full-disclosure - Re: ICQ 6 protocol bug?

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]

Message-ID: <119796.1234648145@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 16:49:05 -0500
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: ICQ 6 protocol bug?

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:26:48 +0200, James Matthews said:

> ICQ is known to have a few remote bugs. I use meebo.com instead of a client
> due to these issues.

At which point you're probably trading known bugs for unknown bugs. ;)

Of course, this is a battle the user can't win. The other option is to
toss the proprietary ICQ client and use some other open-source client like
Pidgin - at which point you're trading known ICQ bugs for unknown Pidgin bugs.
At that point, your best bet is to consider 2 things:

1) What client am I most likely to see actual attacks against?
2) What client am I the most worried about attacks?

(Note the two don't have to be the same - widespread ICQ attacks may be more
common, but maybe you worry more about getting hit with a Pidgin attack because
it possibly means you're being targeted....)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

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