full-disclosure - Re: [SEC-LABS] Win32 Device Drivers Communication ...

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <200308030418.h734IAa03254@milan.maths.usyd.edu.au>
From: psz at maths.usyd.edu.au (Paul Szabo)
Subject: Re: [SEC-LABS] Win32 Device Drivers Communication ...

> The Sec-Labs security research group found a bug in Win32 Device Drivers
> Communication, the white-paper for this vulnerability can be viewed at
> http://sec-labs.hack.pl , the exploit code for Symantec Norton AntiVirus
> '2002 (probably all versions) Device Driver is also stored at our homepage. 
> 
> The full link to the white paper: 
> http://sec-labs.hack.pl/papers/win32ddc.php

Two questions:

Can this problem be classified as a "shatter" attack? The similarity I see
is that Windows takes an address and does things with it without any checks.

Could other drivers (part of a "standard" Windows install) be exploited?
Maybe the CON: driver where we have some control over the output?

I apologize if these are "stupid" questions.

Thanks,

Paul Szabo - psz@...hs.usyd.edu.au  http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au:8000/u/psz/
School of Mathematics and Statistics  University of Sydney   2006  Australia