Nmap Security Scanner
*Intro
*Ref Guide
*Install Guide
*Download
*Changelog
*Book
*Docs
Security Lists
*Nmap Hackers
*Nmap Dev
*Bugtraq
*Full Disclosure
*Pen Test
*Basics
*More
Security Tools
*Pass crackers
*Sniffers
*Vuln Scanners
*Web scanners
*Wireless
*Exploitation
*Packet crafters
*More
Site News
Site Search:
Exploit World
Advertising
About/Contact
Credits
Sponsors:




bugtraq logo Bugtraq mailing list archives

Re: [ANNOUNCE] glibc heap protection patch
From: Stefan Esser <se () nopiracy de>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:10:05 +0100

xenophi1e wrote:

This question seems more complex than 'Feel free to demonstrate me an unlink exploit that works while my unlink macro is in place'. But I have to admit my own ignorance here, I can't say for certain whether an attacker who passes the test in your macro is left in a situation where an exploit is possible.

Fact is my macro makes arbitrary pointer overwrites with unlink() impossible. The magic value approach just makes it harder. You need to guess a 32bit value. Even if this is totally random it is theoreticly possible to exploit the unlink() macro in that case. And do not forget the power of information leak exploits.

Just an example: The gamecube was hacked by an information leak exploit. A crc feature the Phantasy Star Online game allows to request checksums of arbitrary memory positions (and sizes). So it was possible for the smart guy who did it, to create a complete memory dump from
remote. In that case your magic values are worthless...

Stefan Esser


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]