full-disclosure - Re: POC for a simple gmail/possible code injection into html wich can be executed in an email, i will make the PoC code and explain how here and now...

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: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:31:46 -0500
From: adam <adam@...sy.net>
To: secn3t@...il.com
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: POC for a simple gmail/possible code
 injection into html wich can be executed in an email,
 i will make the PoC code and explain how here and now...

At the end of the day, you're going to be treated like a child as long as
you continue to type like one.

The entertaining part for me is how each of your replies contradicts a
previous one. According to you, this *vulnerability* *has existed for years*.
And also according to you, the reason why the original email was filled with
spelling errors is because it *was rushed out due to you being "awake" at
6AM.* Do you see the inconsistency between those two statements? Your
response to Christian also indicated that you* **didn't just discover this*.

IF this is an old vulnerability and IF you've known about it for an extended
period of time - WHY did you have to post it right when you did? It's old,
you've known about it for a while, it's existed for years, yet it couldn't
wait until later in the day? It couldn't wait until you had time to skim
over the email and correct any spelling/grammar mistakes? It absolutely had
to be posted right then and there?

On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:14 PM, -= Glowing Doom =- <secn3t@...il.com>wrote:

> Thats why i the people who do understand it, can see that it is there...
> yes, VERY hard to expalin, id LOVE to see you try.
>
>
>
> On 12 June 2011 12:11, adam <adam@...sy.net> wrote:
>
>> Furthermore, pretending that we [the readers] are somehow at fault here
>> (for not understanding) isn't going to get you very far. The only thing
>> consistent in this entire thread is that people *kind of* want to know
>> what you're talking about, but aren't able to due to the poor writing style
>> and spelling/grammar errors.
>>
>> It should be noted that no one is being anal about typos, I fully
>> understand that people make mistakes. The difference is that it appears you
>> didn't even so much as proof read the original email.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:04 PM, phocean <0x90@...cean.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi n3td3v... oops!... secn3t (that is close),
>>>
>>> Sorry but I don't understand anything to this thread.
>>> Each of your emails is such a pain to read, that I stop at the first
>>> sentence.
>>> We are all busy and don't want to take 20 min to decipher your writing
>>> with the risk that it is not deserving it.
>>> Please clarify and give consistent technical facts.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Le 12/06/2011 03:33, -= Glowing Doom =- a écrit :
>>> > This is NOT coded..  the PoC i am explaining, is possible with simply
>>> > copyying text,then using a sequence of keys, to make the actual
>>> > sentence/s, appear.
>>> > This code is not what shows up when it is dissected.
>>> > It shows up with many x41 all over the email when it is done properly .
>>> > Regards.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 12 June 2011 11:29, Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@...il.com
>>> > <mailto:uuf6429@...il.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >     For those lazy enough to search:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/The_CSRSS_Backspace_Bug_still_works_in_windows_2003_sp1
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     Excerpt:
>>> >
>>> >     Basicaly just compile this and you will get a 100% processor usage
>>> >     by the compiled exploit and Csrss.exe
>>> >
>>> >     #include <stdio.h>
>>> >     int main(void)
>>> >     {
>>> >     while(1)
>>> >     printf("\t\t\b\b\b\b\b\b");
>>> >     return 0;
>>> >     }
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     How this helps in sending spam is beyond me.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Jeffrey Walton <
>>> noloader@...il.com
>>> >     <mailto:noloader@...il.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >         On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:06 PM, -= Glowing Doom =-
>>> >         <secn3t@...il.com <mailto:secn3t@...il.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >         > It is now, over 1yr old atleast and exists in riched20.dll.
>>> >         > This PoC info is over for me also.
>>> >         Microsoft had problems with a backspace in the past. Search for
>>> >         "CSRSS
>>> >         Backspace Bug".
>>> >
>>> >         > [SNIP
>>> >
>>> >         Jeff
>>> >
>>> >         _______________________________________________
>>> >         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/
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> phocean
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>
>
>

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/