kj's blog

From the last post, I found out.

i. jmp %esp is not possible for me.
ii. [buffer] + 4 is not possible also (atm , maybe ?)

Read more…

This small note will talk about how randomzie allocated stack like protection in gcc 4.1 can protect a buggy code. Just a quick note for my self.

When gcc 3.4 came out, they intoroduce some new protections into the compiler. The whole idea is to protect vuln. binary being exploite and harder to smash the stack. The main idea is, bye bye
script kiddie.

Again, in gcc 4.1. There are something new and also interesting.

* GCC can now emit code for protecting applications from stack-smashing attacks. The protection is realized by buffer overflow detection and reordering of stack variables to avoid pointer corruption.
* Some built-in functions have been fortified to protect them against various buffer overflow (and format string) vulnerabilities. Compared to the mudflap bounds checking feature, the safe builtins have far smaller overhead. This means that programs built using safe builtins should not experience any measurable slowdown.

Read more…

Repost : Old Code

Version 0.1 (Public)

snort 2.4.0 – 2.4.2 Back Orifice Pre-Preprocessor Remote Exploit

by xwings at security dot net dot my
URL : http://www.security.net.my , somebody need to update the page

Saying Hi to ….
. All the 1337 c0d3r @ pulltheplug.org
. Gurus from #rubylang @ freenode.net
. Skywizard @ somewhere right now
. HITBSecConf CREW and Team Panda

03:07 < @mark> hey xwings
03:07 < @mark> why don’t you come up and see me sometime?
Tested on :
Linux debian24 2.4.27-2-386 #1 Mon May 16 16:47:51 JST 2005 i686 GNU/Linux
gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13)
Snort 2.4.2 , ./configure && make && make install
Use Ruby : http://www.ruby-lang.org

Read more…