CVE-2016-3223 : Detail

CVE-2016-3223

8.1
/
High
A01-Broken Access Control
1.96%V3
Network
2016-06-15
23h00 +00:00
2018-10-12
17h57 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Microsoft Windows Vista SP2, Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT 8.1, and Windows 10 Gold and 1511 mishandle LDAP authentication, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to gain privileges by modifying group-policy update data within a domain-controller data stream, aka "Group Policy Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability."

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-264 Category : Permissions, Privileges, and Access Controls
Weaknesses in this category are related to the management of permissions, privileges, and other security features that are used to perform access control.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.0 8.1 HIGH CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/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

A vulnerability exploitable with network access means the vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the attacker's path is through OSI layer 3 (the network layer). Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable one or more network hops away (e.g. across layer 3 boundaries from routers).

Attack Complexity

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

High

A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected.

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 to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a 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

An important property captured by CVSS v3.0 is the ability for a vulnerability in one software component to impact resources beyond its means, or privileges.

Scope

Formally, Scope refers to the collection of privileges defined by a computing authority (e.g. an application, an operating system, or a sandbox environment) when granting access to computing resources (e.g. files, CPU, memory, etc). These privileges are assigned based on some method of identification and authorization. In some cases, the authorization may be simple or loosely controlled based upon predefined rules or standards. For example, in the case of Ethernet traffic sent to a network switch, the switch accepts traffic that arrives on its ports and is an authority that controls the traffic flow to other switch ports.

Unchanged

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

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics refer to the properties of the impacted component.

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 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 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 that one has in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

 [email protected]
V2 9.3 AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C [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 : 40219

Publication date : 2016-08-07 22h00 +00:00
Author : Nabeel Ahmed
EDB Verified : Yes

# Exploit Title: Group Policy Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability # Date: 08-08-2016 # Exploit Author: Nabeel Ahmed # Tested on: Windows 7 Professional (x32/x64) # CVE : CVE-2016-3223 # Category: Privilege Escalation SPECIAL CONFIG: Standard Domain Member configuration with valid credentials. (Standard Domain User with valid credentials) SUMMARY: This vulnerability allows an attacker to create/modify local Administrator account through a fake Domain Controller by creating User Configuration Group Policies. 1) Prerequisites: - Standard Windows 7 Fully patched and member of an existing domain. (e.g. domain.local) - Domain User Credentials are known with no Administrative rights. - Computer has to be connected on a network. - Fake Domain Controller 2) Reproduce: STEP 1: Determine domain of the target computer (e.g. domain.local) STEP 2: Boot system and determine FQDN of the device. (example. CLIENT.domain.local), this can be obtained by monitoring the network broadcast communication, which the system sends prior to loggin in. The username can be extracted from the loginscreen (E.g USER1) STEP 3: Create Active Directory for the domain you obtained in STEP 2 (domain.local). STEP 4: Create User with similar name and password as the target computer. (E.g. domain\USER1:password123!). STEP 5: Login on the target system with the known Username and Password without any network connection (using cached credentials). STEP 6: Establish network connection between the target system and the newly created Domain Controller. STEP 7: Create a Group Policy called "Create Local Admin" STEP 8: Edit the "Create Local Admin" Group Policy to create in the User Configuration section a new user called "TestAdmin" and add him to the group "Administrators". STEP 9: Open Command Prompt on the target system and execute the following command: "gpupdate /target:user /force" STEP 10: User Policy update will complete successfully. STEP 11: Confirm the newly created Administrator "TestAdmin" by executing the following command in Command Prompt: "net localgroup Administrators" STEP 12: "TestAdmin" user will be member of the Administrators group. 3) Impact: A regular Domain User can gain higher privileges on his system by creating a new administrator through Group Policies created on a fake Domain Controller 4) Solution: Install the latest patches from 14-06-2016 using Windows Update. 5) References: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/security/ms16-072.aspx https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3163622 6) Credits: Vulnerability discovered by Nabeel Ahmed (https://twitter.com/NabeelAhmedBE) and Tom Gilis (https://twitter.com/tgilis) of Dimension Data (https://www.dimensiondata.com)

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1511

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 r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_vista >> Version *

References

http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1036100
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_SECTRACK
https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/40219/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB