[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <88f16eb31003032015n4d4bddabx2cc7e37711d98931@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 09:45:23 +0530
From: information security <informationhacker08@...il.com>
To: Jeff Williams <jeffwillis30@...il.com>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Mozilla Firefox 3.6 plenitude String
Crash(0day) Exploit
i had check this code in 64 bit computer it works
but why this code only work for Mozilla browser not in Internet Explorer
and
also thanks Jeff for all your comment :)
In India a famous Poet kabir says "keep your critic next to you he is your
best friend!" :)
Asheesh kumar Mani Tripathi
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Jeff Williams <jeffwillis30@...il.com>wrote:
> Sure;
>
> Mozilla by default recover any "lost" tabs by itself, then no worry for
> your "users" considerations.
>
> Now sparky, who will be stupid enough to launch a botnet that sets a web
> page containing a document.write "A" * 2000000000000000000 on them
> compromised hosts ?
>
> You tell me.
>
>
>
> 2010/3/3 information security <informationhacker08@...il.com>
>
>> Thanks Valdis .Jeff for all your comment
>> yes my small-penis machine running out of RAM and swap space ...: ......
>> :)and i believe that Mozilla get crash ...........:(
>> can you tell me how to fix that people don't become victim from this
>> attack people with having 34 bit Computer
>> or people having small -penis machine change into big-penis machine :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 12:37 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:02:37 PST, information security said:
>>>
>>> > open in Mozilla Firefox and wait for 15 sec ...... :) and say Good Bye
>>>
>>> Sorry, your exploit doesn't do squat on a 64-bit Firefox 3.7a3 with
>>> plenty of
>>> RAM. It chugs for about 7-8 seconds and displays a *very* wide page. It
>>> must
>>> be your small-penis machine running out of RAM and swap space. :)
>>>
>>> Hint - this issue was well understood back in 1964. Literally. IBM's
>>> OS/360 had
>>> a GETMAIN macro that allocated storage that could encounter this same
>>> basic
>>> "out of memory" issue. So not only is this a non-bug that was known when
>>> you
>>> were still being toilet-trained, this may be the first recorded case of
>>> somebody reporting a non-bug that was known when their *parents* were
>>> still
>>> being toilet-trained.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Content of type "text/html" 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists