Re: Kernel 'developer' makes fuzzy FUD (RH Episodes: Volume 1)

[L.M.H <lmh () info-pull com>]

On 11/12/06, PERFECT. MATERIAL <perfect.material () gmail com> wrote:
> Is this your in depth technical analysis into the exploitability of
> the bug in question? Pointing out that "the vendor is taking it
> seriously as opposed to as a joke" does not validate this bug at all.
> Just wanted to make sure you didn't take the time to look into this
> bug yourself. I am hopeful that by raising this question, you will be
> forced to realize that you should stop blabbing and cross posting
> harassing e-mails to bloggers.

Please go back and read my follow-up email as well as the PS file from
the bugzilla entry.
And if possible, re-phrase that. I don't pay attention to trolls,
usually. But this time I'm not sure if it's just that you didn't read,
understand or even bothered to see the details at all.

> it (but do anyway). How do you explain the root privilege or physical
> access requirement?

I'll ignore the other non-sense stuff, and answer to this one. Fedora
Core and most distributions out there currently allow unprivileged
users to mount filesystems. Check out automount and the other tools
that come with Gnome, KDE, etc. In win32 you have third-party tools
that allow all sorts of filesystem images to be mounted (ex. Daemon
Tools), also.

Anyway, it strikes me that your e-mail even managed to get through the
moderation filter. Dave, accidental mistake? :-)

I thought we didn't have trolls over here.

Cheers.
_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave