Juha-Matti Laurio
20/11/07, 12:17
There is a well-known unpatched code execution type vulnerability reported originally in msjet40.dll version 4.00.8618.0 too.
This issue reported by HexView is known since March 2005:
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/12960
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-0944
We probably don't see a fix for this issue.
- Juha-Matti
"CaseArmour.net Security Administrator" <security@casearmour.net> kirjoitti:
> It would be useful to know if this is also an issue with msjet40.dll
> 4.0.9510.0 (Windows Server 2003 SP2 + hotfixes). I have an installer
> for Windows XP SP2 that -- seems -- to cleanly apply Windows Server 2003
> SP2's MDAC 2.82. I haven't been able to give it a serious, hard testing
> because I don't have many apps that still use MDAC.
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:25:29 +0800, "cocoruder" <cocoruder@gmail.com>
> said:
> >
> > (C:\Windows\System32\msjet40.dll, version is 4.0.8618.0)
This issue reported by HexView is known since March 2005:
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/12960
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2005-0944
We probably don't see a fix for this issue.
- Juha-Matti
"CaseArmour.net Security Administrator" <security@casearmour.net> kirjoitti:
> It would be useful to know if this is also an issue with msjet40.dll
> 4.0.9510.0 (Windows Server 2003 SP2 + hotfixes). I have an installer
> for Windows XP SP2 that -- seems -- to cleanly apply Windows Server 2003
> SP2's MDAC 2.82. I haven't been able to give it a serious, hard testing
> because I don't have many apps that still use MDAC.
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:25:29 +0800, "cocoruder" <cocoruder@gmail.com>
> said:
> >
> > (C:\Windows\System32\msjet40.dll, version is 4.0.8618.0)