Google Version - Unclesam

[BASE813 0]

http://www.google.com/unclesam

This searches only .mil and .gov sites, I have tried a few advanced search terms and found some areas within these sites that perhaps should not be that easily found. I know that these can be found using google anyway, but not this easy.

What do you USers think?

[blueskyserenity 0]

Wow! Thanks!

I like coconuts. You can break them open and they smell like ladies lying in the sun!

[IanHarrop 42]

Quote

http://www.google.com/unclesam

This searches only .mil and .gov sites, I have tried a few advanced search terms and found some areas within these sites that perhaps should not be that easily found. I know that these can be found using google anyway, but not this easy.

What do you USers think?

users of SC ought to love this

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[AlexCrowley 0]

Those networks regularly fail security audits because the admins are clueless enough to leave information and systems unprotected.

I think at last audit they got a D grade, up from an F last year.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[BASE813 0]

Quote

Those networks regularly fail security audits because the admins are clueless enough to leave information and systems unprotected.

I think at last audit they got a D grade, up from an F last year.

that is kinda worrying dont you think? I thought it was just .edu that was wildly insecure... but .mil and .gov? makes this specific googling even more worrying then really.... a few inurl: intitle: with generic terms does find some areas that should not be accessable - hell a monkey can do that!

[AlexCrowley 0]

yes, it's worrying but its how things are. I agree with you, but am too jaded to be shocked any longer.

Things are a little better in a post911 world. you wouldnt believe what could be found before then

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.