English
Français
Light
Dark
System

Alert System

Stay informed at all times
Create an account Open a free account Login Manage your alerts

CVE-2017-0285 : Detail

CVE-2017-0285

5
/
MEDIUM
A01-Broken Access Control
0.11%V3
Local
2017-06-14 23:00 +00:00
2017-08-11 13:57 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD

Alert for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Alert management

Descriptions

Uniscribe in Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT 8.1, Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, 1703, Windows Server 2016, Microsoft Office 2007 SP3, Microsoft Office 2010 SP2, and Microsoft Office Word Viewer allows improper disclosure of memory contents, aka "Windows Uniscribe Information Disclosure Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0282, CVE-2017-0284, and CVE-2017-8534.

Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.

Metrics

Metric Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

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.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

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.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

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.

Required

Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited. For example, a successful exploit may only be possible during the installation of an application by a system administrator.

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.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

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

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

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 1.9 AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N 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 : 42236

Publication date : 2017-06-22 22:00 +00:00
Author : Google Security Research
EDB Verified : Yes

Source: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=1200 We have encountered a crash in the Windows Uniscribe user-mode library, in the USP10!SubstituteNtoM function, while trying to display text using a corrupted TTF font file: --- (69c.164): Access violation - code c0000005 (first chance) First chance exceptions are reported before any exception handling. This exception may be expected and handled. eax=035fc256 ebx=00000000 ecx=035fc256 edx=00000019 esi=035cc1d0 edi=00000001 eip=7750a774 esp=0014eb38 ebp=0014eb64 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na pe nc cs=001b ss=0023 ds=0023 es=0023 fs=003b gs=0000 efl=00010206 USP10!SubstituteNtoM+0x2c4: 7750a774 668b08 mov cx,word ptr [eax] ds:0023:035fc256=???? 0:000> kb # ChildEBP RetAddr Args to Child 00 0014eb64 7750994d 0014ef40 0014ef64 035fc256 USP10!SubstituteNtoM+0x2c4 01 0014eba8 7750142a 0014ef40 0014ef64 0014ee54 USP10!otlMultiSubstLookup::apply+0x10d 02 0014ec10 775039f1 00000000 0014ef40 00001c3a USP10!ApplyLookup+0x1aa 03 0014ee14 774fefcf 42555347 0014ef7c 0014ef40 USP10!ApplyFeatures+0x481 04 0014ee60 774ff920 00000000 035f3ffe 035f3c90 USP10!SubstituteOtlGlyphs+0x1bf 05 0014ee9c 774f1500 0014ef18 0014ef50 0014ef7c USP10!SubstituteOtlChars+0x220 06 0014f118 774e55da 0014f224 0014f250 0014f238 USP10!HebrewEngineGetGlyphs+0x690 07 0014f1d8 774e273f 0014f224 0014f250 0014f238 USP10!ShapingGetGlyphs+0x36a 08 0014f2c4 774b5c6f a30105a2 035c6124 035c6318 USP10!ShlShape+0x2ef 09 0014f308 774c174a a30105a2 035c6124 035c6318 USP10!ScriptShape+0x15f 0a 0014f368 774c2bd4 00000000 00000000 0014f3e8 USP10!RenderItemNoFallback+0xfa 0b 0014f394 774c2e62 00000000 00000000 0014f3e8 USP10!RenderItemWithFallback+0x104 0c 0014f3b8 774c43f9 00000000 0014f3e8 035c6124 USP10!RenderItem+0x22 0d 0014f3fc 774b7a04 000004a0 00000400 a30105a2 USP10!ScriptStringAnalyzeGlyphs+0x1e9 0e 0014f414 760a1736 a30105a2 035c6040 0000000a USP10!ScriptStringAnalyse+0x284 0f 0014f460 760a18c1 a30105a2 0014f8e4 0000000a LPK!LpkStringAnalyse+0xe5 10 0014f55c 760a17b4 a30105a2 00000000 00000000 LPK!LpkCharsetDraw+0x332 11 0014f590 77df56a9 a30105a2 00000000 00000000 LPK!LpkDrawTextEx+0x40 12 0014f5d0 77df5a64 a30105a2 00000728 00000000 USER32!DT_DrawStr+0x13c 13 0014f61c 77df580f a30105a2 0014f8e4 0014f8f8 USER32!DT_GetLineBreak+0x78 14 0014f6c8 77df5882 a30105a2 00000000 0000000a USER32!DrawTextExWorker+0x250 15 0014f6ec 77df5b68 a30105a2 0014f8e4 ffffffff USER32!DrawTextExW+0x1e [...] --- The issue reproduces on Windows 7, and could be potentially used to disclose sensitive data from the process heap. It is easiest to reproduce with PageHeap enabled, but it is also possible to observe a crash in a default system configuration. In order to reproduce the problem with the provided samples, it might be necessary to use a custom program which displays all of the font's glyphs at various point sizes. Attached are 2 proof of concept malformed font files which trigger the crash. Proof of Concept: https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/42236.zip

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Office >> Version 2007

Microsoft>>Office >> Version 2010

Microsoft>>Office_word_viewer >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1511

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1607

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1703

Microsoft>>Windows_7 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_8.1 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_rt_8.1 >> Version *

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2016 >> Version -

References

https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/42236/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/98914
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_BID

More information
Click on the button to the left (OFF), to authorize the inscription of cookie improving the functionalities of the site. Click on the button to the left (Accept all), to unauthorize the inscription of cookie improving the functionalities of the site.