Re: smk

[Ryan Permeh <ryan () EEYE COM>]

perhaps this just wasn't written in a way i could understand, but from what
i gathered, it looked like they were trying to do some kind of dns
redirection attack, paired with the routing of the loopback address(not even
sure why anyone would want to route this, since it ususally will never even
send a packet on the wire). I'm not certain i'm seeing any new
vulnerabilities, or any vulnerabilities at all.  it wasn't written in a way
where i could understand their test scenarios, or the processes they used,
or even really what the end result should have been.  perhaps someone who
read this and understood it better could comment further, but from the
information in there, i couldn't see any problems, ither than a presupposed
NIC Registry spoof and a bad routing table on router X.
Signed,
Ryan
eEye Digital Security Team
http://www.eEye.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Carr" <viper () BEA COM>
To: <VULN-DEV () SECURITYFOCUS COM>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 10:51 AM
Subject: smk


> I haven't heard any chat about this from Stray Mountain Kitty about a NAT
> exploit.
> http://www.cryptography.ws/smk/smk-vun.001.001.htm
>
> Has anyone have any ideas or heard about this?
>
> Viper Team
> viper () bea com