Posted by Fyodor on Mar 14

Yeah, the general FD list policy is to reject requests for vendor contacts
unless they also include full disclosure of the bug details:

https://secwiki.org/w/FD_Moderation#Requests_for_vendor_security_contacts

It’s not that there is anything wrong with the more limited disclosure and
vendor pre-disclosure approaches, but those aren’t full disclosure and so
probably belong on a different list. This post must have slipped by one of
the…

Posted by Jeffrey Walton on Mar 14

According to RFC 2142 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt), MAILBOX
NAMES FOR COMMON SERVICES, ROLES AND FUNCTIONS, you should be able to
use:

secure () gigabyte com
security () gigabyte com

I also rummage the WHOIS data and use the Administrative and Technical contacts:

$ whois gigabyte.com | grep ‘@’
Registrant Email: domains () marcaria com
Admin Email: domains () marcaria com
Tech Email: domains () marcaria com…

Posted by INTREST SEC on Mar 14

Author: <github.com/tintinweb>
Ref: https://github.com/tintinweb/pub/tree/master/pocs/cve-2016-3116
Version: 0.2
Date: Mar 3rd, 2016

Tag: dropbearsshd xauth command injection may lead to forced-command bypass

Overview
——–

Name: dropbear
Vendor: Matt Johnston
References: * https://matt.ucc.asn.au/dropbear/dropbear.html [1]

Version: 2015.71
Latest Version: 2015.71
Other…

Posted by paul . szabo on Mar 14

I noticed a security issue in my Netgear CG3000v2 cable modem, as
provided by Optus (an Australian phone/communications provider).

The “admin password” can be changed on the web interface, without
providing the current password. The page
http://192.168.0.1/SetPassword.asp
prompts for old and new passwords (and repeat of new), but in fact
ignores the old password provided, and changes the password to the
new one, regardless.

This issue…

Posted by Jesse Jacobs on Mar 14

Hello All,

I unfortunately must report tomcat ‘examples’ code is included in latest
Tegile security updates for NAS appliance (Zebi HA2100).

Jesse

Posted by loon on Mar 14

Since when does reverse engineering a patch make you the discoverer of the patched exploit?

this is silly to take credit for.

Posted by Andrew Deck on Mar 14

Well, they’re trying to ensure they’re doing their due diligence with
respect to responsible disclosure before they make a public
disclosure.

It sounds like they got a response from a confirmed idiot working at
Gigabyte. They’re asking for other contact info to ascertain whether
idiocy is Gigabyte’s official company policy, or if they just
contacted the wrong helpdesk drugdeon.

Posted by Dawid Golunski on Mar 14

Hi loon,

I posted this in a rush copying my usual template I used for my other
advisories. I only noticed the discovered header after posting to the
list. I’ve fixed it since then (which you’d have seen if you clicked
on the URL above my message) as I also had thought it could sound
confusing. The link to the exim patch for the environment cleanup
issue was in the references from the start.
Thanks for the heads up anyway.

Posted by loon on Mar 14

Fair enough, i was probably harsh, I apologize. I did see it was different on the website. Thanks for that.

Cheers,
loon