RE: Microsoft and Security

["Mark Laurence" <m.laurence () groveindependentschool co uk>]

On the subject of IE bugs, I am running SP2 RC2, IE6.0.2900.2149 today I
opened a window 
http://www.asus.com/products/server/srv-mb/ncch-dl/overview.htm
In another IE window I had www.ingrammicro.com/uk open

Whe I click on the picture of the motherboard in the first page to enlarge
it, it changes the ingrammicro page to have the picture of the motherboard
in it but still displays the ingrammicro page title in the browser bar, and
the top "frame" of the ingrammicro page....

Weird one, I don’t know if it is restricted to this build of IE though
HTH
Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com 
> [mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of 
> Steve Kudlak
> Sent: 29 June 2004 08:05
> To: Nancy Kramer
> Cc: Burnes, James; 1 () malware com; bugtraq () securityfocus com; 
> NTBugtraq () listserv ntbugtraq com; full-disclosure () lists netsys com
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Microsoft and Security
>
>
> To a certain extent you are right. I dunno if this is the 
> place to discuss all these very general issuesd, although 
> many pf the reasons that IE has so many problems may come 
> from the very fact that there is some minority of sites that 
> are very IE only.and that large enterprises sometimes 
> declares "thou shalt use Outlook". Well some small places 
> too. I notice many public libraries have IE as their internal browser.
>
> This is interesting because my local library goes to 
> extraordinary lengths to prevent people doing nasty things to 
> their computer. For example one can not bring in floppy disk, 
> or CDs and the public browser is pretty limited.
> But it still lets you surf anywhere you wanted. Now if there 
> were a mailcious site that could work ill WITHOUT DOWNLOADING 
> that would be really bad news for the limited public access 
> that many people have.
>
> What would be nice is some HTML code to test things like 
> browser vulnerabilities, especially those often reported. 
> They could be put up in some well marked demo site with flags 
> about be careful with this, so someone who is interested 
> could test browsers and resolve these "which browsers are 
> safer" questions and also allow people to put pressure on 
> various browser development teams to make browsers safer for 
> the benefit of everyone.
>
> Have Fun,
> Sends Steve
>
> Nancy Kramer wrote:
>
> > There are lots of sites written only for IE or clones of IE like 
> > Opera.  Some large sites are written only for late model IEs.  Many 
> > are from large companies.  Big business thinks MS is the 
> state of the 
> > art and the only way to go for business.  You have a choice do it 
> > their way or don't get the benefits of their web site.  
> They play to 
> > the user who has AOL, uses only IE and Outlook with all the 
> defaults 
> > on because if MS does it it must be right and they really have no 
> > interest in changing things or knowing about them.  People believe 
> > they are protected by big companies like MS.  They are 
> fools but then 
> > like a friend of mine always says "business people are stupid".
> >
> > They believe that the US government should protect them 
> from hackers 
> > and spam.  That cannot be done but they don't understand that  and 
> > neither do the US legislators.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Nancy Kramer
> > Webmaster http://www.americandreamcars.com Free Color 
> Picture Ads for 
> > Collector Cars One of the Ten Best Places To Buy or Sell a 
> Collector 
> > Car on the Web
> >
> >
> > At 05:23 PM 6/28/2004, Burnes, James wrote:
> >
> > > Well, this is an predictable, but interesting quote from 
> IDefense...
> > > [IDefense linked the malicious attacks to a group by a 
> different name 
> > > called the hangUP team, also from Russia and also believed to be 
> > > responsible for the recent string of Korgo worms, Dunham said.
> > >
> > > "These are hackers for hire and they commoditize every piece of 
> > > information they capture. This was a very complicated and 
> > > sophisticated attack," he said.
> > >
> > > Security experts were still trying to determine Friday how IIS 
> > > servers were compromised and whether applying the latest 
> patches for 
> > > IIS and Internet Explorer would protect users from the attacks.
> > >
> > > "My gut feeling is (patching) doesn't protect you," Dunham 
> said. "If 
> > > I were a home user, I'd consider using another Web browser, like 
> > > Mozilla, until a patch comes out," he said.]  (nwfusion - 
> 06/25/2004)
> > > Well, of course.  By why go back to IE unless someone 
> wrote apps that 
> > > only run on IE and what's the point of that.  Might as well write 
> > > them in VB.
> > >
> > > jim burnes
> > > security engineer
> > > great-west, denver
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com 
> > > > [mailto:full-disclosure- admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of 
> > > > http-equiv () excite com
> > > > Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 9:41 AM
> > > > To: bugtraq () securityfocus com
> > > > Cc: NTBugtraq () listserv ntbugtraq com; 
> > > > full-disclosure () lists netsys com
> > > > Subject: [Full-disclosure] Microsoft and Security
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Where is Microsoft now "protecting their customers" as 
> they love to 
> > > > bray? Should not someone in authority of this public 
> company step 
> > > > forward and explain themselves at this time?
> > > >
> > > > All of sudden panic is being created across the WWW with "IIS 
> > > > Exploit Infecting Web Site Visitors With Malware", "Mysterious 
> > > > Attack Hits Web Servers", "Researchers warn of infectious Web 
> > > > sites" all stemming from all news accounts from an unpatched 
> > > > "problem" with Internet Explorer now two weeks old and counting, 
> > > > which in fact in reality stems from 10 months ago, that 
> being the 
> > > > adodb.stream safe for scripting control with write capabilities.
> > > >
> > > > What exactly is being done about this? Nothing. What 
> does multiple 
> > > > billions of dollars buy you today. Nothing. However for 
> $20 million 
> > > > you can almost fly to the moon.
> > > >
> > > > Someone ought to step forward and explaini what exactly is 
> > > > happening at this public company. The great "protector of their 
> > > > customers". One might even suggest that their entire "security"
> > > > mandate be re-examined. What exactly do they consider a 
> > > > vulnerability? Something that suits them or something 
> that's cost 
> > > > effective to fix. So what, a few people lose their 
> identities, have 
> > > > a few dollars extracted from their bank accounts, have 
> their home 
> > > > pages reset, we'll fix it when it suits us as we have to be on 
> > > > budget this quarter. The  Big Boss says $40 billion isn't enough 
> > > > this year.
> > > >
> > > > A vulnerability:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/community/columns/securi
> > > > ty/essays/vulnrbl.mspx
> > > >
> > > > "A security vulnerability is a flaw in a product that makes it 
> > > > infeasible - even when using the product properly-to prevent an 
> > > > attacker from usurping privileges on the user's system, 
> regulating 
> > > > its operation, compromising data on it, or assuming ungranted 
> > > > trust."
> > > >
> > > > what this gibberish? For the past 10 months the 
> adobd.stream object 
> > > > is capable of writing files to the "all important customer's" 
> > > > computer. It has real world consequences. It rapes their 
> computer. 
> > > > Does it fit into the gibberish custom definition. Plain 
> and simple: 
> > > > "A security vulnerability is a flaw in a product that makes it 
> > > > infeasible". What kind of language is this. Reads like the 
> > > > financial department conjured it up.
> > > >
> > > > Disabling scripting won't solve it. Putting sites in one of the 
> > > > myriad of "zones' won't solve it. Internet Explorer can 
> trivially 
> > > > be fooled into operating in the less than secure so- called 
> > > > "intranet zone" and it can be guided there remotely.
> > > >
> > > > What's happening here. Where is the Microsoft representative 
> > > > explaining all of this to the shareholders and 
> "customers" they so 
> > > > dearly wish to protect.  This is unacceptable.  Someone must be 
> > > > held accountable.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://www.malware.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 09/04/2004
>  

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 09/04/2004
 

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html