[5344] in bugtraq
Re: Possible weakness in LPD protocol
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Masto)
Fri Oct 3 19:42:19 1997
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:14:20 -0400
Reply-To: Christopher Masto <chris@NETMONGER.NET>
From: Christopher Masto <chris@NETMONGER.NET>
To: BUGTRAQ@NETSPACE.ORG
In-Reply-To: <19971003024316.29744@sobolev.rhein.de>; from Thomas Roessler on
Fri, Oct 03, 1997 at 02:43:16AM +0200
On Fri, Oct 03, 1997 at 02:43:16AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On October 02 1997, Bennett Samowich wrote:
>
> > 1.) Obtaining hard (or possibly soft) copies of any file on the system.
> > 2.) Deleting any file on the system.
> > 3.) Creating a file on the system.
> > 4.) Mail bombing.
>
> 5.) Overflow at least one buffer from the network; this is just
> above the "print any file" part of recvjob.c:
So far, I haven't seen any mention of LPRng. It was supposedly
designed with more security in mind, though I suspect the meaning of
"security" was more "students can't print stuff for free" rather than
a seach for buffer overruns and such. Anyone know how it compares?
--
= Christopher Masto = chris@netmonger.net = http://www.netmonger.net/ =
= NetMonger Communications = finger for PGP key = $19.95/mo unlimited access =
= Director of Operations = (516) 221-6664 = mailto:info@netmonger.net =
v---(cut here)---v
--
yourname@some.dumb.host.com
"Keep in mind that anything Kibo says makes a great sig." -- Kibo
^---(cut here)---^
