full-disclosure - FW: [Fwd: Re[2]: Fun with event logs (semi-offtopic)]

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]

Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:10:35 +0000
From: "BART. ...." <need4angel@...mail.com>
To: 3APA3A@...URITY.NNOV.RU
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: FW: [Fwd: Re[2]: Fun with event logs
	(semi-offtopic)]

Dear 3APA3A,

Correct me if i am wrong, but it looks like it's documented behavior of the 
event viewer.
This is what i found:

Note that there is no way to log a string that contains %n, where n is an 
integer value. This syntax is used in IPv6 addresses, so it is a problem to 
log an event message that contains an IPv6 address. For example, if the 
message text contains %1, the event viewer treats it as an insertion string. 
If the string contains %%1, the event viewer literally uses %%1.

Source:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa363679.aspx

Greetz,
B

>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: 	Re[2]: [Full-disclosure] Fun with event logs (semi-offtopic)
>Date: 	Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:13:14 +0300
>From: 	3APA3A <3APA3A@...URITY.NNOV.RU>
>Reply-To: 	3APA3A <3APA3A@...URITY.NNOV.RU>
>Organization: 	http://www.security.nnov.ru
>To: 	Michele Cicciotti <mc@...msa.net>
>CC: 	full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
>References: 	<20061221122536.6AA7A1D8F7C@...ertolla.itapac.net> 
><20061221152104.A96731D8F79@...ertolla.itapac.net>
>
>
>
>Dear Michele Cicciotti,
>
>--Thursday, December 21, 2006, 6:20:54 PM, you wrote to 
>full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk:
>
>>>There  is  interesting  thing  with  event  logging on Windows. The only
>>>security  aspect  of  it  is  event log record tampering and performance
>>>degradation,  but  it may become sensitive is some 3rd party software is
>>>used for automated event log analysis.
>
>MC> I doubt this. The event logs don't contain the actual formatted
>MC> string, because the template string is localized and only retrieved
>MC> when the entry is displayed - what is logged is just a message id
>MC> and the string inserts (see documentation for EVENTLOGRECORD).
>MC> FormatMessage (which is used to build the full message to display to
>MC> the user) isn't the culprit, either, because it doesn't operate
>MC> recursively (that would have bizarre consequences, since
>
>As  I  wrote,  my message is semi-offtopic, because it's more fun than
>any  security  vulnerability  here.
>
>Yes,  probably  this  bug  only  affects  event  viewer  itself. I don't
>understand  how  and why Microsoft achieved this effect in event viewer,
>which  is,  by  the  way,  security tool, and if it's hard for different
>vendor  to  make  same  mistake. It doesn't look like Easter egg, but if
>FormatMessage  does  not recursion it needs to be specially coded and it
>does  nothing  except this bug. Bug, that needs to be specially coded is
>new funny bug category, isn't it?
>
>--
>~/ZARAZA
>http://www.security.nnov.ru/
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
The MSN Entertainment Guide to Golden Globes is here.  Get all the scoop. 
http://tv.msn.com/tv/globes2007/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/