bugtraq - Re: [Full-disclosure] RealVNC 4.1.1 Remote Compromise

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]

Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 15:10:09 -0700
From: Ray Van Dolson <rayvd@...italpath.net>
To: Kurt Seifried <bt@...fried.org>
Cc: Tobias Kreidl <Tobias.Kreidl@....EDU>, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] RealVNC 4.1.1 Remote Compromise


On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 05:33:29PM -0600, Kurt Seifried wrote:
> >How is it that even though this vulnerability has been known now for
> >some time, Red Hat still has not issued a new package or security update
> >that addresses this?  On RHN, the most recent package I can find is
> >4.0.0 beta and the most recent security patch for VNC dates back to
> >December 2004.  Since Red Hat started distributing the package, why has
> >it not been kept up with?
> 
> Probably because customers are not bugging them to much for it?  I've never 
> used vnc-server on Linux or seen it used to be honest, and although it is a 
> nasty problem it's easy to deal with (just firewall it to trusted systems 
> or wrap a VPN around it). They are obviously aware of this issue (it was 
> fixed in Fedora Core 5, reported by Mark J. Cox).
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191692
> 

That bugzilla report makes it sound like RHEL versions of VNC are
unaffected?

"I've verified that by altering a client in this way you are able to bypass
password authentication in vnc 4.1.1 but not in earlier versions as shipped
in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (their server connection souce code is
different)."

Ray