full-disclosure - DCOM RPC exploit (dcom.c)

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: <3F23BFC0.9000308@guninski.com>
From: guninski at guninski.com (Georgi Guninski)
Subject: DCOM RPC exploit  (dcom.c)

Chris Paget wrote:
> Personally, I'm tempted to set up my firewall to NAT incoming requests on port
> 135 to either www.metasploit.com or www.xfocus.org.  I know this is the
> full-disclosure list, but working exploit code for an issue this huge is taking
> it a bit far, especially less than 2 weeks after the advisory comes out.
> 

IMHO releasing the exploit is ethical and legal.
The root of the problem is m$, they should take responsibility for the worms.
IIRC the m$ EULA states something like "the product is not fit for any purpose". 
So the exploit is consistent with the m$ EULA, I can't understand why you whine.
btw, Terry Pratchett has very good writings on IT EULA's and practices - check 
"Good Omens" and a disc world book mentioning a disorganizer.

georgi