If you classify a remote bug (anything that can be exploited remotely) then you are classifying all bugs (you can use a privilege escalation exploit remotely) I agree with Thor, anything that exploits a remote service (HTTP,FTP Etc..) without any user interaction.
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 12:54 AM, Thor (Hammer of God) <[email protected] > wrote: > > > > I think we can agree that yes, it is remotely exploitable and as such > > should be categorized as "remote" in Risk/Impactt scoring systems ? > > > > Does anybody disagree ? I'd be interested to hear your point of view. > > Hey Thierry - I hope all is well... > > I'm happy to include "user assisted remote exploitation" as a "remote" > vulnerability in academic conversations, but I don't categorize it as > "remote" when assessing overall risk to a particular threat in production > environments. Like everyone else, my TMs include impact and skill required > to exploit a particular vulnerability; but they also include "likelihood of > exploitation." While that may sound like a wildcard metric, I quantify it > by applying the internal controls in place that may mitigate a particular > attack. In "my" networks (networks I control, design, or consult for) most > users couldn't execute [common] exploits even if they wanted to. I won't > bore you with the controls I deploy as I'm confident you are well aware of > the options one has, but the fact they exist at all place "user assisted > remote exploits" in a different category for me when assessing risk. When > the propensity for a vulnerability to be exploited lies in a particular > user's response to any given > trigger, as opposed to any authoritative in-place controls to mitigate > exposure, then a model's relevant response options are greatly diminished > (IMO). > > As such, I choose to categorize "remote" exploits as those that may be > executed against a given host that is autonomously running a [vulnerable] > service that can be connected to by some (any) other network client, device, > or service for the purposes of ascertaining overall risk. > > t > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ > -- http://www.goldwatches.com
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
