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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:57:54 -0500 (EST)
From: Zhenkai Liang <>
To: Gadi Evron <>
Cc: "" <>,
   "" <>,
   Thor Larholm <>
Subject: Re: W2K source "leaked"?

Microsoft has confirmed the leak. See the link below:


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, Gadi Evron wrote:

> A couple of days ago a friend of mine drew my attention to the source 
> making rounds on the encrypted p2p networks, I was hoping it would take 
> a bit longer for it to be "out", but that was just day-dreaming.
> Thor Larholm just gave me this URL, as you can notice, the server is busy:
> I never believed in 0-days. "New" or more to the point 
> un-known-to-the-public exploits and vulnerabilities exist and are being 
> used.
> In my opinion "0-days" virtually don't exist. It's usually either some 
> vulnerability that is long known and a COP or a worm is created. Or 
> exploits that will nearly never see the "public" but exist and are used 
> by few individuals.. but now... I don't know.
> How often does a brand new exploit come out without prior warning and
> "attack" the net?
> *If* this really is the.. _real_ source code for W2K (and according to 
> the article NT4 as well).... we'll see what happens next.
> People didn't need help finding vulnerabilities in Windows before, but 
> it just became a whole lot easier and a lot less demanding on the "m4d 
> #4x0r 5k111z".
> I can't really say that the article is right and the source was "leaked" 
> or "stolen". The source is being sold/given (?) for years now to EDU's 
> and commercial companies for research purposes (not to mention China..). 
> I suppose foul play is always possible.
> Can anyone confirm this is the real source code? How about a press 
> release? :)
> 	Gadi Evron

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists