Re: Verifying Toolchain Semantics

[Ian Grant <ian.a.n.grant@googlemail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Nala Ginrut <nalaginrut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Alright, I changed a system and try it again with evince successfully.
> Anyway, I did't find any maths or special symbols in it, so it could be
> published on your blog as plain text. But you may insist on the opinion of
> PDF.

There is another reason why I use PDF. It's much nicer to read. I love
Garamond. Did you see the Jobs movie? Do you remember what he said
about Garamond?

> It's not your mistake but mine. ;-)

Well being mistaken about somebody else's mistake that wasn't a
mistake is about the least mistaken it's possible to be: it really
doesn't matter at all.

What we really need to do is find out what software Mark was using to
pdf->png. If it segfaults then there is a good chance that that bug
can be turned into a working exploit. Because all binaries distributed
by the binary-distributors are identical, attackers can analyse the
file and work out how to turn a bad pointer dereference into an
exploitable "PDF attack vector" which executes binary code contained
in the PDF.

Ian