bugtraq - Re[2]: Ipswitch WS_FTP Server 5.04 multiple arbitrary code execution vulnerabilities

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 23:27:18 +0300
From: 3APA3A <3APA3A@...URITY.NNOV.RU>
To: "Steven M. Christey" <coley@...re.org>
Cc: michal.bucko@...k.pl, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re[2]: Ipswitch WS_FTP Server 5.04 multiple arbitrary code execution vulnerabilities

Dear Steven M. Christey,

 In  general  case,  FTP  site admin is not necessary host admin. He can
 only  be  allowed  to  manage  users and virtual hosts for FTP. This is
 privilege escalation vulnerability from FTP site administrator to local
 system account.

 In  addition,  FTP  authentication is usually cleartext, and ability to
 execute  code with local system privileges by any FTP account should be
 taken seriously because of Man-in-the-middle attack vector.

-- 
~/ZARAZA
http://securityvulns.com/

--Friday, February 2, 2007, 10:48:39 PM, you wrote to michal.bucko@...k.pl:

SMC> Michal,

SMC> iFTPAddU is for adding users, and iFTPAddH is for adding virtual
SMC> hosts.  These sound like administator-level controls.  Presumably, the
SMC> same admin already had the access to install WS_FTP in the first
SMC> place.  So, it doesn't seem like these cross any privilege boundaries,
SMC> so they don't sound like vulnerabilities.

SMC> Am I missing something here?

SMC> - Steve