[Dshield] FW: W2K source "leaked"?
thor at pivx.com
Thu Feb 12 23:11:03 GMT 2004
From: Thor Larholm [mailto:thor at pivx.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 2:00 PM
To: 'bugtraq at securityfocus.com'
Cc: 'ntbugtraq at listserv.ntbugtraq.com'
Subject: RE: W2K source "leaked"?
This is not the first time that people have reported leaked copies of
Windows source code. In 2000, Wired News reported that the source code
for Whistler (now Windows XP) had been leaked, though they never
WinBeta is also reporting on the new leak
0-day exploits being used on Microsofts network, foul play by privileged
partners or a hoax? Let's see what Microsoft reports.
Senior Security Researcher
24 Corporate Plaza #180
Newport Beach, CA 92660
thor at pivx.com
Phone: +1 (949) 231-8496
6BB1 B77F CB62 0D3D 5A82 C65D E1A4 157C 5A27 6569
PivX defines "Proactive Threat Mitigation". Get a FREE Beta Version of
From: Gadi Evron [mailto:ge at egotistical.reprehensible.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 1:49 PM
To: bugtraq at securityfocus.com
Cc: full-disclosure at 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
I never believed in 0-days. "New" or more to the point
un-known-to-the-public exploits and vulnerabilities exist and are being
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
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
More information about the list