Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Is Mozilla's "patch" enough?
From: Aviv Raff <avivra () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 17:23:29 +0300

How can it not be a security flaw of mozilla if a setting in the
user.js overrides the global security setting defined by a patch, and
any manual setting defined by the user through the about:config?

I understand that if an attacker has the ability to change the user.js
file he can do worse things, but why should there be a way to override
security patches without uninstalling them?

I think user.js (or the lockPref settings in mozila.cfg) makes Mozilla
more spyware/worms oriented.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:01:53 +0200, Thomas Kaschwig <thomas () kaschwig net> wrote:
Aviv Raff wrote:

If an attacker has a file writing access to the user's default profile
directory, or somehow manages to update/create the file user.js (or
even worse - mozilla.cfg) he can override the patch's configuration
change, and enable the shell protocol handler again.

Nobody should have write access to your user profile. If someone is able
to modify your user.js file, (s)he can enable some worse options, e.g.
the protocol handler for `hcp' or `vbscript', but this is not a security
flaw of mozilla...

Thomas
--
PGP/GnuPG: http://www.kaschwig.net/kaschwig.gpg.asc * KeyID: 0x3D68D63A
Fingerprint: 274A 4CB8 B362 D593 39D6 0989 8FC3 725F 3D68 D63A


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


  By Date           By Thread  

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