Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 09:11:34 +1100
From: xD 0x41 <secn3t@...il.com>
To: Chris Evans <scarybeasts@...il.com>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Facebook Attach EXE Vulnerability

Oh hey, 3k is great!
I saw that they just made it look abit cheap... no wrath but, it is
still a MULTI billion now, dollar company, so they shoukld be trying
to make SURE they can out bi ANY underground payers.. thats all i had
to question.
thanks for clearing it up, but sure, if theyre paying better now thats
cool, i should have said to, it is atleast a step in the right
direction :s  Still, they ARE*** a mutil frigging million dollar
company lol, so why wouldnt they give say, 1k minimum and make sure
they get people more than interested but even fuzzing for bugs wich
could potentially be in use already... this is something theyre not
covering atall really with 500bux.
It is tho, a start...
cheers for clearing up theyre rce payout, wow, so they maybe read
googles hall of fame and did it in accordance ? Maybe im wrong but....
this company, is not really the same thing as a google, and i guess a
bug on this site, would be actually worth 5million pcs to anyone
buying it... im just saying for them being so rish, they could do
better, and definately, the comapnies who offer nothing, should get
nothing back, simple, thats why blackhats sometimes are blackhats,
they got rooted around tryin to help some pig headed company who makes
millions yet will screw you around so badly, you do realise they tried
to reproduce the bug YOU made even, in order to _NOT_ pay you shit.
remeber that.
But then again, your in theyre pocket now, and really CANT do shit now
but say yes sir no sir two bags half fkn full sir.
am i rite.
cheers tho.
FB still sux hairy ones.



On 31 October 2011 16:44, Chris Evans <scarybeasts@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 2:33 PM, xD 0x41 <secn3t@...il.com> wrote:
>> Bounty, another nice way to say *screw you but here anyhow...*
>> I am shocked they offer so little ($500 usd for remote-code injection) ,
>
> Actually, it's $500 _or more_. I've lost the reference, but I think
> they paid about $3000 for one case. Perhaps an RCE? Anyway, your
> assumption is off.
>
>> one remote code injection bug for FB in a security environment wich is
>> not white, and may sell the bug for upto more than 5000,
>
> You can't compare whitehat vs. blackhat programs. In the latter, you
> cross moral and legal lines. Most people aren't willing to be such a
> dick.
>
> Perhaps you should reserve your wrath for companies that offer
> $fuckall for good bugs? :)
>
>
> Cheers
> Chris
>
>> because if a
>> RCE or other was there, something wich was 'seadable' or wormable,
>> then theyre bounty should be far higher, because that doesnt even
>> match up to what many 0days would sell for.
>> If someone had a rce for this and were to worm it, now thats a million
>> dollar botnet... that would be for those who could make from it
>> something and there is no shortage of spammers all to happy to take
>> control of 2million or more pcs...
>> Thats just one scenarion, in wich they could loose somuch data and
>> info, and in exchange offer 500bux.
>> What a slap in the face, FB should be ashamed of that price and bump
>> it up atleast for more serious stuff.
>> EXE attachment would be medium to high risk, they would be able to now
>> patch it, after first they did not acknowledge, but also did not have
>> the bounty also... only recently they have added this, with what, a
>> crappy 500 bux, multi million dollar enterprises, wich are saved by
>> these disclosures, and they are paying pittance.
>> SHAME ON YOU FACEBOOK.COM , Shame...
>>
>> Welcome to the Shame-Files FB, your a disgrace to the good people who
>> are helping you.
>> Nice bug, and, atleast you worked with them to reproduce, you realise
>> they would have gave you 0 $ if they had repoduced this, so again,
>> shame on them for only acknowledging this when they failed at
>> repruction.
>> Theat 'bounty' page screams to me of the actual owners writing, and, I
>> bet he even probably hand wrote that, because he is a TIGHT FTSTED
>> pr**k , someone should put a /blackhat/ folder there, but then, its
>> not worth the time :) (no bug payout rofl...)
>> Notice also, D0S is not part of this, well then this would be funny if
>> one were to find a 0dayer in FB (ala apache d0s byterange style) ,
>> well dont bother disclosing it , just run it on a loop from theyre own
>> pages, afterall, whats the use to disclose such a shitty thing (yes
>> this is true it is shitty but, is all cases same...)
>> So summary is, Remote code injection or other, will get ya 500$ ,but,
>> if you goto an UG blackhat site, you might get 5k and up :P
>> xheers and again, thanks for being a good person and helping the
>> citizens of FB, really tho, you have, probably saved me even, 20
>> removals from my sisters PC :P
>> So, yes, I thank you and FD surely would thank you but, FB dont give a damn :P
>> If they have anyone on this list who is also in theyre secteam well,
>> you really have a 'suck-ass' bounty, wich should be looked over,
>> because seriously, what worth would be it to give you anything, when
>> it is directly cheaper from wqebsites to buy it, and not have any
>> disclosure atall.
>> I guess this is something YOU need to ponder, not me, and im glad for
>> that, and Im glad again, i dont use the shitty service, and never
>> will.
>> Enjoy, have a great day!
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30 October 2011 05:12, Nathan Power <np@...uritypentest.com> wrote:
>>> That was the original program I was participating in.  Facebook has agreed
>>> to pay me a bounty for this bug.
>>>
>>> Nathan Power
>>> www.securitypentest.com
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Ulises2k <ulises2k@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You know this?  ;)
>>>> https://www.facebook.com/whitehat/bounty/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 17:49, Nathan Power <np@...uritypentest.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > I would also like to note this vulnerability was reported responsibly in
>>>> > regards to full disclosure.
>>>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_disclosure
>>>> >
>>>> > Nathan Power
>>>> > www.securitypentest.com
>>>> > On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Nathan Power <np@...uritypentest.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I was basically told that Facebook didn't see it as an issue and I was
>>>> >> puzzled by that. Ends up the Facebook security team had issues reproducing
>>>> >> my work and that's why they initially disgarded it. After publishing, the
>>>> >> Facebook security team re-examined the issue and by working with me they
>>>> >> seem to have been able to reproduce the bug.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Nathan Power
>>>> >> www.securitypentest.com
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Pablo Ximenes <pablo@...en.es> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Not fixed yet. At least not yesterday when I checked.
>>>> >>> Nathan, didn't Facebook ask for some time to fix this bug after they
>>>> >>> have acknowledged it?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Pablo Ximenes
>>>> >>> http://ximen.es/
>>>> >>> http://twitter.com/pabloximenes
>>>> >>> Em 27/10/2011, às 19:29, Joshua Thomas <rappercrazzy@...il.com>
>>>> >>> escreveu:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> can't believe such was on FB  .... wahahaha !!! lol ....rofl ...
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> When was this discovered and fixed ?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Nathan Power <np@...uritypentest.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >>>> 1. Summary:
>>>> >>>> When using the Facebook 'Messages' tab, there is a feature to attach
>>>> >>>> a file.
>>>> >>>> Using this feature normally, the site won't allow a user to attach an
>>>> >>>> executable file.
>>>> >>>> A bug was discovered to subvert this security mechanisms. Note, you
>>>> >>>> do NOT have
>>>> >>>> to be friends with the user to send them a message with an
>>>> >>>> attachment.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >>>> Read the rest of this advisory here:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> http://www.securitypentest.com/2011/10/facebook-attach-exe-vulnerability.html
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Enjoy :)
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Nathan Power
>>>> >>>> www.securitypentest.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/
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> 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/
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>
>

_______________________________________________
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