|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: Analysis of jolt2.c (MS00-029)
From: Darren Reed (avalon
COOMBS.ANU.EDU.AU)Date: Fri May 26 2000 - 18:51:45 CDT
- Next message: Luciano Martins: "Re: DST2K0004b: Authentication issue in WebShield SMTP v4.5.44 Management Tool"
- Previous message: Maurycy Prodeus: "Re: Qpopper 2.53 problem, user can gain gid=mail"
- In reply to: Mikael Olsson: "Analysis of jolt2.c (MS00-029)"
- Reply: Darren Reed: "Re: Analysis of jolt2.c (MS00-029)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
In some mail from Mikael Olsson, sie said:
[...]
> 2. Microsoft doesn't verify the checksum prior to storing it.
> Microsoft doesn't verify the structural integrity (the
> packet is truncated!)
[...]
I think it has been mentioned before that the MS TCP/IP code is
implemented in such a way that each of TCP, UDP, ICMP (and any
further protocol, such as IGMP?) have to do all their own sanity
checking of fragments, checksums, etc. I can only think that
they believe there is some performance benefit to be gained here.
Darren
- Next message: Luciano Martins: "Re: DST2K0004b: Authentication issue in WebShield SMTP v4.5.44 Management Tool"
- Previous message: Maurycy Prodeus: "Re: Qpopper 2.53 problem, user can gain gid=mail"
- In reply to: Mikael Olsson: "Analysis of jolt2.c (MS00-029)"
- Reply: Darren Reed: "Re: Analysis of jolt2.c (MS00-029)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]