Slashdot Mirror


Another Zero-Day IE Scripting Exploit

billstewart writes "A Computerworld Article reports a pair of vulnerabilities to Internet Explorer that allow Windows machines to be 0wned by a single click on a malicious web page. It was discovered by Dutch researcher Jelmer. As usual, the primary workaround is to disable Active Scripting for any sites that aren't Trusted, but you should have turned off that and Javascript years ago for safety anyway. At least one of the holes is fixed in XP Service Pack 2, but that doesn't fix previous versions of Windows and it's still only beta."

6 of 696 comments (clear)

  1. BugTraq by Mz6 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Posted to BugTraq 6/7.. 2 days ago...

    Here is the BugTraq Archive link.. WARNING.. The link to this site contains OTHER links to the ACTUAL exploit as well as the source code and a non-harmless display. Use at your OWN risk. Just thought I would put out the disclaimer.

    --
    Hmmm.
  2. And the pain continues by Da_Slayer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Another IE security problem, are you suprised by this? Lets make an insecure piece of software that intergrates into our operating system with portions of it running at Ring Zero. This allowing whatever malicious code/hacker to gain access to your system.

    Now most people recommnd just switching to Linux. Yeah that works. But what about those hacked Windows PCs that happen to be remotely controlled? Some are sending SPAM others are used for DDoS attacks and others just scan all the IP space they can get ahold of.

    It is a vicious cycle which has been growing more pronounced over the past 4 years. The only real solution to this problem is to inform people. Don't just tell people to use something else.

    Explain the advantages of using a different program. In this case explain how Mozilla or Opera being seperate programs with different internal works and security systems are not going to be compromised as easily.

    --
    Push harder towards Open Media/Content
  3. Re:100% Safe IE by afidel · · Score: 5, Informative

    You only THINK you are joking:

    The most effective step that you can take to help protect yourself from malicious hyperlinks is not to click them. Rather, type the URL of your intended destination in the address bar yourself.
    linky

    This was for a previous IE link related exploit. When MS is telling not to use their product in the most basic manner expected of the product then it should be painfully obvious that the product is broken.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  4. Exploit analysis by gmuslera · · Score: 5, Informative
    As it is not directly linked by the story, in http://62.131.86.111/analysis.htm there is an analysis of the exploit that looks very helpful to understand why and how it works.

    As always, are from the start design problems the ones exploited here, artificial solutions like separating internet in "zones" (local, trusted, etc) are just patches that don't resolve the core problem so it still have more holes that a swiss cheese.

  5. Re:Kudos to Norton by JPDeckers · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well, The demonstration is indeed blocked.

    But after reading the article, I tried the real installer URL, and, surprise, with Norton Antivirus (fully updated) the ad-bar WAS installed.

    As said in the article, due to various layers of encoding the javascript, detection is avoided.

    Ad-Aware luckely recognized all 34 (!!) regkeys, dll's etc.

  6. extremely sophisticated use of encrypted code by landoltjp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dutch researcher Jelmer [...] embarked on a detailed analysis of the link, which demonstrates an extremely sophisticated use of encrypted code.

    Hmm... I hardly consider using the (unfortunatly) existing Script encoding feature in IE to be 'sophisticated'. Besides, for those who are not DMCA-encumbered, here is a program to Decode the Javascript contained in the "JScript.Encode" areas. (The author of the script has an interesting and informative article on what a piece of crap the JScript.Encode function is, and can be found here)