Pardon me for maybe being a little na=EFve here, but the situation you =
state:=20
"I have conducted code reviews on several commercial apps which use =
C:\TEMP in very insecure ways to store sensitive data." =20
That would certainly seem to me that a programmer and the QA process =
failed. I struggle to see where Windows is to blame for that. I am no =
"Windows lover" but as a working security professional, I see as much =
poorly written code junking up Linux, Unix, Apples (yes we have them =
all) as I see with Windows, yet in those situations, will you blame the =
OS there too? I think it is time you take the bias you have, set it =
aside and look at the statement you made which was concise, accurate and =
factual, then point the blame where it belongs; at the code writers =
whose code you review!. =20
Cheers
Jens=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim [mailto:tim-security@sentinelchicken.org]=20
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:20 AM
To: Roger A. Grimes
Cc: bugtraq@securityfocus.com; full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Microsoft Windows Vista/2003/XP/2000 file =
management security issues
Roger,
> But we'll have to agree to disagree. Your security scenarios are just
> bizarre. It's a lot easier to hack people then going through all the
> interations you suggest.
>
> For one, I've been a sys admin for 20 years and NEVER created a
> private folder under a public folder. Not in my Novell days, not in my
> Windows days. The only time I've seen a private folder created under a
> public folder is the \Users folder, and in that case, the users only
> have Read and List access to the parent \Users folder, and then Full
> Control to their own folders.
I find your assessment somewhat short-sighted. It seems some of these =
attacks would be
possible in those situations.
Sure, Windows is already pathetically insecure against an attackers
already on the local system, but this would be yet another attack
vector.
tim