I know some people have been talking about this as being a false news story, but now there is confirmation from Redmond. http://www.komotv.com/stories/29778.htm Regards Thor Larholm Senior Security Researcher PivX Solutions 24 Corporate Plaza #180 Newport Beach, CA 92660 http://www.pivx.com thor@pivx.com Phone: +1 (949) 231-8496 PGP: 0x5A276569 6BB1 B77F CB62 0D3D 5A82 C65D E1A4 157C 5A27 6569 PivX defines "Proactive Threat Mitigation". Get a FREE Beta Version of Qwik-Fix <http://www.qwik-fix.net> -----Original Message----- From: Gadi Evron [mailto:ge@egotistical.reprehensible.net] Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 1:49 PM To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com Cc: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com; Thor Larholm Subject: W2K source "leaked"? A couple of days ago a friend of mine drew my attention to the source making rounds on the encrypted p2p networks, I was hoping it would take a bit longer for it to be "out", but that was just day-dreaming. Thor Larholm just gave me this URL, as you can notice, the server is busy: http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=17509 I never believed in 0-days. "New" or more to the point un-known-to-the-public exploits and vulnerabilities exist and are being used. In my opinion "0-days" virtually don't exist. It's usually either some vulnerability that is long known and a COP or a worm is created. Or exploits that will nearly never see the "public" but exist and are used by few individuals.. but now... I don't know. How often does a brand new exploit come out without prior warning and "attack" the net? *If* this really is the.. _real_ source code for W2K (and according to the article NT4 as well).... we'll see what happens next. People didn't need help finding vulnerabilities in Windows before, but it just became a whole lot easier and a lot less demanding on the "m4d #4x0r 5k111z". I can't really say that the article is right and the source was "leaked" or "stolen". The source is being sold/given (?) for years now to EDU's and commercial companies for research purposes (not to mention China..). I suppose foul play is always possible. Can anyone confirm this is the real source code? How about a press release? :) Gadi Evron
