Re: DLL hijacking POC (failed, see for yourself)

[Jeffrey Walton <noloader () gmail com>]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Christian Sciberras <uuf6429 () gmail com> wrote:
> > Yes. Once again: get your homework done!
> >
> > > http://www.codeproject.com/KB/DLL/dynamicdllloading.aspx
> >
> > That's a double DYNAMIC there!
>
> Did you even bother to read the article? The very first paragraph
> states the difference between the two.
>
> Oh, and for the records, you can't statically link to dll files. At
> least, not in the way you're imagining.
> Static linking (in your case) only works for object files (.o or .lib).
>
> Dlls are inherently dynamic. Which is why they can be *loaded* both
> *statically* and *dynamically*.
> You can call that "implicit" vs "explicit" all you want, but the fact
> remains that one is static and the other is not.
Hmmm.... you should probably revisit this one. Also see Richter's
"Programming Windows" series (the latest is Windows via C++).

[SNIP]

> By the way, oldie...
Lol.... You will probably be old one day also (statistically, if you
made it to 18, you'll most likely make it to old age).

[SNIP]

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/