Re: Is The .WMF Exploit A ConsPiracy Gone Bad?

[Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>]

Thomas Mannfred Carlsson wrote:
> On 13 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Thomas Mannfred Carlsson wrote:
>
>
> > Can anyone here who has experimented with the
> > WMF vulnerability confirm or deny that portion of 
> > the Gibson announcement (i.e. that the vulnerability 
> > can only be triggered in Windows systems with Size 
> > = 1)?
>
>
> Just as a followup, a quick look at published WMF exploits to date 
> suggest that successful exploitation can use different sizes than 1 
> (e.g. 4 in Metasploit, 17 in Ilfak's tester).. so either Gibson has 
> stumbled on something new/different (i.e. maybe he uses a different 
> function number, and this is a whole new issue), or then it may 
> simply be a coding/interpretation error in his testbed (in which case 
> my heart goes out to the lad, I'm sure we all know what it's like to 
> discover something seemingly unprecedented and then force ourselves 
> to calmly and carefully recheck the data, processes etc before 
> drawing any significant conclusions).

Maybe it's another planned disinformation campaign.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.