Third Microsoft Word Code Execution Exploit Posted

gregleimbeck writes "Exploit code for a third, unpatched vulnerability in Microsoft Word has been posted on the Internet, adding to the software maker's struggles to keep up with gaping holes in its popular word processing program. The attack code, available at Milw0rm.com, contains sample Word documents that have been rigged to launch code execution exploits when the file is opened."

Thanks for the proof

[Anonymous Coward]

I always suspected that Microsoft Word was Turing-complete.

Re:Third Microsoft Word Code Execution Exploit Pos

[__aaclcg7560]

I did. My brain went blue screen and shut down. My attorney will be in touch.

Kinda limits Word's functionality, dontcha think?

[kbob88]

Microsoft suggests that users "do not open or save Word files,"

I really like this quote! That kind of limits the functionality of a word processor if you can't open or save files, right?

What exactly does Microsoft suggest that I do with Word files? Besides using them to fragment my hard-disk? Maybe I can burn them to keep warm in the winter... um, no.

Or perhaps I'll just use Word to create and save HTML files!!

Suddenly, up pops: Hackie

[Anonymous Coward]

"I see that you are trying to craft an exploit. Would you like me to assist?" <blink, blink>

Re:Thanks for the proof

[spellraiser]

No, that's Emacs. MS Word is a pushdown automaton at best.

Re:Wait, who still uses M$ 0ffice?

[newt0311]

OOo is nice because it is free. It is however the most bloated piece of software that I have seen in terms of resource consumption including MS products. True non-bloatedness comes with emacs+LaTeX. Now there are things which do not take up any significant resources (until they are done reading my 33K startup .emacs file and increasing buffer and undo limits to ungodly levels that is.).

Re:This appears to affect OpenOffice 2.0.4?

[droopycom]

Dont worry!
Dont you know that OpenOffice.org use Slashdot as a bug tracking system ??

Tagging

[shadowmas]

Why is there both a bugs and a Microsoft tag on this article? isn't it rather redundant having both tags?