I just tested it out on Windows XP sp2, firefox 1.0.3 and IE6 No crash... -Randy On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, patrick wrote:
Ok everyone, someone sent me a copy of the site which was the link that was originally sent with the vulnerability. Looking closer, it seems that it may not be that the extremely large height and width properties of the image in a site is what is causing the crash. However, I have not had time to test it out, I will in a little bit, I need to finish a few things. Here is the full page source (it's in the attachment). This is what I was talking about though. Notice this in the page source: <code> <!-- // Cache-busting LUBID bug. var ran = Math.round(Math.random() * 899999) + 100000; var lubid_string = "<img src=\"http://hb.lycos.com/header?VID=6105&LHIG=1&ord="; + ran + "\" height=\"1\" width=\"1\">"; document.write(lubid_string); //--> </script> </code> The site also has this: <code> <img src="http://home.comcast.net/~squaresoft0/internet.jpg"; height="9999999" width= "9999999"><br /><img src="http://home.comcast.net/~squaresoft0/internet.jpg"; height=" 9999999" width="9999999"> </code> Now, I will try setting up a site with just that code, and then a site with both, and see what happens. I only briefly looked at the page source, so there may be more. Tell me what you guys find. Jesse Morgan wrote:Yes, it was SP2. My values were at 50000000 or something similar. I also created a 50000x50000 gif and tried that, still no luck. Unfortunately I didn't get my hands on the code. Also a friend's system rebooted after a bsod (he has an ATI video card and I have on-board video on a laptop) patrick wrote:Hmm, don't think so, though, you said it crashed your computer... was it XP SP2? It sounds like it later in your email but I'm not sure... it's quite interesting. Possibly his site had a different code than the one you and I set up? He didn't go into much detail about the code except that the "height" and "width" properties should be an enourmous amount. Did you by any chance get the page source or no?Jesse Morgan wrote:His site was up when I got the email and it did crash my computer. Livejorunal locked his account a few hours later. I too tried creating the exploit myself a few days later (windows xp sp2) and it failed to work. Maybe Microsoft somehow got a patch installed without us knowing? patrick wrote:Andrew wrote:Alpha-Pi-Omicron Pi-Alpha-Nu-Tau-Omicron-C? Kappa-Alpha-Kappa-Omicron-Delta-Alpha-Iota-Mu-Omicron-Nu-Omicron-C? __ ___ __ _____ _ _ ___ _ _ / / /___\/ // _ / /\ /(_) __ _| |__ / __\___ _ _ _ __ ___(_) | / / // // / \// / / /_/ / |/ _` | '_ \ / / / _ \| | | | '_ \ / __| | | / /___/ \_// /___/ //\ / __ /| | (_| | | | | / /__| (_) | |_| | | | | (__| | | \____/\___/\____/____/ \/ /_/ |_|\__, |_| |_| \____/\___/ \__,_|_| |_|\___|_|_| |___/ Overview There exists a vulnerabilility in the way Microsoft Windows handles the rendering of images. By resizing an image with html properties to an extremely large size an attacker may perform a very quick and effective denial of service attack upon a victim. I. Description and PoC Only clients running Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Avant in Windows 2k or XP have been confirmed to be vulnerable. Opera does it's own image rendering and is not ulnerable to this method of attack. The status of Longhorn is not known. Other operating systems, including Mac OS X and Linux are not vulnerable. You may point your browser to this URL to see a live demonstration of this attack: http://www.livejournal.com/users/deeplolz This may cause an instant reboot or bluescreen detailing a problem with your video drivers. Other possibilities include an extended period of poor performance until next reboot, a short to medium period of nonfunctionality or a crash of the browser. II. Impact Because this attack can be performed anywhere an img src is allowed, there are many forums including blogs, messageboards, and others which are vulnerable. It is hopeful that Microsoft will release a patch for this attack assoon aspossible. III. Solution Until a patch is released you are advised to use the Opera web browser. It might also be possible to write a script for the Firefox "GreaseMonkey" extension which performs a workaround for this attack. Such as setting height and width of images to 5000 pixels if they are currently set to render at over 5000. Very special shouts: Girlvinyl, Hepkitten, Confkids, and Frienditto (Come back!!! We need you badly, FD!) Shouts: LJD, LJ-Zeera, Encyclopedia Dramatica, Lulz News Network, Project Mayhem, Amalea, Wednesday Night Karate Explosion, The Gundanium Alloys Manufacturers Association, Richmond Flash Mob Society, RVA_BS, RVA_FYAD, Brad Fitzpatrick, Mena Trott, SALJ, The International Department of Internet Security, #telconinjas, undernet #drugs, The Kadaitcha Dancers, psychotic vegans, Warren Ellis, and pro-ana preteen girls.Hmm, a few things.1) That site is down. Has been down ever since I got this email. 2) I created a site with this HTML code:/././././././././././././<html> <body> <p>If you are using IE, YOU SUCK! Just kidding.<br> If you're in Window$ though, this should crash your puter<br> or give you a BSOD. HAVE FUN BUDDY! MUA HA HA!</p><img src="http://thepcelement.com/hardware/neowinscreenie.jpg"; height="9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999991" width="999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999991"></body> </html>/./././././././././././Yet no crash, this was on my Dad's PC running Window$ XP, no SP2, Firefox and Internet Exploder, the image was all white, no slowdown or anything.Can you tell me what I'm doing wrong and give me the source to thatpageyou had up as a live demonstration? I'm interested to see more about this vulnerability.Thanks for posting, have a nice day,