Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: 10.0.0.1

Stories and comments across the archive that link to 10.0.0.1.

Comments · 6

  1. Re:Address space limitation? by bwcbwc · · Score: 1 · on New Exploit Uses JavaScript To Compromise Intranets, VPNs

    I think it's the other way around. First, you get malicious javascript loaded on http://10.0.0.1/myscript.js when you visit the exploit site.
    Then when you connect to http://10.0.0.1/myscript.js on a different non-routable subnet you end up running the malicious script instead of the local version, which could include doing fun stuff against the HTTP server you are connecting to.

  2. Re:Address space limitation? by bwcbwc · · Score: 1 · on New Exploit Uses JavaScript To Compromise Intranets, VPNs

    I think it's the other way around. First, you get malicious javascript loaded on http://10.0.0.1/myscript.js when you visit the exploit site.
    Then when you connect to http://10.0.0.1/myscript.js on a different non-routable subnet you end up running the malicious script instead of the local version, which could include doing fun stuff against the HTTP server you are connecting to.

  3. Address space limitation? by kosmosik · · Score: 2, Interesting · on New Exploit Uses JavaScript To Compromise Intranets, VPNs

    I think address space limitation is not an issue here. If I correctly understand this vulnerability means that for example some user has cached session cookies for intranet site like http://10.0.0.1/intranet - then if he connects to other network (that I control) via VPN I can forge http://10.0.0.1/intranet site in my network trick the browser by injecting JavaScript code and read this users session cookies? Do I understand this correctly?

    Well if I do then SSL/TLS certificates and cryptography in general are the means to authenticate someones (or some servers) indentity.

    So my question is: if sites in my intranet use proper PKI and SSL/TLS mechanisms am I still voulnerable to this flaw?

  4. Address space limitation? by kosmosik · · Score: 2, Interesting · on New Exploit Uses JavaScript To Compromise Intranets, VPNs

    I think address space limitation is not an issue here. If I correctly understand this vulnerability means that for example some user has cached session cookies for intranet site like http://10.0.0.1/intranet - then if he connects to other network (that I control) via VPN I can forge http://10.0.0.1/intranet site in my network trick the browser by injecting JavaScript code and read this users session cookies? Do I understand this correctly?

    Well if I do then SSL/TLS certificates and cryptography in general are the means to authenticate someones (or some servers) indentity.

    So my question is: if sites in my intranet use proper PKI and SSL/TLS mechanisms am I still voulnerable to this flaw?

  5. Re:Mirror incase of slashdotting by sicapo27 · · Score: 2, Funny · on The Planet's Most Moronic Hacker

    Also here and here

  6. Re:How can you detect transparent proxying? by shepd · · Score: 1 · on How to Work Around Broken Port-80 Routing?

    Easier:

    Try browsing to this or this.

    Assuming your local administrator isn't using up all the non-routeable IPs, those should not connect anywhere. If you get an error message back that looks different from the one you get from this (assuming you aren't running a server yourself) then they are running a proxy. If they are both the same then either they aren't running a proxy, or you are using a broken web-browser that doesn't return proper error messages, such as IE.

    Not as guaranteed to product a result as the parent message, but way easier! :-)

    HTH.