On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:25:08 -0700, you wrote:
>Anytime a developer has an application running as system which
>is a rare need, they must realize the security ramifications of
>what they are doing. (That, if a flaw is found in their software,
>they will elevate the privileges of the user).
Agreed
> -Original Message-
> From: Rothe, Greg (G.A.) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:00 AM
> To: 'Paul Starzetz'; Andrey Kolishak; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: White paper: Exploiting the Win32 API.
>
>
> All of this brin
ECTED]
Subject: Re: White paper: Exploiting the Win32 API.
Andrey Kolishak wrote:
>
>There is also article of Symeon Xenitellis "A New Avenue of Attack:
>Event-driven system vulnerabilities"
>http://www.isg.rhul.ac.uk/~simos/event_demo/
>
>
>
In fact, the problem i
Andrey Kolishak wrote:
>
>There is also article of Symeon Xenitellis "A New Avenue of Attack:
>Event-driven system vulnerabilities" http://www.isg.rhul.ac.uk/~simos/event_demo/
>
>
>
In fact, the problem is similar to U*ix signals, except that there is no
jump-to-address argument for usual. Re
> So let me get this straight.
>
> Allowing unpriveleged processes to send control messages to priveleged
> processes is not a flaw in the Win32 API because there is a mechanism
> for applications to protect themselves from this type of attack
> (alternate Windows Stations/Desktops).
>
> But the
From: John Howie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:44 AM
To: Chris Paget; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: White paper: Exploiting the Win32 API.
Chris,
This class of attack is not new, it has been discussed before. While you
can assert that the blame lies with Microsoft
I believe nothing new it that issue. WM_TIMER tricks were described by
Matt Pietrek in 1997, in Microsoft's MSJ
http://www.microsoft.com/msj/defaultframe.asp?page=/msj/0397/hood/hood0397.htm&nav=/msj/0397/newnav.htm
(sample included)
So it was noted already at least 5 years before Jim Allchin.
Dear All,
The issue of vulnerabilities in event-driven systems has been mentioned
last month (7th July 2002) in the vuln-dev mailling list at
http://online.securityfocus.com/archive/82/280912/2002-07-04/2002-07-10/0
Perhaps vuln-dev is not that popular as bugtraq :'(. Time to switch
maill
