bugtraq - Re: IPv4 fragmentation --> The Rose Attack

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

Message-ID: <200404081826.i38IQHov006845@caligula.anu.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 04:26:17 +1000 (Australia/ACT)
From: Darren Reed <avalon@...igula.anu.edu.au>
To: vigour@...antis.bg (Ventsislav Genchev)
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: IPv4 fragmentation --> The Rose Attack

In some mail from Ventsislav Genchev, sie said:
> 
> I've tested the attack on 4 machines..
> The first two were running windows 98 SE with all patches and service
> packs... the CPU stuck the 100% as soon as the attack started..
> 
> The last two machines were running Fedora Core 1 Linux and RedHat Linux
> 9... no success here... the attack seems not to bother the normal work
> of the PCs... The RedHat Linux uses kernel-2.4.20-30.9...

Is there any real point in testing Windows 9*, still ?
Does anyone care, including Microsoft, enough to want it fixed rather
than get people to upgrade to something that is better when it comes
to security, overall ?

This is approaching 6 years plus in age and has surely got to be in
the "so what" category by now.  Similarly, IE4 has dropped off the
things to check and you didn't test with Linux 2.2 or 2.0 or whatever
else is of similar same vintage (not that I would expect any difference in
terms of results).