WINE Still Vulnerable to WMF Exploit
blast3r wrote to mention a ZDNet Blog posting by George Ou, stating that WINE is still vulnerable to the WMF flaw. From the article: "All applications launched inside Wine, Cedega, or Cross-Over Office are technically still exploitable. Wine runs on most x86 platforms, including Linux and the various BSDs. The surprising part about finding this flaw in Wine is that they implemented the entire Meta File API without realizing that this could be a security issue. Exploiting a Windows application running inside Wine depends on that application calling the vulnerable function with malicious data."
Should I be worried about my Fake Windows security or am I at no risk as long as I don't run "sol.exe" as root?
How far can someone get by working over WINE with this exploit?
Get your Unix fortune now!
On a serious note, I wonder what this means for emulation projects. If you recognize an exploit in the original environment (as possibly someone did when writing a WMF parser for WINE), do you implement the exploit in your emulator or do you introduce a potential incompatibility?
Can't you just make a copy of the fixed gdi32.dll from a working windows machine?
After all, from winehq.org: "Wine has always strived for "bug for bug" compatibility"
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
does anyone use wmf files?
did you forget to take your meds?
How does WINE manage to duplicate a flaw in a function that WINE doesn't even implement?
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
It's been a while since I've written any WMF software, but if I remember correctly, the problem here is with the general principle of a WMF, not a bug in any libraries, hence windows and wine both being vulnerable.
A wmf is not a graphics format in a traditional sense, but rather a list of API calls to the GDI libraries that when fired off one after another will recreate an image.
For this reason, saying that the WMF insecurity is a bug, is like saying that the fact that you can make a malicious EXE for windows is a bug also.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be fixed, becuase it is a vulnerability, I'm just trying to shine some light on why similar vulnerabilities exist in WINE.
If I have given an incorrect explanation of WMF, please feel free to comment.
Big ones, small ones, some as big as yer 'ead!
Give 'em a twist, a flick o' the wrist...
Six days after m$ft learned of the vulnerability, we were all yelling that it shouldn't take that long for a fix and thank heavens that open source projects could always churn out fixes so much quicker. Well, the open source wine has now had 3 days. Does that mean that if wine takes another 3 days, then we've proven that open source isn't always faster with fixes?