Re: Windows Vista winsat.exe Integer Overflow
[email protected] Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:22:35 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.security.vulnerabilities |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--==_Exmh_1207326155_3066P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:58:14 PDT, "Thor (Hammer of God)" said: > Hey Valdis - > > > > So, if you have someone who is going to run as administrator anyway, > > > download the untrusted .exe, execute it, and then confirm the > > > execution of the program without concern for what happens, we can't > > > really fault the OS for that at this point in the game. > > > > I wasn't faulting the OS - I was pointing out it's still a viable > > attack vector, despite the OS's best efforts to stop it. > > I know you weren't specifically faulting the OS for this -- it's just > that when I see posts that combine the "non-issue of the day" with a > requirement of "this is bad because if I can get the user to run > arbitrary code as administrator first, then I use that code to exploit > his vulnerability" coupled with "and this is easy because it's trivial > to get people to run malicious code and we all know they all just click > through all warnings" that it just gets to be too much. > > I'm aware that you didn't say all of the above, but it's what the net > result of the thread became. From the *prevention* side of the fence, it's true - once you get the user to run untrusted code as administrator, the box is pwned good and thoroughly. And since there's a wide variety of things that can happen, "nuke it from orbit and re-install, it's the only way to be sure" is the operative phrase. The number of *different* things that can be done once you get an initial foothold of executing code is more probably interesting to those of us who do computer forensics, where the exact mechanism *is* relevant to figuring out what happened, and (possibly) how to prevent it from happening again. --==_Exmh_1207326155_3066P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFH9lXLcC3lWbTT17ARAvSEAJ4rX0MeJi8EdziUIbgp1ggD/9bpRACg9cmF wwYjm5LJkap/ypmgZFkXVTM= =loDu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1207326155_3066P--