Firewalls: Re: Wingate 2 vulnerabilities

Firewalls
(February 1998)

Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject:	Re: Wingate 2 vulnerabilities
From:	Frank de Lange <frank @ rintintin . gv-itf . unisource . nl>
Date:	Thu, 5 Feb 1998 23:27:12 +0100
To:	mcwilkin <mcwilkin @ twcable . com>
Cc:	firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to:	<Pine . GSO . 3 . 96 . 980205091951 . 14869A-100000 @ denmisf01>; from mcwilkin on Thu, Feb 05, 1998 at 09:51:31AM -0700
References:	<Pine . GSO . 3 . 96 . 980205091951 . 14869A-100000 @ denmisf01>

On Thu, Feb 05, 1998 at 09:51:31AM -0700, mcwilkin wrote:
> Ok, at the risk of asking too generic a question - anybody got any thought
> on a proxy called WinGate?
> Other than the obvious shortcomings inherent in the M$ environment, anyone
> have any opinions on the product itself?

To answer your question, please read this repost of a message recently
posted to the BUGTRAQ list:

References:

Wingate 2 vulnerabilities
From: mcwilkin <mcwilkin @ twcable . com>

Indexed By Date	Previous:	RE: MS ProxyServer 2.0 From: MacGyver <macgyver @ tos . net>
Indexed By Date	Next:	DNS cache attack From: Dave Santeramo <santercon @ mail . clarityconnect . com>
Indexed By Thread	Previous:	Wingate 2 vulnerabilities From: mcwilkin <mcwilkin @ twcable . com>
Indexed By Thread	Next:	Re: Wingate 2 vulnerabilities From: Emmanuel Gadaix <emmanuel @ siamrelay . com>