Howard J. Rogers wrote:
>
> "Pete Finnigan" <plsql_at_petefinnigan.com> wrote in message
> news:sh6rgeB2afhBRxpy_at_peterfinnigan.demon.co.uk...
> > >Excellent question. You realise it will require some testing and research
> >>won't you!? (In other words, I'll get back to you on that one!!).
> >>But it will appear as a new paragraph at the end of the existing paper,
> >>because it's such a good issue to address.
> >>
> >>It is because people ask good questions that we (together) learn good
> >>stuff.
> >>
> >>Regards
> >>HJR
> > Hi Howard,
> >
> > I answered this question over a year ago in relation to SQL*Plus in my
> > newsletter http://www.petefinnigan.com/news_letter_001.pdf - In there I
> > renamed the SQL*Plus binary on the client and on the server and the
> > values in v$session did not change. In other words Oracle networking
> > still knew it was SQL*Plus even though the binary is now called
> > "hacker". I guess this is because SQL*Plus identifies itself internally
> > to the network stack. I don't know if the same will work if you use a
> > third party application unless that application uses
> > dbms_application_info to set up values.
> >
> > hth
>
> It certainly does. Makes for some interesting test scenarios
>
> Regards
> HJR
although a little hex editing would probably make the sqlplus binary
just as vulnerable to such mods as well.
hth
connor
--
Connor McDonald
Co-author: "Mastering Oracle PL/SQL - Practical Solutions"
ISBN: 1590592174
web: http://www.oracledba.co.uk
web: http://www.oaktable.net
email: connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com
Coming Soon! "Oracle Insight - Tales of the OakTable"
"GIVE a man a fish and he will eat for a day. But TEACH him how to fish,
and...he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day"
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Sat Nov 06 2004 - 05:42:36 CST
