Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

As secure as it was tested?

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Copytrooper
    replied
    Seems they didn't test Sygate themselves, but had user report about it only, thus Daemon Tools was the unofficial winner.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sabrehawk
    replied
    Interesting article...maybe a reason for odd display driver crashes with certain games ? Anti-Cheat or Copyprotection
    programs should be tested on that!!!!

    Btw...Sygate didnt have any red markers either...mistake?
    Cause then it would share the throne with daemon tools...
    not? Author seems to ignore that.

    Leave a comment:


  • al1uk
    replied
    Nice work, congrats. (Even though I don't understand the article )

    Leave a comment:


  • Alco
    replied
    yes, it is interesting to read their Conclusion:
    ( at:
    http://www.matousec.com/projects/win...re-drivers.php)

    ---
    Conclusion

    Almost every software that implements SSDT hooks is vulnerable to the bug we introduce in this article. BlackICE PC Protection, G DATA InternetSecurity, Ghost Security Suite, Kaspersky Internet Security, Norton Internet Security, Online Armor Personal Firewall, Outpost Firewall Pro, Privatefirewall, ProcessGuard, ProSecurity, ZoneAlarm Pro, Process Monitor, RegMon are just a few examples of badly written, not properly tested, vulnerable software.
    There were only two personal firewalls that passed our argument validation testing successfully, Comodo Personal Firewall and Sunbelt Personal Firewall. Our tests revealed, that the current versions of these products are probably not vulnerable, but earlier versions of both these personal firewalls contained the bug and they were both fixed after our notifications to their vendors. So in fact, the only product that passed the tests was Daemon Tools.


    We also found many articles, tutorials and papers that described either SSDT hooking or other driver code and contained improper parameter validation.
    Even more disturbing is that these bugs are present in professional software products and also in official Sysinternals (Microsoft) tools – Process Monitor and RegMon. Even Mark Russinovich and Bryce Cogswell, the authors of these tools and two of the most famous Windows kernel hackers, seem to have forgotten about validation in their tools. Process Monitor and RegMon have been vulnerable for ages.

    We advise all vendors of affected products to download and use our tool and/or contact us and order our software testing services.
    ---

    Leave a comment:


  • Reef
    replied
    Too bad they didn't test Starforce drivers. I really would like to see the result of it

    Leave a comment:


  • ricse
    started a topic As secure as it was tested?

    As secure as it was tested?

    Hi guys,
    Here's a security paper named "Plague in (security) software drivers" dealing with the correct use of SSDT hooks:
    http://www.matousec.com/projects/win...re-drivers.php
    Congrats for its result:
    So in fact, the only product that passed the tests was Daemon Tools.
    But out of curiousity, did their BSODhook utility not find anything in Daemon Tools just by chance or did you really think of the topic before?
    If not then this post at least fits into the category and you've got something to do.
    Cheers
Working...
X