Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: ICQ Webserver bug
From: jarrell () VTSERF CC VT EDU (Ronald A. Jarrell)
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 13:42:53 -0400
From: Kerb <kerb () CANA NET>
I am writing this in reply to the message posted by Ronald A. Jarrell entitled `icq DOS / possible "stupid user" vulnerability`. What platforms did you test that exploit on? I tested it on an x86 NT machine (Intel 233 w/ 32 MB of RAM) locally and remotely, dropped it both times. It did not seem to work on Windows 95, and maybe 98 (havent gotten a chance to test yet). I have a bit of exploit code
Well, my box was win 98, and the remote box I tested it against was win 95. Didn't have anyone running NT handy to test against. However, another person I corresponded with who was testing this did get it to drop a 95 box, but not every time. Did it every time for me; but there's apparently other factors that contribute as well. -- Ron Jarrell VA Tech Computing Center
Current thread:
- Re: ICQ Webserver bug Ronald A. Jarrell (Apr 06)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: ICQ Webserver bug José Reyes Cedeño (Apr 08)
- Re: ICQ Webserver bug Kaven Rousseau (Apr 08)
- Re: ICQ Webserver bug Frank Dekervel (Apr 10)
- ARP problem in Windows9X/NT Joel Jacobson (Apr 12)
- Re: ARP problem in Windows9X/NT gandalf () POBOX COM (Apr 12)
- Re: ARP problem in Windows9X/NT kay (Apr 13)
- Re: ARP problem in Windows9X/NT kay (Apr 13)
- Serious security holes in web anonimyzing services Patrick Oonk (Apr 13)
- Re: Serious security holes in web anonimyzing services Jeremey Barrett (Apr 13)
- Re: ARP problem in Windows9X/NT route () RESENTMENT INFONEXUS COM (Apr 13)