Christian Sciberras wrote: > I can't take THAT seriously. At least not all of it. > > The part that interested me most: > >> 4. Should I find such vulnerability in many applications as I can? >> >> You should not. It's just a waste of time and your energy. Focus on most >> popular application types/classes. > > If, say, DWM.dll is exploitable, why not point *that* out rather than > point out the many applications that are using it (wrongly)?
ANY DLL is/may be exploitable when referenced without its (often well-known) complete pathname. It IS necessary to name all the applications with unqualified references and to have them fixed by their authors/vendors. And there are MANY places where DLLs or EXEs are referenced, not just in binaries: the registry, DESKTOP.INI files (especially in the start menu and %ProgramFiles%), batch files (do you reference CMD.EXE always as %SystemRoot%\System32\CMD.EXE? No? It really doesn't hurt!), scripts (including AUTORUN.INF.-), ... Stefan > Oh, and the "report". For obvious reasons, I cannot include the full > report. If I missed passing any detail, just ask and I'll fix right > away. > > http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/4801/31998033.png > > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:10 PM, YGN Ethical Hacker Group <li...@yehg.net> > wrote: >> Hi Christian >> >> The reason I use "Clean" doesn't mean (or I'm not accusing) your >> Windows is infected. >> It's better to test DLL Hijacking in Clean Copy of Windows without any >> prior applications messup. >> >> Please take a look at >> http://core.yehg.net/lab/pr0js/texts/when_testing_for_dll_hijacking.txt >> >> We thank ACROS Security for bringing life to this issue. >> We'll take social responsibility as a security community to stop this >> issue as much as we could. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
