My personal opinion is that while Steve Gibson is a pretty smart guy and
occasionaly says and does smart things - for the most part his parrinioa
levels are often off the professional scale - so I tend to take what he
says with a grain of salt unless independantly verified.
Remember when he was saying that raw sockets in XP was going to cause
hackers to all dump linux and use windows to hack since they could
spoof IP address on raw sockets in windows instead of using Linux ! He
was trying to get MS to remove raw socket abilities ... where was the
flood ? where are these hackers .. and who cares any more ?
Mark Ellister
LinuxRocks! wrote:
So... I was just reading this earlier... I found it interesting enough
to share :) what do you guys think? intentional? or goof?
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/13/1519204&from=rss
WMF Vulnerability is an Intentional Backdoor?
Posted by Zonk on Friday January 13, @12:36PM
from the take-with-a-grain-of-salt dept.
Windows Bug Programming
An anonymous reader writes "Steve Gibson alleges that the WMF
vulnerability in Windows was neither a bug, nor a feature designed
without security in mind, but was actually an intentionally placed
backdoor. In a more detailed explanation, Gibson explains that the way
SetAbortProc works in metafiles does not bear even the slightest
resemblance to the way it works when used by a program while printing.
Based on the information presented, it really does look like an
intentional backdoor." There's a transcript available of the 'Security
Now!' podcast where Gibson discusses this.
_______________________________________________
EUGLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
_______________________________________________
EUGLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
