Re: [Full-disclosure] THISISNOTMYEXPLOIT

[yersinia <yersinia.spiros@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:49 PM, taha<tahacalypse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 3:25 PM, yersinia <yersinia.spiros@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Kingcope<kcope2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Hello people,
>> > Yes there is a warning when the PoC is compiled. But I guess that is
>> > not a big issue.
>>
>> No, problem. It is only necessary to include stdlib.h because malloc
>> is implicitily defined (gcc complaint). Anyway,  your POC work as
>> aspected. Thanks. In this days it is difficult to see a true exploit
>> in a mailing list. The fact that bug was discovered from someone else
>> is not important : you have rewritten in another language, so it is
>> only your work.
>>
>> Regards
>> > So about what PoC am I talking about?
>> > It seems that the moderator of bugtraq keeps blocking me because of
>> > fancy
>> > headlines maybe. The moderator of bugtraq blocked the actual exploit but
>> > let
>> > the following messages slip through. The PoC is on milw0rm.com and
>> > full disclosure.
>> > Thanks for clarifying the issue with the zones, I really have not a
>> > 100% understanding
>> > of the DNS protocol therefore I took a guess on my named.conf file and
>> > put the
>> > address into the PoC.
>> >
>> > Thanks for your time,
>> >
>> > Kingcope
>> >
>> >
>> > 2009/7/31 yersinia <yersinia.spiros@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> Repost for mailing problem.
>> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:14 AM, yersinia <yersinia.spiros@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Kingcope <kcope2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hello again,
>> >>>> the default setting of 127.in-addr.arpa is a bit weird
>> >>>>
>> >>>> try
>> >>>> ./bind <ip> localhost
>> >>>
>> >>> Never mind. I have only a warning from gcc because it was necessary to
>> >>> include stdlib.h for malloc.
>> >>>
>> >>> But, the important thing is that it works as aspected.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards
>> >>>>
>> >>>> lewls
>> >>>>
>> >>>> XD
>> >>>>
>> >>>> kcope
>> >>>>
>
> Hello all,
> By reading the US-CERT vulnerability issue (CVE-2009-0696) I found this :
> "The vulnerability affects all servers that are masters for one or more
> zones and is not limited to those that are configured to allow dynamic
> updates ". I have some Infoblox master DNS servers with not-allowed dynamic
> updates, so I'm wondering if they are vulnerable to this attack and if
> somebody test this PoC on a DNS server which not allow dynamic updates? What
> is the comportement in this case?

Crash.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/