full-disclosure - Re: shell:windows

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

Message-ID: <40F2C9CD.9010804@sdf.lonestar.org>
From: bkfsec at sdf.lonestar.org (Barry Fitzgerald)
Subject: Re: shell:windows

Larry Seltzer wrote:

>
>This behavior is indistinguishable from that of a simple href to the file itself, so
>there's no point in bringing in the shell: stuff. If you want to assume a little social
>engineering can do anything than a simple href is a vulnerability for any browser. 
>
>  
>
I agree with what you're saying here, but it's still an issue to be 
aware of and is not disabled entirely - which was what was claimed in 
the message I responded to.

>>>>>Also, when the shell:windows reference is input into IE's address bar field, it
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>executes the code without a a dialogue box...
>
>Gimme a break. This is not a meaningful problem.
>
>
>  
>
It's as meaningful as the Mozilla issue.  If your point is that that 
wasn't a meaningful problem either, then we can agree to disagree on the 
scope.  I'll agree that getting this issue to run code of the choosing 
of the attacker is more difficult than some other unpatched IE holes, 
but it is not impossible.

I wonder, why are you so quick to discount this when you haven't looked 
deeply into it?

                -Barry