Microsoft PowerPoint Code Execution Vulnerability

Does anyone know if this was patched yet????

Description:
A vulnerability has been reported in Microsoft PowerPoint, which can be
exploited by malicious people to compromise a user's system.

The vulnerability is due to an unspecified error when processing PowerPoint
documents containing a malformed string. This can be exploited to corrupt
system memory and may allow execution of arbitrary code when a malicious
PowerPoint document is opened.

NOTE: This vulnerability is reportedly being exploited in the wild

http://secunia.com/advisories/22127/

Imhotep

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security, microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers, microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin
> Followup-To: microsoft.public.security

Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
the other groups.

--

(E-Mail Removed)
remove 999 in order to email me

"Leythos" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:_hiUg.7751$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
>> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin
>> Followup-To: microsoft.public.security
>
> Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
> the other groups.
>
> --
>
> (E-Mail Removed)
> remove 999 in order to email me

Because he's not only a troll, he's an idiot. If other people wouldn't
answer him I'd never see him.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Answer in newsgroup. Don't send mail.

Leythos wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
>> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin Followup-To:
>> microsoft.public.security
>
> Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
> the other groups.
>


The troll emerges from his sleep...you want to add anything of meaning to
this post or are you clearly outclass by the sheer complexity, yet again.

Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM wrote:

> "Leythos" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:_hiUg.7751$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
>>> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
>>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin
>>> Followup-To: microsoft.public.security
>>
>> Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
>> the other groups.
>>
>> --
>>
>> (E-Mail Removed)
>> remove 999 in order to email me
>
> Because he's not only a troll, he's an idiot. If other people wouldn't
> answer him I'd never see him.
>

Funny you call me a troll WHILE YOU ARE TROLLING. Hey Einstein, you have
anything to help the people here with this security hole, you are you just
flexing your moron muscles??? Yea, I could have guessed.

MVP eh? Yet the best you can do to help the people here is call other people
names? Is that really the best a MVP can do???

Imhotep

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Leythos wrote:
>
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
> >> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
> >> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin Followup-To:
> >> microsoft.public.security
> >
> > Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
> > the other groups.
> >
>
>
> The troll emerges from his sleep...you want to add anything of meaning to
> this post or are you clearly outclass by the sheer complexity, yet again.

When you figure out that you are improperly posting and correct your
error, people might take you seriously.

--

(E-Mail Removed)
remove 999 in order to email me

"Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> "Leythos" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:_hiUg.7751$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> >> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
> >> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
> >> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin
> >> Followup-To: microsoft.public.security
> >
> > Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
> > the other groups.
> >
> > --
> >
> > (E-Mail Removed)
> > remove 999 in order to email me
>
> Because he's not only a troll, he's an idiot. If other people wouldn't
> answer him I'd never see him.

The idiots here are clearly all those who don't know how to answer
a crosspost: the followup to one of the groups is the appropriate
and ONLY CORRECT way!

fup .test for idiots to learn!

nuff said
Stefan

In article <#(E-Mail Removed)>, postmaster@
[127.0.0.1] says...
> "Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > "Leythos" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:_hiUg.7751$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > >> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
> > >> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
> > >> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin
> > >> Followup-To: microsoft.public.security
> > >
> > > Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
> > > the other groups.
> > >
> >
> > Because he's not only a troll, he's an idiot. If other people wouldn't
> > answer him I'd never see him.
>
> The idiots here are clearly all those who don't know how to answer
> a crosspost: the followup to one of the groups is the appropriate
> and ONLY CORRECT way!
>
> fup .test for idiots to learn!
>
> nuff said
> Stefan

Obviously you don't know how to post either - I like the MS.TEST, but if
you are going to post to a BUNCH of groups you should accept replies
from them too.

--

(E-Mail Removed)
remove 999 in order to email me

"Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> "Leythos" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:_hiUg.7751$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> >> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
>> >> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
>> >> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin
>> >> Followup-To: microsoft.public.security
>> >
>> > Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
>> > the other groups.
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > (E-Mail Removed)
>> > remove 999 in order to email me
>>
>> Because he's not only a troll, he's an idiot. If other people wouldn't
>> answer him I'd never see him.
>
> The idiots here are clearly all those who don't know how to answer
> a crosspost: the followup to one of the groups is the appropriate
> and ONLY CORRECT way!
>

The real issue to me is neither the xpost, nor the irritating follow-up,
as after all those are a matter of choice (even though they defeat the
effort to spread the message), but rather the issue is the replying back
to all initial groups despite it being a reply to a post in but the one
(follow-up) group.

Roger

Leythos wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> Leythos wrote:
>>
>> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> > (E-Mail Removed) says...
>> >> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.security,
>> >> microsoft.public.security, microsoft.public.security.homeusers,
>> >> microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin Followup-To:
>> >> microsoft.public.security
>> >
>> > Why do you play with a follow-up to a single group when posting to all
>> > the other groups.
>> >
>>
>>
>> The troll emerges from his sleep...you want to add anything of meaning to
>> this post or are you clearly outclass by the sheer complexity, yet again.
>
> When you figure out that you are improperly posting and correct your
> error, people might take you seriously.
>

I can't help that your newsreader does not adhere to the protocols....that's
your fault.