I know there is some talk about other sections being vulnerable to overflow as well, I have not look into this yet so I can not be sure. If it is true, I wonder if the AV companies are aware/detect the possible new exploits.
Anyone else have any input?
/gerry
Todd Towles wrote:
What exactly are the AV products detecting in the JPEG exploits? Barry and I was talking about how impressed we were that the AV companies jumped on this one and detection was pretty fast. But is the detection so generic that a variant will bypass? Is the detection based on a original exploit that could be modified in a way that makes it "undetectable" right now?
-Todd
-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Fitzgerald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 1:55 PM
To: Todd Towles
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Full-Disclosure digest, Vol 1 #1933 -
20 msgs
Todd Towles wrote:
Yep, really surprised. Just hopefully the invalid data that is being detected can't be changed or worked in a work that would bypass normal detection. Once the file is renamed to a BMP or a GIF, you confuse the whole thing even more.
Are the AV products hitting on a part of the original exploit? Can this
part be changed in a future version to make it "undetectable". I am very impressed at the work of the AV companines on this one, but I also
know that is this detection is too simple, that it will be bypassed.
I'm not sure what they're specifically detecting. This may be a good question for the list.
-Barry
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
-- Gerald Eisenhaur Cisco Systems, Inc. 1414 Massachusetts Ave. Boxborough, Massachusetts 01719 voice: 978.936.0465 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
