[25484] in bugtraq
Re: Update and comments on the MS02-023 patch, holes still remain
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Clover)
Fri May 17 12:53:47 2002
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 09:27:37 +0000
From: Andrew Clover <and@doxdesk.com>
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Message-ID: <20020517092737.A10750@doxdesk.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52D05AEFB0D95C4BAD179A054A54CDEB1BD424@mailsrv1.jubii.dk>; from Thor@jubii.dk on Thu, May 16, 2002 at 04:20:08PM +0200
Thor Larholm <Thor@jubii.dk> wrote:
> The above is merely misinformation on their parts. The Restricted Sites Zone
> tries to disable scripting ( a requisite for the dialogArguments
> vulnerability ), but many vulnerabilities allow you to circumvent this
> setting
Even non-vulnerabilities allow it. For example a <meta http-equiv="refresh">
can redirect to a page not within the Restricted Sites zone, and a
<frame> or <iframe> can include content from a non-restricted site.
It is also possible to create an about:<script>...</script> URL, which
injects scripts into the Internet zone. Such URLs cannot be put in the
Restricted Sites zone using the normal IE Security tab. Microsoft have
refused to remove this undocumented behaviour.
So essentially the Restricted Sites feature offers zero security protection
by design. Users should not rely on it to enforce stricter settings than
present in the Internet Zone.
--
Andrew Clover
mailto:and@doxdesk.com
http://and.doxdesk.com/
