{"id":2398,"date":"2006-09-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-09-14T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/09\/14\/new-ie-hole-revisits-an-old-bug\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:41:16","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:41:16","slug":"new-ie-hole-revisits-an-old-bug","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/09\/14\/new-ie-hole-revisits-an-old-bug\/","title":{"rendered":"New IE hole revisits an old bug"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Hackers have discovered a new vulnerability in Internet Explorer, and they&#8217;ve released code that could be used to attack users of Microsoft Corp.&#8217;s popular browser.  To take advantage of the exploit code, attackers would first need to trick users into viewing a maliciously encoded Web page, but they could then run unauthorized code on a victim&#8217;s computer.  Symantec calls the bug &#8220;critical,&#8221; and Secunia rates the issue as &#8220;highly critical,&#8221; its most severe rating.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The xsec.org hackers referred to their code as a 0day, meaning an exploit for a previously undisclosed vulnerability.  But one well-known hacker said the flaw was not difficult to find using publicly available security tools, such as the AxMan ActiveX fuzzing software.<\/p>\n<p>Moore wrote an automated ActiveX testing tool called AxMan that uncovered a handful of IE bugs, including the one exploited by on xsec.org.  Although Moore recently launched a project called the Month of Browser Bugs, in which he disclosed a new browser vulnerability every day for the month of July, he said he had refrained from disclosing this particular vulnerability.  &#8220;This is one of the many exploitable bugs that can be discovered using AxMan and one of the few that I didn&#8217;t include in Month of Browser bugs due to the ease of exploitation,&#8221; he said.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.computerworld.com\/action\/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&#038;articleId=9003329&#038;source=NLT_AM&#038;nlid=1<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2398","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-warnings"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2398","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2398"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2398\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4885,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2398\/revisions\/4885"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2398"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2398"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2398"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}