English
Français
Light
Dark
System

CVEFind - Alertes CVE

Restez informé en continue
Créer un compte Ouvrez un compte Simple et Gratuit Se connecter Gérez vos alertes

CVE-2017-0289 : Détail

CVE-2017-0289

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

Alerte pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des alertes

Descriptions

Graphics 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, and Windows Server 2016 allows improper disclosure of memory contents, aka "Windows Graphics Information Disclosure Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0286, CVE-2017-0287, CVE-2017-0288, CVE-2017-8531, CVE-2017-8532, and CVE-2017-8533.

Informations

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse 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 Sévérité CVSS Vecteur 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.

 [email protected]
V2 1.9 AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

EPSS Score

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

EPSS Percentile

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.
EPSS First.org

Informations sur l'Exploit

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 42240

Date de publication : 2017-06-22 22:00 +00:00
Auteur : Google Security Research
EDB Vérifié : Yes

Source: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=1204 We have encountered a crash in the Windows Uniscribe user-mode library, in the USP10!otlValueRecord::adjustPos function, while trying to display text using a corrupted TTF font file: --- (470.4d4): Access violation - code c0000005 (first chance) First chance exceptions are reported before any exception handling. This exception may be expected and handled. eax=00000000 ebx=03546538 ecx=0017e9c4 edx=0353961e esi=0017eda4 edi=0353961c eip=77509f2e esp=0017e96c ebp=0017e97c iopl=0 nv up ei pl zr na pe nc cs=001b ss=0023 ds=0023 es=0023 fs=003b gs=0000 efl=00010246 USP10!otlValueRecord::adjustPos+0x7e: 77509f2e 668b17 mov dx,word ptr [edi] ds:0023:0353961c=???? 0:000> kb # ChildEBP RetAddr Args to Child 00 0017e97c 775071b1 0017eda4 03546538 035464ac USP10!otlValueRecord::adjustPos+0x7e 01 0017ea04 7750168c 0017edbc 00000005 0017ecbc USP10!otlPairPosLookup::apply+0x1a1 02 0017ea78 775039f1 00000002 0017edbc 0017edb0 USP10!ApplyLookup+0x40c 03 0017ec7c 774ff1d1 534f5047 0017edf4 0017edbc USP10!ApplyFeatures+0x481 04 0017ecc8 774fb28b 00000000 00000000 0017edf4 USP10!RePositionOtlGlyphs+0x1c1 05 0017ecfc 774f7df3 0017ed94 0017ede0 0017edf4 USP10!ShapingLibraryInternal::RePositionOtlGlyphsWithLanguageFallback+0x2b 06 0017ef68 774e5bee 0017f0b8 0017f0c0 0017f0a4 USP10!GenericEngineGetGlyphPositions+0x8a3 07 0017f03c 774e2d8a 0017f0b8 0017f0c0 0017f0a4 USP10!ShapingGetGlyphPositions+0x40e 08 0017f134 774b5e45 af0106d0 03546124 035463dc USP10!ShlPlace+0x20a 09 0017f178 774c193d af0106d0 03546124 035463dc USP10!ScriptPlace+0x165 0a 0017f1d4 774c2bd4 00000000 00000000 0017f254 USP10!RenderItemNoFallback+0x2ed 0b 0017f200 774c2e62 00000000 00000000 0017f254 USP10!RenderItemWithFallback+0x104 0c 0017f224 774c43f9 00000000 0017f254 03546124 USP10!RenderItem+0x22 0d 0017f268 774b7a04 000004a0 00000400 af0106d0 USP10!ScriptStringAnalyzeGlyphs+0x1e9 0e 0017f280 760a1736 af0106d0 03546040 0000000a USP10!ScriptStringAnalyse+0x284 0f 0017f2cc 760a18c1 af0106d0 0017f750 0000000a LPK!LpkStringAnalyse+0xe5 10 0017f3c8 760a17b4 af0106d0 00000000 00000000 LPK!LpkCharsetDraw+0x332 11 0017f3fc 77df56a9 af0106d0 00000000 00000000 LPK!LpkDrawTextEx+0x40 12 0017f43c 77df5a64 af0106d0 00000060 00000000 USER32!DT_DrawStr+0x13c 13 0017f488 77df580f af0106d0 0017f750 0017f764 USER32!DT_GetLineBreak+0x78 14 0017f534 77df5882 af0106d0 00000000 0000000a USER32!DrawTextExWorker+0x250 15 0017f558 77df5b68 af0106d0 0017f750 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 3 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/42240.zip

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Office >> Version 2007

Microsoft>>Office >> Version 2010

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 r2

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/42240/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB
http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038662
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_SECTRACK
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/98929
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_BID

Plus d'informations
Cliquez sur le bouton à gauche (OFF), pour autoriser l'inscription de cookie améliorant les fonctionnalités du site. Cliquez sur le bouton à gauche (Tout accepter), pour ne plus autoriser l'inscription de cookie améliorant les fonctionnalités du site.