full-disclosure - question regarding CAN-2004-0930

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

Message-ID: <20041118001016.M22551@gmx.net>
From: evilninja at gmx.net (evil)
Subject: question regarding CAN-2004-0930

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:49:12 -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote
> 
> When you do an "ls", you are making a call that the *os* has 
> to respond to. The os is *not* vulnerable, so it (properly)
> rejects the request as malformed.

i think i get it now. as someone else explained is "wildcard expansion"
also an issue here. so the (linux) os responds, before the smbd could
even notice the call.

> Hopefully that makes more sense to you.

yes, thank you.

Christian.
-- 
BOFH excuse #433:

error: one bad user found in front of screen