Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: POC for a simple gmail/possible code injection into html wich can be executed in an email, i will make the PoC code and explain how here and now...


From: phocean <0x90 () phocean net>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 10:11:30 +0200

Before asking others to learn reading, learn writing yourself.

By the way, just a hint concerning this whole thread: maybe if you first
start by understanding very well what you want to explain, it will sure
become much easier.
So you shouldn't blame others for the consequences of your own lacks.

--phocean


Le 12/06/2011 04:34, -= Glowing Doom =- a écrit :
Umm... someone ELSE showed the fact that, there is something with
backspace, and MS... Learn to read, ill prmise to learn to speeel :)

To many IF's, do some research, instead of flaming.



On 12 June 2011 12:31, adam <adam () papsy net <mailto:adam () papsy net>> wrote:

    At the end of the day, you're going to be treated like a child as
    long as you continue to type like one. 

    The entertaining part for me is how each of your replies contradicts
    a previous one. According to you, this /vulnerability/ *has existed
    for years*. And also according to you, the reason why the original
    email was filled with spelling errors is because it *was rushed out
    due to you being "awake" at 6AM.* Do you see the inconsistency
    between those two statements? Your response to Christian also
    indicated that you/ /*/didn't/ just discover this*.

    IF this is an old vulnerability and IF you've known about it for an
    extended period of time - WHY did you have to post it right when you
    did? It's old, you've known about it for a while, it's existed for
    years, yet it couldn't wait until later in the day? It couldn't wait
    until you had time to skim over the email and correct any
    spelling/grammar mistakes? It absolutely had to be posted right then
    and there? 

    On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:14 PM, -= Glowing Doom =-
    <secn3t () gmail com <mailto:secn3t () gmail com>> wrote:

        Thats why i the people who do understand it, can see that it is
        there... yes, VERY hard to expalin, id LOVE to see you try.



        On 12 June 2011 12:11, adam <adam () papsy net
        <mailto:adam () papsy net>> wrote:

            Furthermore, pretending that we [the readers] are somehow at
            fault here (for not understanding) isn't going to get you
            very far. The only thing consistent in this entire thread is
            that people /kind of/ want to know what you're talking
            about, but aren't able to due to the poor writing style and
            spelling/grammar errors.

            It should be noted that no one is being anal about typos, I
            fully understand that people make mistakes. The difference
            is that it appears you didn't even so much as proof read the
            original email.


            On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:04 PM, phocean <0x90 () phocean net
            <mailto:0x90 () phocean net>> wrote:

                Hi n3td3v... oops!... secn3t (that is close),

                Sorry but I don't understand anything to this thread.
                Each of your emails is such a pain to read, that I stop
                at the first
                sentence.
                We are all busy and don't want to take 20 min to
                decipher your writing
                with the risk that it is not deserving it.
                Please clarify and give consistent technical facts.

                Thanks.

                Le 12/06/2011 03:33, -= Glowing Doom =- a écrit :
                > This is NOT coded..  the PoC i am explaining, is
                possible with simply
                > copyying text,then using a sequence of keys, to make
                the actual
                > sentence/s, appear.
                > This code is not what shows up when it is dissected.
                > It shows up with many x41 all over the email when it
                is done properly .
                > Regards.
                >
                >
                >
                > On 12 June 2011 11:29, Christian Sciberras
                <uuf6429 () gmail com <mailto:uuf6429 () gmail com>
                > <mailto:uuf6429 () gmail com <mailto:uuf6429 () gmail com>>>
                wrote:
                >
                >     For those lazy enough to search:
                >
                >    
                https://www.owasp.org/index.php/The_CSRSS_Backspace_Bug_still_works_in_windows_2003_sp1
                >
                >
                >     Excerpt:
                >
                >     Basicaly just compile this and you will get a 100%
                processor usage
                >     by the compiled exploit and Csrss.exe
                >
                >     #include <stdio.h>
                >     int main(void)
                >     {
                >     while(1)
                >     printf("\t\t\b\b\b\b\b\b");
                >     return 0;
                >     }
                >
                >
                >     How this helps in sending spam is beyond me.
                >
                >
                >
                >     On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Jeffrey Walton
                <noloader () gmail com <mailto:noloader () gmail com>
                >     <mailto:noloader () gmail com
                <mailto:noloader () gmail com>>> wrote:
                >
                >         On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:06 PM, -= Glowing
                Doom =-
                >         <secn3t () gmail com <mailto:secn3t () gmail com>
                <mailto:secn3t () gmail com <mailto:secn3t () gmail com>>> wrote:
                >
                >         > It is now, over 1yr old atleast and exists
                in riched20.dll.
                >         > This PoC info is over for me also.
                >         Microsoft had problems with a backspace in the
                past. Search for
                >         "CSRSS
                >         Backspace Bug".
                >
                >         > [SNIP
                >
                >         Jeff
                >
                >         _______________________________________________
                >         Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
                >         Charter:
                http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
                >         Hosted and sponsored by Secunia -
                http://secunia.com/
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > _______________________________________________
                > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
                > Charter:
                http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
                > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


                --
                phocean

                _______________________________________________
                Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
                Charter:
                http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
                Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/



            _______________________________________________
            Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
            Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
            Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/






_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


-- 
phocean

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/


Current thread: