-
Website
http://www.matasano.com/log -
Original page
http://www.matasano.com/log/849/details-on-dinos-quicktime-advisory-with-code-snippet/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Press Controls
3 comments · 2 points
-
ChrisMtso
12 comments · 1 points
-
Eric Monti
11 comments · 1 points
-
StatlerAndWaldorf
12 comments · 3 points
-
Dave G.
7 comments · 1 points
-
-
Popular Threads
http://infosecsellout.blogspot.com/2007/04/vuln...
Not that I'm not conceding that his post was effective.
No, it means that if you install QuickTime on your Vista... like, oh say... to use itunes.. then you've got the goods, and you can get owned.
Sometimes no matter how hard MS tries to remove naughty things that they didn't "make themselves"... users download other software that Microsoft didn't ship on the box and therefor subject themselves to additonal vulnerabilities such as this one.
Out of which box? The box that contained their new PC? After all, that's how the majority of people acquire Windows, with a new PC (according to Microsoft's own press releases).
And the point is, Vista's fancy new whatsits and whoseits didn't prevent it. That's all that's being said. Don't look for FUD where none exists.
Are you sure you're not Stephen Tooulouse? Or is it just part of your employeer's brainw^H^H^H^H^H^H indoctrination program to make you assume that the only software that anyone could possibly run on Vista must be developed and shipped by Microsoft. A toootally unrelated question: current versions of iTunes and Quicktime for Windows are compiled with VS 2005 SP1 using /GS, SafeSEH and /dynamicbase, yes? yeah right...I thought so.
I suppose that GS, SEH and ALSR and a few more things (NX?!) could help if they imposed some severe constrains on the valid values of "addr". Hmm btw, does the Java VM run within a process with hardware NX on?
(Emphasis added.)
So, ZDI, unlike Thomas, is saying that Vista, not 'quicktime on VIsta' is vulnerable. That is not accurate. "Vista in many installed configurations" might or might not be.
Sure, it would be great if Microsoft could invent things that would prevent all vulns. Save us and everyone else gobs of money. But defenses in depth are there for when the vuln gets missed. We don't find things, leave them in, and hope.
No, I'm not Stepto. And I'll decline to answer further questions like that.
We're quite aware that other people write code on Vista. We even encourage it. I am objecting to ZDI's claim that the Windows OS is vulnerable based on a component that we didn't write, and don't ship.
Feel free to knock us for mistakes we actually make.
There is no Vista-bashing going on here. If anything, I'd say the tone is one of respect for Dino's work.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=...
does NOT list Vista, just Windows XP SP2 and Windows 2000 SP4. Is Quicktime "technically" not yet supported on Vista?
Even the QT download page only states 2000/XP. There is a request for feedback on the bottom of the page for QT on Vista.
I am not "knocking" you for someone else's mistake, I am pointing our that if I run Vista (or actually any Windows OS) and iTunes/Quicktime on it I'd still be vulnerable to attack. Seems to be a plausible and important scenario to mention given that the iPod sales are at least an order of magnitude higher than Apple PC sales... I'd assume that those owning an iPod and not owning an Apple are not running iTunes/Quicktime on Linux or Solaris right?
I am not at all interested in blaming vendors or pointing fingers at their mistakes (they manage to do that to each other quite well by themselves) I am interested in helping potentially affected users understand that disregarding what OS they run (even Vista) they are _still_ vulnerable to exploitable bugs in the applications they run. Although that seemed to be a fair, common sense statement (at least to me) some of your colleagues did not like to hear it. And since you used the royal "we" in your posts I assumed that you were not posting just your _personal_ opinions. Its either that or that you are some king or The Pope :)
I understand what you're saying. I reacted pretty strongly to the claim that Vista (rather than Vista users) are vulnerable. From one perspective, that's splitting hairs. From another, it's saying please be accurate.
And speaking of not being clear, I didn't actually talk to any of my co-workers about this. So the royal we was expressing my impression of my co-workers opinions in the little corner I work in.