>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, -No Strezzz Cazzz wrote:
>
>> >On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 21:51:12 UTC, rpc said:
>> >
>> >
>> >What you define below does not constitute a 'remote attack'. ping is
>> >still executing locally. This is completely unrelated. I could just as
>> >easily DoS the machine by creating 1e16 instances of minesweeper with
>> >remote command execution.
>>
>> I thought that when a bug could get triggered from a remote location the
bug
>> itself is considered a remote-bug. In this case its a remote aswell as a
>> local bug. I want a p0ny...
>
>You're completely missing rpc's point. You didn't win a pony, this is not a
>bug. The -unicode- exploit is a bug, but being able to ping flood yourself
>is certainly not. If this were the case then 'ping -f 127.0.0.1' would be a
>bug under *Nix.

Difference is that ping -f on *Nix or ping -t on Windows won't make your CPU
go wild. When I use ping -t without the "-i 0" option my CPU
Usage is about 2%-3%. But if I ping -t with -i 0 my CPU Usage will be 100%.
Don't tell me this is normal behaviour for a processor. Also if it was true
what you said then why can't you put the -i option on 0 on Win 9x, ME, NT5?

>The 'ping -i' thingie you found is nothing more than a plain-jane,
>run-of-the-mill PING FLOOD. It's NORMAL. It's SUPPOSED to work this way. If
>you want to throw packets at your own machine as fast as it possibly can,
>then knock yourself and your machine out.

If it was normal it wouldn't generate the "Bad option specified" message.
Also the -i is the Time To Live option. When you put that on 0 it doesn't
"live", it never lived, its dead. It also works if you put the -i option on
a letter instead of 0. But if you try any different number (256+) you'll get
the "Bad value for option -i" error. But you won't get flooded with it, you
only receive it once.

>'ping -t 127.0.0.1 -i 0' is NOT a bug. It's called "Typical lUser not
>bothering to RTFM".

I was too thrilled. Oh well, maybe I get a p0ny next Christmas.

-No Strezzz Cazzz, Powered By UN0X

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]