Re[2]: Frontpage Extensions Remote Command Execution

[Adik <netninja () hotmail kg>]

Hello Nick,

Thursday, November 13, 2003, 3:14:40 AM, you wrote:

NJ> Has anyone even had any luck reproducing this?  I can't for the life of
NJ> me get a crash...

NJ>         -----Original Message----- 
NJ>         From: Geo. 
NJ>         Sent: Wed 11/12/2003 11:41 AM 
NJ>         To: full-disclosure () lists netsys com 
NJ>         Cc: 
NJ>         Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] Frontpage Extensions Remote
NJ> Command Execution
        
        

NJ>         >>
NJ>         Well, for one, it's not root level.  It allows ANONYMOUS (Guest)
NJ> access
NJ>         <<
        
NJ>         No it's not, IWAM is Web Applications MANAGER account you were
NJ> thinking of
NJ>         IUSR perhaps? This is not guest. This account can change
NJ> websites so in a
NJ>         multi host environment this level of access will allow a
NJ> compromise of every
NJ>         website on the server.
        
NJ>         Geo. (I'd call that root)
        
NJ>         _______________________________________________
NJ>         Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
NJ>         Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
        

What i learned from this overflow was that there is a difference
between sending 500 'A's and sending 500 'X's. sending 500 'A' even
more doesn't trigger access violation on dllhost process. however if u
send 500 'X's u'll get acces violation. well at least thats what i
noticed. maybe i'm wrong. so sometimes sendin different strings
might generate different results.



-- 
Best regards,
 Adik                            mailto:netninja () hotmail kg

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