Next Page >>
MustLive
ini_alter() may be used instead of ini_set() and vice versa.
SecurityVulns issue: http://securityvulns.com/news/PHP/alias-pb.html
Original message (in Russian): http://securityvulns.ru/Sdocument67.html
2. MustLive reports Crossite-Cripting vulnerability in WordPress
MultiUser 1.0
XSS is possible via Username form field.
Additional information (in Ukranian): http://websecurity.com.ua/1269/
Hi Mustlive,
I'm not sure if there's a need to discuss or clarify this any further.
Please refer to my earlier posts, and for the sake of saving some of our
time & efforts, avoid drawing tangents about scripts and noscripts (I've
clarified both earlier) & weasel words (security vulnerability and nntp
exploit - irrelevent in this case).
JS or no-JS, this issue is nothing new, this behavior is well-defined and a
necessity and definitely not a URI (of any kind) exploit or a security
vulnerability.
Configuring Windows 7 for a Limited User Account:
http://unixwiz.net/techtips/win7-limited-user.html
MustLive wrote:
> Hello Susan!
>
> If Microsoft did it, than it's good. But better for my opinion to do
> such as
> in Windows XP Professional - not to disable admin account by default,
Best Regards,
w
--------------------------------------------------
From: "MustLive" <mustlive@websecurity.com.ua>
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:23 AM
To: "Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
Cc: <bugtraq@securityfocus.com>
Subject: Re: DoS vulnerabilities in Firefox, Internet Explorer, Chrome,
Opera and other browsers
MustLive wrote:
> Hello Susan!
>
>> Pardon me, but you disclosed it at your site before you informed the
>> developers?
>
these sites, sometimes sent some of them to Bugtraq. Last month I drew
attention that he didn't write to Bugtraq about all these holes in XAMPP, so
I decided to write about them by myself :-).
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: advisories@intern0t.net
here. Have you considered giving these vendors time to respond? I do
not find that 99% of them don't, rather I find that they do. Should you
have issues, would you consider emailing me first so I can introduce you
to contacts?
MustLive wrote:
> Hello Susan!
>
>> Granted I can denial of service a browser just by loading up a horrible
>> add in or just using a browser
>
have different situations with default admin accounts. Which leads to
vulnerability in XP Home. So I'm planning to investigate different versions
of Windows Vista to be sure.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
failed to react.
SecurityVulns issue: http://securityvulns.com/news/Planet/VC-200M/DoS.html
Original message (in Russian): http://securityvulns.ru/Rdocument847.html
2. MustLive reports low-risk (requires social engineering), yet
interesting example of crossite scripting in Internet Explorer. Local
zone scripting is possible on accessing saved page with original URL
in the form of
http://site/-->[script]alert("XSS")[/script]
mod_usr3dcloud). It's commercial module with three versions - one free (demo
version) and two paid ones. And the hole in 3D user cloud module (in all its
versions) is still not fixed.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: JoomlaJabber
works in Joomla 1.0 and Mambo, it doesn't work in Joomla 1.5, because it
uses another method to work with sessions and for it another code must be
used (for clearing of session).
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matteo Valenza" <ilmetu@gmail.com>
Hello MustLive,
Thanks for your immediate reply.
I have now tested what you said, cause I suspected that it was only happening because Google Chrome was installed, due to FireFox isn't able to know what ``chromehtml:´´ is on its own. (it has to be associated with an application in this case).
The following would open a lot of windows, consuming most likely all ressources:
http://websecurity.com.ua/uploads/2009/Google%20Chrome%20DoS%20Exploit2.html
so effective (because it's resource consumption in case of IE as I wrote),
as it can be at not powerful computers. And many people in the world have
not so powerful computers.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremiah Gowdy" <Jeremiah.Gowdy@freedomvoice.com>
4. Developers of the browsers.
Which must give you a ground for thoughts.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
Define vulnerability here. I don't think this is one.
