CVE-2019-0543 : Détail

CVE-2019-0543

7.8
/
Haute
Authorization problems
A07-Identif. and Authent. Fail
3.19%V4
Local
2019-01-08
21h00 +00:00
2025-02-04
15h33 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists when Windows improperly handles authentication requests, aka "Microsoft Windows Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability." This affects Windows 7, Windows Server 2012 R2, Windows RT 8.1, Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2019, Windows Server 2012, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2016, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows 10, Windows 10 Servers.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-287 Improper Authentication
When an actor claims to have a given identity, the product does not prove or insufficiently proves that the claim is correct.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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

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.

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

CISA KEV (Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues)

Nom de la vulnérabilité : Microsoft Windows Privilege Escalation Vulnerability

Action requise : Apply updates per vendor instructions.

Connu pour être utilisé dans des campagnes de ransomware : Known

Ajouter le : 2022-03-14 23h00 +00:00

Action attendue : 2022-04-04 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.

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 : 46156

Date de publication : 2019-01-13 23h00 +00:00
Auteur : Google Security Research
EDB Vérifié : Yes

Windows: SSPI Network Authentication Session 0 EoP Platform: Windows 10 1803/1809 (not tested earlier versions) Class: Elevation of Privilege Security Boundary (per Windows Security Service Criteria): Session boundary Summary: Performing an NTLM authentication to the same machine results in a network token which can be used to create arbitrary processes in session 0. Description: Typically performing a loopback authentication would result in a short circuited authentication NTLM challenge response which will just return to the caller a copy of the token which initiated the authentication request. This token has the same properties, such as elevation status, authentication ID and session ID as the caller and so isn’t that interesting from an exploitation perspective. However if you initiate the authentication process by supplying a SEC_WINNT_AUTH_IDENTITY_EX structure to AcquireCredentialsHandle which has the username and domain fields set, but not the password the authentication process will instead return an authenticated network token. This is interesting because LSASS doesn’t modify the session ID of the token, which means the returned token is set to session ID 0 (network authentication doesn’t spin up a new console session). If we do the authentication to ourselves we’ll meet all the requirements to impersonate this token, it’s the same user and the same privilege level so we can then use this to spawn a new process running in session 0, where we could potentially elevate our privileges by modifying global named objects or making it easier to exploit case 47435. Note that not specifying any buffer to pAuthData in AcquireCredentialsHandle or passing SEC_WINNT_AUTH_IDENTITY_EX but with empty username and domain fields results in the normal loopback authentication. While I’ve not verified this it might also work in an AppContainer if the Enterprise Authentication capability has been granted, which is allowed in some of the Edge sandbox profiles. The normal short circuit authentication would return the AC token but this approach might return the full token. With a full token you might be able to elevate privileges. Proof of Concept: I’ve provided a PoC as a C# project. The PoC negotiates the network access token set to Session 0 then abuses the COM activator to create a process using that access token. While I don’t control the process being created (outside of choosing a suitable COM class) it would be easy to do by modifying DOS devices to redirect the creation or just inject into the new process and execute arbitrary code. 1) Compile the C# project. It will need to grab the NtApiDotNet from NuGet to work. 2) Run the PoC, observe the text output. Expected Result: The negotiated token is just a reflected version of the current process token. Observed Result: The token is set for session 0 and a new process can be created with that session ID set. Proof of Concept: https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/46156.zip

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1507 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1507 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1607 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1607 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1703 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1703 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1709 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1803 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1803 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1803 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1809 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1809 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1809 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_7 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_8.1 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_rt_8.1 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_1709 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_1803 >> 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 -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2019 >> Version -

Références

http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/106408
Tags : vdb-entry, x_refsource_BID
https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/46156/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB