other these days?
Nice try, though.
A bit of advice: Bush isn't going to be running in 2008. Less dullwitted conspiracy theory screeching about Bush, more effort on scraping up a viable Democratic candidate would seem to be the best strategy here. Hint: try to find someone who isn't a senile hippie this time.
I'm not sure what "then we invaded and destroyed stockpiles" means -- we didn't invade Iraq until 2003. Are you trolling, or just stupid?
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
Yep. In 1998. Then we invaded, destroyed stockpiles, and ushered in the inspection teams.
What that has to do with GWB's claims in 2003 I don't know, but I'm sure that completely unbiased and non-partisan site you linked to has an answer.
Fox News has no excuse (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:5, Informative)
I know that I will get flamed for this but it is the truth.
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
I no longer subscribe to the "Bush as Mr. Magoo" story line. There's too much evidence that they wanted invade Iraq from day 1.
Re:Where he can see DirectoryIndex is on ? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:5, Informative)
And, of course, there were also incidents where the insurgent groups got ahold of some lingering chemical weapons (mustard gas, I think) and tried to make bombs out of them--luckily, that also was old and non-effective. Those were widely reported at the time.
In other words, get off your uninformed, sanctimonious high-horse.
Re:Password (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Wasted chance (Score:2, Informative)
So, if there was fissile material in a bomb configuration that was in a missile-like object, would that be a WMD even if the priming charge was bad, the fissile material had decayed to the point where critical mass could not be achieved and the missile would have exploded on the pad if someone would have tried to launch it?
Simply saying "we found canisters marked 'sarin' which appeared to be good at one time and of unknown status now" to indicate that actual WMDs were found is not logical. Were the chemicals found still at full strength? Was there an available delivery method? Did the government have records of them and the ability to deploy them?
Of course Saddam would lie about WMDs. He thought that there would be no uprisings if people thought he had them, and he thought there'd be no invasion if people had them. So he wanted everyone to think he had them in large quantities with his finger on the button. For some reason, the same people (Fox News watchers) who claim that all politicians are liars, seem to think that Saddam should have been believed when he implied that he still had them.
And, of course, there were also incidents where the insurgent groups got ahold of some lingering chemical weapons (mustard gas, I think) and tried to make bombs out of them--luckily, that also was old and non-effective. Those were widely reported at the time.
Again, confirmed reports of non-WMDs, further confirming that anything that he had laying around was useless and that there were no functioning WMDs in Iraq at the time of the invasion.
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
You'd feel safer in AR then. When I took my CCW testing there, I learned that it was perfectly legal to shoot someone you saw in the act of committing arson. Seriously, the law is on the books there.
I never was 'lucky' enough to catch someone in the 'act'....
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
The reason why it was used and repeated over and over while the troops were assembling in the Gulf was that it was actually a rather safe bet (since it was the US itself that provided him with those!) and that you could scare uninformed folks to death by exaggerating what the evil guy from half way around the globe could to to them.
The invasion was wrong not because Saddam had no WMDs, but (among so many other reasons) because the hawks in Washington used their power and the gullibility of the people (the same people that actually empower them by paying taxes, building stuff, working, inventing... - those same people that actually carry the US forward) to bring war to a country that did not deserve it. Their motive was to intimidate by displaying military strength, to establish control on an oil rich region and ultimately to fill their own bank accounts (if you don't believe this I suggest you read up on privately funded mercenaries "working" in Iraq, e.g. Blackwater and about the huge profits companies like Halliburton are making through Iraq in a war funded by tax dollars while no end or even an improvement of the situation is in sight (intentionally?); there's also a documentary [imdb.com] about this).
Re:Wasted chance (Score:3, Informative)
Get used to it. Whomever wins (Democrat or Republican) the whitehouse will
1. Blame the previous administration for anything that goes wrong domestic or foreign for I predict at least 2 years and probably 3.
2. Spin Spin Spin until you puke like riding that thing that kids ride at parks.
3. Probably keep 90 to 95% of every executive order that Bush signed to use for their own political advantage.