done.. bye!
On 12 June 2011 13:12, -= Glowing Doom =- <sec...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yet i now stop... enjoy your pathetic,useless luist.. i will now > unsubscribe :) > thanks. > > > > On 12 June 2011 13:09, -= Glowing Doom =- <sec...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here again.... >> >> I will write a sentence now, and, i will just copy, so it is 'darkened' >> text , then with NO backspace just leave the text darkened, and goto 'link' >> , and enter a link.. the text will turn to red. >> >> >> (this is the easiest way to reproduce it...) <http://www.haxxor-NOT.bs> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 12 June 2011 13:07, -= Glowing Doom =- <sec...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I should have said just 'copy, then hit link... because the other one, is >>> actually VERY hard to explain..but yes... backspace... has a bug with >>> emails. Is this so hard for 500000 ppl to understand ? >>> I am really shocked at the brubbish talk i have copped from this. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12 June 2011 13:06, -= Glowing Doom =- <sec...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Do the research... then call yourself a 'team'...please :s >>>> >>>> The PoC, is easy as hell to reproduce. I am shocked a team, cannot do >>>> it.. >>>> >>>> even the easy one wich is just copy/backspace, and, hit link and enter a >>>> link! >>>> simple ? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12 June 2011 12:52, Haxxor Security <h...@xxor.se> wrote: >>>> >>>>> As I (painfully tried to) understand it, secn3t can fool his own email >>>>> client to create malformed links by pressing backspace... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2011/6/12 adam <a...@papsy.net> >>>>> >>>>>> 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 =- <sec...@gmail.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 <a...@papsy.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 <0...@phocean.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 <uuf6...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> > <mailto:uuf6...@gmail.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 < >>>>>>>>> noloa...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> > <mailto:noloa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:06 PM, -= Glowing Doom =- >>>>>>>>> > <sec...@gmail.com <mailto:sec...@gmail.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/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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/