BugTraq
vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 22 2004 06:45PM
Bob Kryger (bobk panix com) (2 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 05:01AM
Darren Reed (avalon caligula anu edu au) (6 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 02:56AM
Glynn Clements (glynn clements virgin net) (1 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 28 2004 04:43PM
Georg Lutz (glist gmx net)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 12:47AM
Michael Zimmermann (zim vegaa de)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 10:41PM
Nate Eldredge (nge cs hmc edu)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 07:21PM
Elizabeth Zwicky (zwicky greatcircle com) (1 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 08:01PM
Darren Reed (avalon caligula anu edu au) (1 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 07:21PM
Stephen Samuel (samuel bcgreen com)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 06:45PM
Jim Knoble (jmknoble pobox com)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 06:40PM
der Mouse (mouse Rodents Montreal QC CA)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 23 2004 04:15AM
der Mouse (mouse Rodents Montreal QC CA) (2 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 27 2004 10:12PM
Ian Farquhar - Network Security Group (Ian Farquhar Sun COM)
der Mouse wrote:
> Third, it would not be easy to usurp control of the printer's CPU to
> start with. PostScript jobs are run in a relatively restricted
> virtual-machine environment, and it is difficult for a job to affect
> the environment provided for future jobs - generally, it needs to
> provide the correct value for a 32-bit "password". (Such things can be
> set insecurely, certainly, but that's no different, really, from having
> a Unix box with root's password set to "root": it's admin error.)

The undocumented, machine-specific cexec interface allows the
downloading and execution of binary images which are run by the RIP CPU.
It's purpose, I was told, was to allow drivers to patch bugs in the
firmware if needed, but it's most (in)famous use was Apple's Laserwriter
bitmap smoothing code which ran natively on the LW's 68000 for speed.

If you could figured out the cexec encryption - and I'd bet money it was
very similar to the now-documented eexec encryption - running code
natively on the RIP's CPU would be fairly easy.

It's been several years since I looked, but cexec was present on most
"genuine Adobe" firmwares I investigated.

--
Ian Farquhar
Senior Network Security Engineer
Network Security Group
Sun Microsystems
Level 2, 828 Pacific Hwy
Gordon, NSW, 2072
Australia

Email: ian.farquhar (at) sun (dot) com [email concealed]
Phone: +61 2 9498 0470 (External)
Phone: 57470 (Sun Internal)
Mobile: +61 414 967 178
Fax: +61 2 9498 0460

[ reply ]
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 12:41AM
Michael Zimmermann (zim vegaa de) (1 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 04:38AM
der Mouse (mouse Rodents Montreal QC CA) (1 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 09:39AM
Michael Zimmermann (zim vegaa de) (1 replies)
Re: vulnerabilities of postscript printers Jan 24 2004 05:26PM
der Mouse (mouse Rodents Montreal QC CA)


 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2010, SecurityFocus