full-disclosure - Re: Windows is 100% self-modifying assembly code?(Interesting security theory)

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: <AANLkTim=OCCrcUKzbDAzYGtobx6=KbpfSOjXo9b3QHV5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 17:01:18 +0100
From: Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@...il.com>
To: John Horn <John.Horn@...sonaz.gov>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Windows is 100% self-modifying assembly
 code?(Interesting security theory)

Or the worst kind of trolling to have ever walked these newsgroups....




On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 4:10 PM, John Horn <John.Horn@...sonaz.gov> wrote:

>  Is this a joke?
>
>
> --
> John Horn
> City of Tucson, IT Department
> Network Services (Network security)
> Phone: (520) 837-6036
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify
>
> the sender by e-mail at the address shown.  This email transmission may contain confidential information.
>
> This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly.
>
> Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient.  Thank you for your compliance, time and attention to this matter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at  6:39 PM, in message <
> 8CD662233C10C95-230C-4704@...-mmc-m02.sysops.aol.com>, John Jester Wilham
> Patrick III <watermonk@...out.com> wrote:
>
>
>   From Andrew Auernheimer's Diary / irc memories:
>
> Windows is written in pure, self-modifying assembly code. Notice how you
> can install 15 gigs of data from a single Windows install DVD, which can
> only hold 5 gigs? This is because the code is dynamically generated to
> minimize attack vectors. Any attempt to observe the static files on the disk
> will change how it looks in runtime. This is also why Windows needs to be
> updated so often, so the running code never looks like it did before.
>
> Does this sound true to you guys? Windows does seem to have updates that
> take forever and speed wise it always felt there was something going
> on.  Whenever I leave my laptop alone, even when it's offline, indexing off,
> the computer is always working on stuff and you new know what it is.
>
> Maybe all applications with Windows compile on runtime for dynamic
> binaries, yet through .net's open, user-friendly API are still compatible?
>
> Balmer said he wanted to make Vista and 7 an OS that would not slow down
> after usage, but instead speed up. Windows is constantly reprogramming
> itself to suit the behavior of it's users and performing security and
> performance auditing.
>
> This is likely true - Think about it:
>
> All viruses are just malicious scripts. It's like saying *nix is insecure
> because script kiddies compile binaries and bash scripts that rm /.
>
> No one ever has ever had an attack vector against Windows 7 or Vista.
> Please confirm.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>

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/