On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:22 AM, jf <[email protected]> wrote: >> Eh? If you visit www.evil.com and your tab crashes, that's no >> different from www.evil.com closing its own tab with Javascript. > > While I generally agree that if its just a straight DoS that there is > very little difference-- but to play devils advocate some-- > the difference is that with JS closing the tab, the code path was a > known/valid/authorized one, whereas the other could potentially be > anything, and whatever it is, it could be useful given the right > circumstances. > > I know you know this, Chris, actually both of you (&& Thierry), so I'm > somewhat preaching to the choir perhaps, but imho, all sigsegv's are at > least worth investigating;
Sure. For the sake of prolonging a pointless argument, let's stick to the original premise of a tab crash with no other consequence, and see where it goes :) > 99.9% of them may be a useless dos, .09% might > be useful dos's and .01% might just be the thing that turns $'s into #'s. > Say saying 'lol xor eax, eax mov [eax], 0x01234567... trash' is a bit > silly > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
