Slashdot Mirror
MS Excel exploit on auction
geo_2677 writes "Someone had put up for auction on eBay the details of an exploit in Microsoft Excel according to a recent article on Securityfocus. According to the article Microsoft has confirmed that this vulnerability exists, but in the meantime the original listing on eBay has been pulled. " The now pulled auction, but it does appear that Microsoft has confirmed the vulnerability in an eweek article.
First, in the interest of stimulating more informed discusion, here is some more information concerning the auction:
From the auction text: Second, two questions:
Discuss.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
eBay is infested with public domain repackagers and sellers of "information" that they seem to do nothing about. But if Microsoft doesn't like an auction, it's gone, apparently.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
Now THAT'S capitalism!
(Or at least a good demonstration of Ferengi behavior...)
I'll buy that one as soon as I buy the product which tells me how to remove all spyware by formatting my hard drive. It's only $7.95, and he sends the PDF file as soon as payment is recieved. Now if only I knew how to open a PDF file. :(
Maybe I'll search ebay, and someone can sell me a product which tells me how to open a PDF file. :) :)
But first, I need to bid on this guy who claims he can teach me how to get Plasma TV's for free from the manufacturers. He says in his ebay auction that manufacturers don't have enough people to test their product and they want me to help them!
Ebay is more good than bad, but how can these people sell garbage?
If the guy is selling information on how to exploit software, doesn't that violate the DCMA?
I guess I should not complain. Ebay is the only place I know of that has everything, the worlds largest flea market.
Looking at the motivation this guy has, I can't really see how it can be good.
So, it was submitted to Microsoft on the 6th, and since then he's recieved a reply stating they'll probably be working on a fix. That was LESS THAN A WEEK AGO. Releasing vulnerabilities is something that, IMO, should only be done if (a) there is some specific need for everyone to know about it right now, or (b) requests for fixes have fallen on deaf ears or otherwise failed for an extended period of time.
This meets neither of those criteria.
- looking to make a profit from releasing details of a vulterability
- phrasing the auction in a way that makes it clear he wants the buyer to do something bad - "It can be assumed that no patch addressing this vulnerability will be available within the next few months"
Sounds to me more like some dumb little script kiddy that got lucky finding a small hole, but doesn't have the ability to do anything with it. Working from an illogical hatred of MS he's trying to get someone else to unleash a virus on the world on his behalf.
What a great guy.
Who is the bigger sucker?
t =b&na=88&View=en-us&qu=excel+crash
The people who bid on an exploit to make Excel crash? Or those who believed that this was a critical security flaw? Or Ebay for posting it in the first place?
If you really want to know how to make Excel crash, pick your poison - here is a free link:
http://search.microsoft.com/search/results.aspx?s
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
People are already paying for vulnerabilities in Microsoft software. They get them as part of the purchase of software licenses. (Now, having actual KNOWLEDGE of such vulnerabilities is another matter I suppose...)
I dont think it was very irresponsible, maybe only a little, it just lights that fire under Microsoft to fix it. Considering my lack of using unkown excel files I'm not too worried about it. Like some other posts say, it brought much less attention to the exploit than e-bay pulling it did.
and shame on the moderators as well. This is obviously either a publicity stunt or this guy is just
having some fun and saying fuck you M$ in a very public arena. Did you read this hilarious part?
Special offers:
Microsoft representatives get 10% off the final price. To qualify, you MUST provide @microsoft.com e-mail address and MUST mention discount code LINUXRULZ during checkout.
parent says: phrasing the auction in a way that makes it clear he wants the buyer to do something bad
No, specifically forbidden by auction text, with no winks or smilies or anything ironic.
Your bid indicates that you agree to the following:
1. You may not use this information for malicious or illegal purposes. The information you receive is for educational and
research purposes only.
2. The seller reserves the right to refuse delivery to anyone (a full refund will be issued).
3. The seller will accept no responsibility for anything you do with this information.
4. The seller cannot be held liable under any circumstances.
5. Absolutely no refunds will be provided except for the reason mentioned above.
Parent says: Looking at the motivation this guy has, I can't really see how it can be good.
It calls to attention that a critical vulnerability will go unpatched for months after it has been properly disclosed. That is the way that it can be good.
music lover since 1969
The auction was canceled and I was the high bidder too!
Here's a mirror of the auction.
Joel
Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
From the auction: Microsoft representatives get 10% off the final price. To qualify, you MUST provide @microsoft.com e-mail address and MUST mention discount code LINUXRULZ during checkout
I was reading through ebay T&C, because the article made me curious.
I, for one, am very disappointed that I cannot list a prohibited country for sale:
A security hole would gets its value from the attached object. A how-to on bypassing shed locks is less value then a how-to on bypassing a bank safe.
Next would come how easy it is to exploit the security hole. This one seems to require people to open an excell sheet. This obviously makes it off lesser value then say an exploit that works when a user opens a gif file via IE. Even more valauble would be an exploit that does not require the user to do anything but can attack any computer just hooked up to the net.
Would there be money in it? You bet. Once you got an exploit using it to install a botnet is childsplay and botnets are big business. If you can deliver a 10.000 zombie network there are people willing to pay you hard cash in exchange. Even for just renting it.
However you would hardly do this over e-bay. There are very few legit uses for a botnet and therefore your potential customers would prefer a less public way of trading it.
But it does happen. It is one of the reasons we see so few destructive virusses vs the ones that turn a pc into a zombie. Used to be different. Once the majority of virusses either joked or destroyed your machine. Now you just got a zombie. Do I have proof?
No of course not. Just stories tall tales from the server room and hints that should a company that hosts pay sites wish to do some advertising that they might know ways that do not involve constantly trying to find the next provider willing to be placed on a ban list for spam.
Spam sells, ISP's are unwilling to hosts spammers, so the only question is, will spammers pay for a botnet that can do their spamming. Does the pope shit in the woods?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
In the first case, yes. In fact, that right has already been upheld and Esquire (IIRC) published an article that describes how to make a nuclear weapon. In the second case, you're talking about classified material that only those with clearances who agreed not to disclose it would be privy to, and that's not a valid comparison. I find it ironic that someone with the name "think freely" would argue in favor of suppression of information.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
eBay has no obligation to list anything in particuar. It is in their best intrests to list most auctions without objection since the more that sells the more money they make, but there's no obligation. If eBay management decided that they wanted to ban selling of all religious items or something, they'd be well within their rights.
Now if I worked for eBay and was the guy with his finger on the button, so to speak, for canceling autions, I'd pull this. Why? Well simple cost-benefit analysis:
It's entirely possible, even likely, this guy is lying (I'm talking from their perspective, pre MS announcement) and thus we'll just get invloved with having to refund someone's money in the end. But let's assume he's telling the truth. In that case we would be on the hook for a ton of bad publicity since no doubt the press would eat up the story of eBay welling hacking instructions, and we might even be civily or criminaly liable for knowingly allowing this to go on. Now weigh that against the 2% or so we'd make from the final sale, maybe a few hundred at most if the auction gets bid way up. Not even a blid on our balance sheet. Thus, we cancel the auction.
eBay's a business, pure and simple. They'll let you sell whatever you want (for a cut) unless they feel what you are selling might cause them trouble. That's why they ban some entire classes of items, like firearms. It's not illegal to sell firearms on the Internet, and there are sites that do it. However it's trickey, since they have to be shipped to a licensed dealer and so on. It exposes you to a lot more liability, liability eBay doesn't want, so they just outright ban them.
I thought M$ bugs were a dime a dozen.
-SHP