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  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: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:21:49 +0000
From: "Nicholas Lemonias." <lem.nikolas@...glemail.com>
To: Krzysztof Kotowicz <kkotowicz+fd@...il.com>,
 full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Fwd: Google vulnerabilities with PoC

And I am not referring just to Google. But for those people who support
that remote uploads to a trusted network is not an issue.  Then that also
means that firewalls and IPS systems are worthless. Why spend so much time
protecting the network layers if a user can send any file of choice to a
remote network through http.


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Nicholas Lemonias. <
lem.nikolas@...glemail.com> wrote:

> And I am not referring just to Google. But for those people who support
> that remote uploads to a trusted network is not an issue.  Then that also
> means that firewalls and IPS systems are worthless. Why spend so much time
> protecting the network layers if a user can send any file of choice to a
> remote network...
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 7:15 PM, Krzysztof Kotowicz <
> kkotowicz+fd@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> Care to report the same to Dropbox and Pastebin? It's a gold mine, you
>> know...
>>
>>
>> 2014-03-14 20:09 GMT+01:00 Nicholas Lemonias. <lem.nikolas@...glemail.com
>> >:
>>
>> You are wrong, because we do have proof of concepts. If we didn't have
>>> them, then there would be no case.
>>>
>>> But if there are video clips, images demonstrating impact - in which
>>> case arbitrary file uploads (which is a write() call ) to a remote network,
>>> then it is a vulnerability. It is not about the bounty, but rather about
>>> not defying academic literature and widely recognised practise.
>>>
>>> Attacking the arguer, won't make the bug to go away.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Nicholas.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Krzysztof Kotowicz <
>>> kkotowicz+fd@...il.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nicholas, seriously, just stop.
>>>>
>>>> You have found an 'arbitrary file upload' in a file hosting service and
>>>> claim it is a serious vulnerability. With no proof that your 'arbitrary
>>>> file' is being used anywhere in any context that would lead to code
>>>> execution - on server or client side. You cite OWASP documents (which are
>>>> unrelated to the case), academia papers from 1975 just to find a reason
>>>> it's theoretically serious, not paying any attention to what service you're
>>>> actually attacking and what have you really achieved in that (which is
>>>> demonstrating a filtering weakness at best, low risk).
>>>>
>>>> Everyone on this list so far explains why you're wrong, but you just
>>>> won't stop. So you start throwing out certificates, your academia
>>>> experience and your respected company. Then - name calling everyone else.
>>>> Seriously, it's just a good laugh for most of us.
>>>>
>>>> Dude, please, just because you did not qualify for a bounty, there's no
>>>> point in launching a whole campaign like you are. You're essentially
>>>> following the path of Khalil Shreateh (the guy who posted on Zuckerberg FB
>>>> wall) - he DID find a vuln though. Do you really want that? Go ahead, start
>>>> a crowdsourcing campaign!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-03-14 19:40 GMT+01:00 Nicholas Lemonias. <
>>>> lem.nikolas@...glemail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> We have many PoC's including video clips. We may upload for the
>>>>> security world to see.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, this is not the way to treat security vulnerabilities.
>>>>> Attacking the researcher and bringing you friends to do aswell, won't
>>>>> mitigate the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists