I think it's worth mentioning that the tool I linked to was not mentioned or tested in this paper. I mentioned this tool because it has quite a few command line options and it actually tries to execute arbitrary commands. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Schaller" <schallerat_private> To: "John" <johnsat_private> Cc: "Michal Zalewski" <lcamtufat_private>; <mixterat_private>; <vuln-devat_private> Sent: March 27, 2002 8:21 PM Subject: Re: Re New Binary Bruteforcing Method Discovered > On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, John wrote: > > > A while back there was a tool that was released that would brute force > > binaries and attempt to exploit the bug. It attempted to exploit simple > > stack overflows, but it was a nice tool at the time. > > > > http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/vuln-dev/2000-q3/0710.html > > <two cents> > I wrote a paper for SANS last summer which surveyed the available > auditing tools (source code scanners, black box testers, and known > exploits). Against the simple target program I chose (Hobbit's > "webs"), the black-box testers failed miserably, for reasons that > I go into in the paper (basically, that they aren't > protocol-aware). Brute-force black-box scanners catch the > low-hanging fruit, bug-wise. > > Direct URL (the report is the HTML file inside the ZIP file): > http://www.giac.org/practical/Jeff_Schaller_GSNA.zip > > Other reports available from: > http://www.giac.org/GSNA.php > </two cents> > > -jeff > -- > Last week, scientists announced the first-ever cloning of a human embryo, > which they hope to mine for stem cells to treat diseases. What do you think? > "I think I'll just sit back and let the ignorant, hysterical Christians > handle this one." Peter Jordan, Systems Analyst. The Onion. >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 18:33:16 PST