3 ms·
Yeah but this shit still scares me: http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/1km0of/injecting_arbritary_code_into_net_assemblies/ http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/
by switch33 13y ago
Yeah but this shit still scares me: http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/1km0of/injecting_arbritary_code_into_net_assemblies/ http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/1km0of/injecting_arb...
Lol at the reference to "1990s crypto mode." The standards are always funky.
- tptacek 13y agoYou can inject into processes on Unix OS's too. Again, not sure what that has to do with this project.
- switch33 13y agoThat may be true, but if injection and backdooring a chat service is as easy as just using some simple code thats already floating in the blackmarket. How long do you think before that project would be backdoored? The answer is before the thing is even used there would be some people including some code to attack it. Especially because chat clients are good for botnets. Hackers think they are yummy.
- tptacek 13y agoThis is pretty silly.
- switch33 13y agoTell that to the well made botnets developed for teamviewer, msnchat, and the hackers targeting skype as well. It's just another way to mask botnet traffic.
- geofft 13y agoThere's plenty of code floating around the white market for injecting code into running UNIX processes. It's a documented feature of the dynamic linker, and has been for decades. Injecting code into a process running in the same security domain is not an attack, regardless of platform.