full-disclosure - Re: [Amsn-devel] aMSN <= 0.96 remote DoS vulnerability

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: <20070422053235.GA18076@kakaroto.homelinux.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 01:32:35 -0400
From: kakaroto@...aroto.homelinux.net (Youness Alaoui)
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Cc: amsn-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Amsn-devel] aMSN <= 0.96 remote DoS
	vulnerability

Hi,

I'm a developer and admin of the aMSN project, someone just sent me this link 
( http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2007-April/053912.html ).

I just grepped in the source code and that port (31337) is not used by aMSN, it could be a port used for a 
profile (as a locking system), in which case the port is randomly chosen each time, so this is probably just a 
fluke, he found the port of his current aMSN instance and used it. 

As I don't have more info, I can't really test this bug and find the real cause and fix it, so it would be nice 
to have more info about this. 

Seeing how the user replied on the "Vendor contacted?" tag, I wonder if I can get any more info on this matter.

Thanks,
KaKaRoTo

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