Granted I have to apologize that my post was a very tongue in cheek
snarky comment regarding the fact that Mr. MustLive appears to be
posting up one by one of every web site that he finds with bad captcha
implementation. I was outting myself in advance because the captcha on
my blog site lets spammers wiggle in. But the spam clean up routine
clears it out in a week so at most it's an annoyance to me not a
vulnerability. So I know I have this issue, but on my stack of risks to
worry about, this not one that keeps me awake at night.
And XAMPP developers didn't refute existence of vulnerabilities in 1.7.0 and
1.7.1, when I informed them, and didn't answer if they fixed the holes (so
it's possible that these holes are still not fixed).
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: S?bastien H?nar?s
doubts received all my letters in 2007-2010 and would receive all future
letters. But as said, I'll not be more informing them about DoS holes. This
decision I made in August 2009 and it's final decision.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
they are informed for long time in advance :-). And so you have no need to
worry, because with every day they become more and more "informed long time
ago" and have more and more days to fix these holes.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
disclosure in 99%). And in most cases they just do lame things, like
ignoring and not fixing, or badly fixing, or hiddenly fixing without
thanking me, like it was with securityfocus.com in 2006 and many others.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Bradley" <sbradcpa@pacbell.net>
As I wrote before, my IE6 isn't affected by that hole in Chrome. Does your
IE7 is affected by my Chrome exploit, or only by your AIM exploit? Because
if there is mentioned hole, then it must be affected by both exploits.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: <advisories@intern0t.net>
Different people have different signatures ;-). It's like: show me your
signature and I'll tell you who you are.
Best wishes & regards,
Eugene Dokukin aka MustLive
Security auditor and security researcher
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: <advisories@intern0t.net>
Also I wrote to Ruben Reguero two days ago, and told him that it was strange
that in Firefox 3.5 he had no problems (with this exploit). And maybe he has
last Firefox 3.5.1. After that he answered me and confirmed it.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MustLive [mailto:mustlive@websecurity.com.ua]
CC to Bugtraq. But it was not published to the list by moderator - maybe
because the letter was to long :-) (and it had additional argumentation
against different not serious statements regarding my advisories).
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Salvatore Fresta aka Drosophila" <drosophilaxxx@gmail.com>
There is no "Arbitrary File Upload" class not in WASC TC v.1, not in TC v.2.
And in my work I'm using only WASC TC v.1 and TC v.2.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Salvatore Fresta aka Drosophila" <drosophilaxxx@gmail.com>
in October 2008 Firefox failed in this case, but Chrome could stop the
script. But I made different versions of exploit, one of which bypassed
Chrome's protection. So the first workaround is more reliable one.
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Smith" <at-x@live.com>
> Some facts for those reading:
Nick, the more facts, the better - it'll show the whole picture. So I'll add
other facts which you forgot to mention.
> MustLive notified us on 13.4.2010 - that's 13 days after disclosure.
As I wrote in my advisory (in "Timeline") there were next important dates:
17.03.2010 - found vulnerability.
31.03.2010 - disclosed at my site.
Microsoft agrees with you which is why they disable the admin account by
default in Vista.
MustLive wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Just came to securityfocus.com and found that there are some answers
> on my post about Insufficient Authentication vulnerability in Acer
> notebooks.
>
Its translation to English:
http://www.google.com/translate?u=http://websecurity.com.ua/2641/&langpair=ua%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
Best wishes & regards,
MustLive
Administrator of Websecurity web site
http://websecurity.com.ua
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thierry Zoller"
Hi MustLive,
I can confirm that this consumed most ressources in FireFox 3.5.2 as well.
I have the newest Google Chrome browser installed which might explain why.
Best regards, hopes, peace and love,
MaXe - Founder of InterN0T - Undergrou...
http://www.intern0t.net/
I've tested this DoS on Internet Explorer 8, does not significantly impact my system.
-----Original Message-----
From: MustLive [mailto:mustlive@websecurity.com.ua]
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 10:33 AM
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: DoS vulnerabilities in Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera and Chrome
Hello Bugtraq!
Next Page>>
|
