-
February 17th, 2004, 07:05 AM
#11
Over here it was reported that the code was Windows 2000 SP1?
I would imagine that it would be NT4 SP6a with some add ons?
Most of it must be "fixes", so it would not take a genius to reverse engineer them and figure out the exploit?
Just a thought
-
February 19th, 2004, 04:32 PM
#12
The 658MB which has been posted online in a compressed file makes up less than two per cent of the total source code for Windows 2000 and NT.
How large is the windows source code?...doing math!
hhmmmmm.
Adiz
-
February 20th, 2004, 02:41 AM
#13
Junior Member
I think that you would have to send c with this file to get this buffer to overflow say the dump value of umm 1000 bits atleast and a letter would probally be used, i think it's more a vunrability that can be exploited by an indervidual from a remote location rather than a web page. atchally no thinking about it thats tosh ignor you could easyily do it through a web site. O the joys of microsoft, but hey this is going to make it one hell of alot stronger in the future by not having to pay for people to find the flaws.
Who am i to question your motive?
-
February 20th, 2004, 02:43 AM
#14
Junior Member
Originally posted here by adiz
How large is the windows source code?...doing math!
hhmmmmm.
Adiz
can i just point out uncompressed it's 831 / 896 megs
Who am i to question your motive?
-
February 20th, 2004, 03:19 AM
#15
Member
has anyone of you ever thought that the source may had leaked on purpose?
just to find some new guys to jail in?
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|