full-disclosure - Re: On the iPhone PDF and kernel exploit

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]

Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 10:24:39 -0700
From: Zach C <fxchip@...il.com>
To: "Marcello Barnaba (void)" <vjt@...nssl.it>
Cc: "full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk" <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: On the iPhone PDF and kernel exploit

According to some of comex's tweets, the exploits he used are public; I also saw one person on Slashdot explain that root was granted via an IOSurface allocation error, while other sources claim part of the Spirit jailbreak was reused in Star. And then, of course, is the PDF exploit (that crashed Okular too when I tried to read one for shits and giggles -- yeah, not the brightest bulb, I know...).

But you are absolutely right in stating that it really is just as dangerous as it would be if the iPhone were a personal computer or somesuch instead (by intention :)). Remote root is remote root, and it is especially scary how it totally trashes every security measure put in place. Normally with this sort of thing I would suppose disclosure ethics would apply, and perhaps they still do, but at the same time, as you said, revealing the exploits makes it that much easier for Apple to find and patch them in the next release, which is both bane and boon. The next revision would be more secure at the expense of the user's freedom. Hell, the next revision will probably have at least part of this patched anyway just out of Apple's commitment to the walled garden. 

However... This particular exploit is only in binary form, and there is no official explanation yet. One usually comes after Apple has patched the flaw (as in "responsible" (I think it's called?) disclosure). Until then, it's likely that only those skilled in analyzing this sort of thing have any idea at all what Star does -- most of the "script kiddies" are just using it to jailbreak. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 4, 2010, at 5:01 AM, "Marcello Barnaba (void)" <vjt@...nssl.it> wrote:

> For the first time in my life, a 0-day exploiting remote code execution,
> sandbox escaping and privilege escalation has been packaged for general
> user consumption via a web site ( http://jailbreakme.com ). The actual
> pdf exploit can be downloaded here: http://jailbreakme.com/_/.
> 
> What puzzles me is.. no notices here on FD, no info on Bugtraq, no CVE,
> no press release by the CERT, as of now.
> 
> The cat & mouse game played by the iPhone dev team and Apple is done to
> liberate our devices from useless restrictions, but the whole point for
> them to exist is because said devices live in a walled garden, that is
> really useful only to the company behind it.
> 
> I've posted more thougths and the few technical details I was able to
> gather (from a tweet!) here:
> 
>  http://sindro.me/2010/8/4/on-the-iphone-pdf-and-kernel-exploit
> 
> What do you think? Did someone reverse engineer the exploit?
> 
> ~Marcello
> -- 
> ~ marcello.barnaba@...il.com
> ~ http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcellobarnaba
> ~ http://sindro.me/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

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