Vulnerability Development mailing list archives

RE: Windows Vista winsat.exe Integer Overflow


From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor () hammerofgod com>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:39:36 -0700


-----Original Message-----
From: listbounce () securityfocus com
[mailto:listbounce () securityfocus com] On Behalf Of
Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 8:52 PM
To: Steve Shockley
Cc: vuln-dev () securityfocus com
Subject: Re: Windows Vista winsat.exe Integer Overflow

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:03:55 EDT, Steve Shockley said:

You'd still have to convince the user to bypass UAC when he wasn't
expecting a UAC prompt, in addition to getting them to run it in the
first place.

Experience has proved that neither of these should be all that
difficult for an attacker - an incredibly large percentage of users
will go ahead and run a .exe, clicking through multiple security
warnings, if it promises to do something interesting (usually having
to
do with somebody famous wearing too little clothing while
misbehaving...)

Right - however, by default, you only get the UAC "prompt for consent"
when you are *already* running as admin.  A normal user would have to
input the administrator username and password to continue the
installation.  Of course you can require even the administrator to enter
username and password, and can even make non-administrative requests for
elevation automatically fail. 

So, if you have someone who is going to run as administrator anyway,
download the untrusted .exe, execute it, and then confirm the execution
of the program without concern for what happens, we can't really fault
the OS for that at this point in the game.

t



Current thread: