4 ms·
It probably isn't, but I don't think we can know whether it was on purpose or not. If I had to put a backdoor in something, it'd definitely be a buffer overflo
by pornel 7y ago
It probably isn't, but I don't think we can know whether it was on purpose or not.
If I had to put a backdoor in something, it'd definitely be a buffer overflow. It gives full remote code execution, it may be hard enough to find to be NOBUS, and it has perfect plausible deniability.
- vesinisa 7y agoNever attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. So - yes, possible in theory, but quite unlikely.
- fauigerzigerk 7y ago"Never" seems a bit much, if you accept the premise that all backdoors would be made to look like accidential security flaws. But since there are probably a lot more accidential security flaws than backdoors, I agree that erring on the side of stupidity is justified.
- UncleMeat 7y agoThe huge majority of applications with any c++ code have some sort of memory safety vulnerability. Codecs are a classic place where this shows up all the time. Why would this vuln out of the literally gazillions of similar vulns be considered a backdoor?