Re: Net:telnet exploit

[Gerardo Richarte <core.lists.pentest () corest com>]

Dave Aitel wrote:

> If you read the telnet protocol's RFC you might see where they mention
> how FF is a control character of some sort, or something. So to send one
> \xFF you need to escape it with another \xFF, which is being
> automatically done for you.

    Gary: remember that, for the same reason,  if you send a single \xff, you won't
see anything on the other side (unless the bug you are exploiting is before telnet's
protocol decoding). i.e. Suppose you are using your $t to control a remote shell,
then if you want the shell to recieve a \xff you need to send two of them.
    And while we are on it, most ftps also implement a downsized version on
telnet's protocol, and for exploiting an ftp bug, you always always need to send
\xff\xff instead of \xff.

    gera



--- for a personal reply use: gera () corest com

top spam and e-mail risk at the gateway.
SurfControl E-mail Filter puts the brakes on spam & viruses
and gives you the reports to prove it. See exactly how much
junk never even makes it in the door. Free 30-day trial:
http://www.surfcontrol.com/go/zsfptl1