[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <4559F8DE.2688.4D8971B9@nick.virus-l.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:11:58 +1300
From: Nick FitzGerald <nick@...us-l.demon.co.uk>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: [ GLSA 200611-03 ] NVIDIA binary graphics
driver: Privilege escalation vulnerability
Raphael Marichez to Nick Boyce (??):
> > um ... doesn't that make it a *remote* privilege escalation ?
>
> in a certain way... you're right... although that requires the user
> complicity, strictly speaking, you're right.
Makes it no less remote.
Not _automatic_ remote, but still very, very much "remote".
> The guy who would manage to remotely root a box with that vulnerability would
> be really good. The real serious risk is local only. (think about all
> that unpatched linux boxes in the universities...)
You have a really odd view of the security exposure...
Even _Microsoft_ (now) self-rates this type of vulnerability as
critical and remotely exploitable for execution of arbitrary code (e.g.
the WMF vuln from late last year). OK -- so we can quibble over
whether it released patches quickly enough in that case (no), but at
least even the traditionally considered slackest of security slackers
gets the rating of the severity and scope of this kind of vuln right.
Any hope of Linux distro folk getting that clued?
Regards,
Nick FitzGerald
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists