Be sure to read the followups on
http://online.securityfocus.com/archive/1/286228/2002-08-03/2002-08-09/1
where basically the consensus is that the article author is that this is
(1) an application problem, not a Windows problem and (2) a problem only
a certain class of poorly written applications. So, yeah, it's a new
attack, but it's not nearly as devastating an MS critique as the author
wants us to believe it is.
Luis
On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 13:08, Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
>
> I'm sure this is common knowledge already, but just in case ...
>
> http://security.tombom.co.uk/shatter.html
>
>    This paper presents a new generation of attacks against Microsoft
>    Windows, and possibly other message-based windowing systems. The
>    flaws presented in this paper are, at the time of writing,
>    unfixable. The only reliable solution to these attacks requires
>    functionality that is not present in Windows, as well as efforts on
>    the part of every single Windows software vendor. Microsoft has
>    known about these flaws for some time; when I alerted them to this
>    attack, their response was that they do not class it as a flaw -
>    the email can be found here. This research was sparked by comments
>    made by Microsoft VP Jim Allchin who stated, under oath, that there
>    were flaws in Windows so great that they would threaten national
>    security if the Windows source code were to be disclosed. He
>    mentioned Message Queueing, and immediately regretted it. However,
>    given the quantity of research currently taking place around the
>    world after Mr Allchin's comments, it is about time the white hat
>    community saw what is actually possible.
>
>
> --
> Gary Lawrence Murphy <garym@teledyn.com> TeleDynamics Communications Inc
> Business Innovations Through Open Source Systems: http://www.teledyn.com
> "Computers are useless.  They can only give you answers."(Pablo Picasso)
>
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F9743FAD
	for <jm@localhost>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 10:05:39 -0400 (EDT)
from dogma.slashnull.org [212.17.35.15]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:05:39 +0100 (IST)
from lugh.tuatha.org (root@lugh.tuatha.org [194.125.145.45]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JE52J02557 for
    <jm-ilug@jmason.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:05:02 +0100
from lugh (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lugh.tuatha.org
    (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA08480; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:00:57 +0100
lugh.tuatha.org: Host [195.218.108.86] claimed
    to be linux.local
from linux.local (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by linux.local
    (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) with ESMTP id g6JE0CX02325 for
    <ilug@linux.ie>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:00:12 +0100
Message from Niall O Broin <niall@linux.ie> of
    "Fri, 19 Jul 2002 14:28:42 BST."
    <20020719132842.GA2506@bagend.makalumedia.com>
from quoted-printable to 8bit by lugh.tuatha.org id
    PAA08447
From ilug-admin@linux.ie  Fri Jul 19 15:05:54 2002