Skip to content

release: V1.0.94 Security content accuracy review - #2294

Merged
florianamette merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
dev
Oct 21, 2026
Merged

florianamette merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
dev

Conversation

@florianamette

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Release summary

  • correct technical inaccuracies across remote-access and related offensive-security content
  • clarify protocol prerequisites, trust boundaries, authentication behavior, and exploit scope
  • remove duplicate English locale indexes and unsupported generic content
  • preserve the V1.0.93 foundation leaf-page additions

Included

Validation

  • git diff --check
  • CI intentionally not run as requested

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 21, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-21T08:38:23.678833Z 9412c1f PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@florianamette
florianamette merged commit 31b8676 into main Oct 21, 2026
1 check passed

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9412c1f729

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

# capture/relay the resulting NTLM authentication, or drive the client action
# match the TeamViewer client version to the advisory for the specific flaw
# defensive verification: identify the installed TeamViewer version
(Get-Item 'C:\Program Files\TeamViewer\TeamViewer.exe').VersionInfo.ProductVersion

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Tag the version check as PowerShell

This newly added command is PowerShell syntax, but the enclosing fence declares Bash. Running the example in the advertised shell fails immediately at (, so readers cannot use the worked command as presented. Change the fence to powershell, as already done for the same command in enumeration/version-detection.md.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Comment on lines +2 to +3
title: "TeamViewer NTLM coercion: CVE-2020-13699"
description: "CVE-2020-13699 affected TeamViewer Desktop for Windows before the listed fixed releases. A malicious URI could launch TeamViewer with attacker-controlled parameters and force an outbound NTLM authentication request for capture or relay; it was not direct TeamViewer remote code execution."

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Remove CVE identifiers from offensive content

The repository house style explicitly prohibits CVE identifiers (.github/CONTRIBUTING.md, line 68), but this change introduces them throughout titles, descriptions, keywords, prose, and links, beginning here. This makes the released content systematically inconsistent with the documented publishing convention; describe the vulnerability class and mechanism without embedding the identifiers.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant