Linked by David Adams on Wed 16th Apr 2008 15:58 UTC, submitted by supergear
Privacy, Security, Encryption IBM researcher Mark Dowd has outlined a Flash vulnerability that could allow for a rare cross-platform web-based exploit. Matasano Chargen uses a Super Mario metaphor, an example we can all relate to, to illuminate it.
Thread beginning with comment 309903
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Karma..
by evangs on Wed 16th Apr 2008 17:13 UTC in reply to "Karma.."
evangs
Member since:
2005-07-07

How are such exploits unique to proprietary software?

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[2]: Karma..
by PLan on Wed 16th Apr 2008 17:43 in reply to "RE: Karma.."
PLan Member since:
2006-01-10

>How are such exploits unique to proprietary software?

Well they're not really, but (I can't really believe I'm going to quote Eric S. Raymond) -

"given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[3]: Karma..
by sbergman27 on Wed 16th Apr 2008 18:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Karma.."
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"

The premise of that claim: "Given enough eyeballs", is often taken as a given. Everyone who has done a security audit of Gnash, please raise your hand.

I'm a strong advocate of open source. But I would be remiss not to state that eyeballs per line of code can be quite variable.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 3

RE[3]: Karma..
by WorknMan on Wed 16th Apr 2008 20:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Karma.."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

"given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"


You just hope that whichever pair of eyeballs discovers the hole first belongs to one of the good guys.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[2]: Karma..
by umccullough on Wed 16th Apr 2008 18:12 in reply to "RE: Karma.."
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

How are such exploits unique to proprietary software?


I would say the lesson learned here for anyone who still believes that proprietary software is safer due to the closed-code is: It doesn't matter - someone with the know-how and determination will still figure out how the software works and find exploits.

Thus, open source has the advantage that *more* people can evaluate the source and find such flaws prior to compilation rather than via low level debugger and disassembly.

Also, if someone wanted to fix this in a mission critical environment before an official patch is available, they would be able to. Something that is not so easy with proprietary closed-source software.

edit: fixed wrong word in my sentence

Edited 2008-04-16 18:12 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[3]: Karma..
by Touvan on Wed 16th Apr 2008 20:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Karma.."
Touvan Member since:
2006-09-01

The exploits they were talking about seem to have a lot to do with the Flash AVM, which just happens to be open source.

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1

RE[3]: Karma..
by andrewg on Wed 16th Apr 2008 21:04 in reply to "RE[2]: Karma.."
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

Read Touvan's comment above, then read the article again. You will see that this exploit required detailed knowledge of the internal workings of the VM. If the VM had been closed source developing this exploit would have been more difficult.

Edited 2008-04-16 21:07 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2