Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP
From: Ali Campbell <fdisclosure () alicampbell org uk>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:12:40 +0100
This is precisely the point that almost everyone is missing completely (but still clamoring "it works on X, it doesn't work onY"), and that Sapheriel pinpointed: the core problem lies in the Windows .bmp implementation.So, I wonder aloud, what is the purpose of publishing 'advisories' that misattribute this flaw to IE [1] or Firefox or any of the otherhundreds or thousands of programs that use it and can be DoSed as a result? st3ng4h
I agree when you say that it's probably a flaw in the BMP lib implementation. But as I've pointed out once already, Windows isn't the only afflicted platform:
Ali-Campbells-Computer:~ alicampbell$ uname -aDarwin Ali-Campbells-Computer.local 7.4.0 Darwin Kernel Version 7.4.0: Wed May 12 16:58:24 PDT 2004; root:xnu/xnu-517.7.7.obj~7/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
Ali-Campbells-Computer:~ alicampbell$ top <!-- snip --> PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE VSIZE <!-- snip -->1449 firefox-bi 0.5% 0:11.84 10 191 293 18.4M 37.2M 46.9M 3.32G
<!-- snip --> That's VSIZE=3.32 gigabytes.As others have also observed, there isn't any machine slowdown when I try this either on Windows or OS X, despite the large amount of virtual memory sucked up. I'm postulating that this is because memory is being malloc()ed but not actually written to, so physical page frames for it never get allocated. I could be wrong though, as my current knowledge of kernels falls squarely in the "tourist" category.
Ali _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP, (continued)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Philip (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP William Warren (Jul 12)
- Message not available
- Fwd: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Jordan Cole (stilist) (Jul 12)
- Message not available
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP st3ng4h (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP William Warren (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Ali Campbell (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP David Huecking (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP st3ng4h (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Jordan Cole (stilist) (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Maarten (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Ali Campbell (Jul 12)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP st3ng4h (Jul 12)
- RE: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Sapheriel (Jul 12)
- RE: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP jhaunsystem (Jul 12)
- RE: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Eric Paynter (Jul 13)
- Re: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP st3ng4h (Jul 12)
- Re: AW: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP Lee Packham (Jul 12)
- Re: AW: Firefox 0.92 DoS via TinyBMP morning_wood (Jul 12)