On 23 Nov 2007 07:23:05 -0000, <emacs25 (at) gmail (dot) com [email concealed]> wrote:
> I was trying to confirm that, but under Windows XP MCE (lang: German and English) with all patches, overflows on other address. Can anybody confirm that?
I've tested it on VPC with Windows XP SP2 PL and I can confirm it
works as the author stated.
> I agree with JohnDo, why just don't send user a specially crafted kernel32.dll :).
I don't. First, it's a .txt file, not a .dll file. Second, this file
is a part of emoticon sets. You do not expect emoticons to execute
some code do you ? ;>
> 2. Why did you wrote VERY HIGH threat? This is local buffer overflow. Moreover user has to
> replace original file. This vulnerability has more to do with SE :(.
As far as I know the user does not have to overwrite any file. See
http://vexillium.org for a video of exploitation without replacing any
files. "Very High" might be a little to much, but just a little imho
On 23 Nov 2007 07:23:05 -0000, <emacs25 (at) gmail (dot) com [email concealed]> wrote:
> I was trying to confirm that, but under Windows XP MCE (lang: German and English) with all patches, overflows on other address. Can anybody confirm that?
I've tested it on VPC with Windows XP SP2 PL and I can confirm it
works as the author stated.
> I agree with JohnDo, why just don't send user a specially crafted kernel32.dll :).
I don't. First, it's a .txt file, not a .dll file. Second, this file
is a part of emoticon sets. You do not expect emoticons to execute
some code do you ? ;>
> 2. Why did you wrote VERY HIGH threat? This is local buffer overflow. Moreover user has to
> replace original file. This vulnerability has more to do with SE :(.
As far as I know the user does not have to overwrite any file. See
http://vexillium.org for a video of exploitation without replacing any
files. "Very High" might be a little to much, but just a little imho
;>
Best Regards ;>
--
gynvael.coldwind//vx
[ reply ]