full-disclosure - Cisco IOS Shellcode Presentation

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: Fri Jul 29 21:23:35 2005
From: jlk at thrashyour.com (John Kinsella)
Subject: Cisco IOS Shellcode Presentation

Lynn's is not a vulnerability per-se, in my mind, but a way to take a
vulnerability and turn it into Something Useful.

John

On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 03:02:38PM -0500, Madison, Marc wrote:
>  Am I missing something here, because it seems that two vulnerabilities
> are being discussed, one is the IPv6 DOS
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20050729-ipv6.shtml.  And
> the other is Lynn presentation on shellcode execution via the IOS?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk
> [mailto:full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of Geo.
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 2:57 PM
> To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
> Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] Cisco IOS Shellcode Presentation
> 
> >>Read the advisory a bit closer. Here the relevant lines:
> "Products that are not running Cisco IOS are not affected.
> Products running any version of Cisco IOS that do not have IPv6
> configured interfaces are not vulnerable."
> 
> Yes, IOS versions that have the fix, or that don't even run IPv6 are not
> *vulnerable*. But all IOS versions are *affected* by the *mechanism* he
> described. <<
> 
> It's acutally a bit worse than that, IPv6 is enabled on all interfaces,
> you have to execute "no ipv6 enable" and "no ipv6 address" command on
> each interface to disable it.
> 
> Second, the exploit is limited to local network segment, except it seems
> to me a worm that spreads from router to router could spread via the
> local network since a local network segment is usually defined as the
> wire between two routers.. Infection would spread from one router to
> it's peers, to those peers, etc. (please correct me if I'm wrong)
> 
> Geo.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/