Vulnerability Development mailing list archives
Re: WSCRIPT.EXE , CSCRIPT.EXE replacement for *.vbs
From: kb8rln () PENGUINMASTER COM (Richard Rager)
Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 03:27:02 -0600
On Thu, 11 May 2000, Daniel S. Otis-Vigil wrote:
What's to stop a trojaner from just replacing wscript.exe and or cscript.exe with their own copy that always authenticates?
Remember that I said that all programs could be require to authenticate! Or the authentication program can contain the checksum in it. I believe that all email attachments should be require to be authenticated be for running. This will help protect the system. This include all those meaning of life exe and all scripts. This will help stop trojan horse program from running. I hope this clear things up. Enjoy, Richard Rager
Current thread:
- Sendmail vs *.vbs Todd Garrison (May 07)
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Mariusz Woloszyn (May 08)
- WSCRIPT.EXE , CSCRIPT.EXE replacement for *.vbs Richard Rager (May 11)
- Re: WSCRIPT.EXE , CSCRIPT.EXE replacement for *.vbs Blue Boar (May 11)
- Re: WSCRIPT.EXE , CSCRIPT.EXE replacement for *.vbs Daniel S. Otis-Vigil (May 11)
- Re: WSCRIPT.EXE , CSCRIPT.EXE replacement for *.vbs Richard Rager (May 12)
- WSCRIPT.EXE , CSCRIPT.EXE replacement for *.vbs Richard Rager (May 11)
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Mariusz Woloszyn (May 08)
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Sean A. Walberg (May 08)
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Gert-Jan Hagenaars (May 08)
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Sean A. Walberg (May 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Mark Tinberg (May 08)
- Re: Sendmail vs *.vbs Mariusz Woloszyn (May 08)