Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit?
From: Laurelai <laurelai () oneechan org>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:32:13 -0700
On 10/3/2011 4:29 PM, GloW - XD wrote:
Someone should write a scanner that checks for that stuff + pulls RSA keys from the web and adds it to a keyring, that would be a nice scanner.There's only 4 billion IP's to scan if he want to get all out of his trick. Synscan can do a subnet (class b) in ~3 minutes nowdays ;) I would think he would find it.i did a scan on a kit i found, root:barcelona123 , and, got like 100 boxes in 10minutes of scanning, ofc, i looked up the IP range, usually they scan by range and classes, log to file, then log in. It is very fast nowdays, and very effective if done properly... i have seen this only recently become "effevive" but, it is..and there is plenty of fools who will execute it as-is... that is just, to easy, every box a kid has root on, will opfc try it *just incase that, fd is wrong* ...and i have seen one case already ;p so, it is the easiest way to engineer, *keep this private* or pvt pvt pvt dont leak!khehe.. best trix ever. xdOn 4 October 2011 02:29, <nix () myproxylists com <mailto:nix () myproxylists com>> wrote:> > > http://packetstormsecurity.org/files/25728/w000t-shell.c.html > > It's a trojan, based on the w00t-shell.c code; the shell code adds a > passwordless root account under the name w000t. > Nice try though. I was not aware that this shellcode was freely available but after debugging the same shellcode I noticed that passwordless account. He'll have plenty of work to do while scanning for that SSH account. There's only 4 billion IP's to scan if he want to get all out of his trick. > > Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:31:29 +0100 > From: d.martyn.fulldisclosure () gmail com <mailto:d.martyn.fulldisclosure () gmail com> > To: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk <mailto:full-disclosure () lists grok org uk> > Subject: [Full-disclosure] Apache 2.2.17 exploit? > > I regularly trawl Pastebin.com to find code - often idiots leave some 0day > and similar there and it is nice to find. > > Well, seeing as I have no test boxes at the moment, can someone check this > code in a VM? I am not sure if it is legit or not. > > > http://pastebin.com/ygByEV2e > > Thanks :) > > ~Darren > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit?, (continued)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? xD 0x41 (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? xD 0x41 (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? xD 0x41 (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? halfdog (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? halfdog (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? Andrew Farmer (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? GloW - XD (Oct 03)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? GloW - XD (Oct 03)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? Laurelai (Oct 03)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? xD 0x41 (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? adam (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? VeNoMouS (Oct 04)
- Re: Apache 2.2.17 exploit? adam (Oct 04)