Re: Team SHATTER Security Advisory: Oracle Database Buffer--Overflow in SYS.KUPF$FILE_INT.GET_FULL_FILENAME (DB11)

From: Joxean Koret <joxeankoret@yahoo.es>
To: security curmudgeon <jericho@attrition.org>
Cc: Team SHATTER <shatter@appsecinc.com>,bugtraq@securityfocus.com,secalert_us@oracle.com
Subject: Re: Team SHATTER Security Advisory: Oracle Database Buffer--Overflow in SYS.KUPF$FILE_INT.GET_FULL_FILENAME (DB11)
Date:


Hi,

This is very typical and, in my opinion, you should only consider
trustworthy the Team Shatter's advisory, not the Oracle's one.

Take for example the bug APPS01[1] in Oracle Critical Patch Update of
April 2007 [2], it was a preauthenticated remote bug (with remote I mean
"from internet", not from "adjacent network"). CVSS2 Score would be 9/10
(calcule it yourself [3]), however, the Oracle advisory says that a
"Valid session" was needed and that the CVSS2 score was 4.2. It's funny.

>As a responsible security professional, I have to assume their research
>is accurate and their advisory should be taken more seriously than
>Oracle's.

Yes, don't trust the Oracle's advisories, the aren't real.

[1]http://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-08-088
[2]
http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/security/critical-patch-updates/cpuapr2007.html
[3] http://nvd.nist.gov/cvss.cfm?calculator&adv&version=2

Thanks,
Joxean Koret

On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 11:11 +0000, security curmudgeon wrote:
> 
> Summary: Team SHATTER says this is a remote overflow that allows for
> the 
> execution of arbitrary code (CVSS2 9.0). Oracle says this is a
> limited 
> DoS condition (CVSS2 4.0). That is a big discrepancy.
> 




Copyright © 1995-2019 LinuxRocket.net. All rights reserved.