English
Français
Light
Dark
System

CVEFind - Alertes CVE

Restez informé en continue
Créer un compte Ouvrez un compte Simple et Gratuit Se connecter Gérez vos alertes

CVE-2019-1364 : Détail

CVE-2019-1364

7.8
/
HIGH
0.05%V3
Local
2019-10-10 11:28 +00:00
2019-10-10 14:06 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD

Alerte pour un CVE

Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des alertes

Descriptions

An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists in Windows when the Windows kernel-mode driver fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka 'Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2019-1362.

Informations

Faiblesses connexes

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

Metrics

Metric Score Sévérité 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.

 [email protected]
V2 7.2 AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

EPSS Score

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.

EPSS Percentile

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 : 47484

Date de publication : 2019-10-09 22:00 +00:00
Auteur : Google Security Research
EDB Vérifié : Yes

We have encountered a Windows kernel crash in the win32k.sys driver while processing a corrupted TTF font file. An example crash log excerpt generated after triggering the bug is shown below: --- cut --- *** Fatal System Error: 0x00000050 (0xFFFFF900C1E1C003,0x0000000000000001,0xFFFFF9600006D2A8,0x0000000000000000) Driver at fault: *** win32k.sys - Address FFFFF9600006D2A8 base at FFFFF96000010000, DateStamp 5d0c4490 [...] 1: kd> !analyze -v ******************************************************************************* * * * Bugcheck Analysis * * * ******************************************************************************* PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA (50) Invalid system memory was referenced. This cannot be protected by try-except. Typically the address is just plain bad or it is pointing at freed memory. Arguments: Arg1: fffff900c1e1c003, memory referenced. Arg2: 0000000000000001, value 0 = read operation, 1 = write operation. Arg3: fffff9600006d2a8, If non-zero, the instruction address which referenced the bad memory address. Arg4: 0000000000000000, (reserved) [...] TRAP_FRAME: fffff880082791f0 -- (.trap 0xfffff880082791f0) NOTE: The trap frame does not contain all registers. Some register values may be zeroed or incorrect. rax=0000000000000000 rbx=0000000000000000 rcx=fffff900c1e1bfb8 rdx=000000000000000a rsi=0000000000000000 rdi=0000000000000000 rip=fffff9600006d2a8 rsp=fffff88008279380 rbp=000000000000000c r8=fffff960002f5750 r9=0000000000000002 r10=fffff900c1e1bfe9 r11=fffff900c1e1bff3 r12=0000000000000000 r13=0000000000000000 r14=0000000000000000 r15=0000000000000000 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na po nc win32k!ulClearTypeFilter+0x214: fffff960`0006d2a8 8807 mov byte ptr [rdi],al ds:00000000`00000000=?? Resetting default scope LAST_CONTROL_TRANSFER: from fffff80002b65a22 to fffff80002ab1520 STACK_TEXT: fffff880`08278928 fffff800`02b65a22 : fffff900`c1e1c003 fffffa80`310f1b50 00000000`00000065 fffff800`02a82658 : nt!RtlpBreakWithStatusInstruction fffff880`08278930 fffff800`02b66812 : fffff880`00000003 fffff880`082791f0 fffff800`02aba420 fffff880`08278f90 : nt!KiBugCheckDebugBreak+0x12 fffff880`08278990 fffff800`02aaada4 : 00000000`00000068 fffff880`08279450 00000000`00010000 00000000`00000000 : nt!KeBugCheck2+0x722 fffff880`08279060 fffff800`02b847b2 : 00000000`00000050 fffff900`c1e1c003 00000000`00000001 fffff880`082791f0 : nt!KeBugCheckEx+0x104 fffff880`082790a0 fffff800`02ab6ddc : 00000000`00000001 fffff900`c1e1c003 00000000`00000000 fffff900`c1e1bf94 : nt!MmAccessFault+0x2322 fffff880`082791f0 fffff960`0006d2a8 : 00000000`00000000 fffff800`00000001 fffff880`08279450 fffff900`c1e1bf94 : nt!KiPageFault+0x35c fffff880`08279380 fffff960`0007097a : fffff900`c1a40010 fffff900`c1a40010 fffff880`08279928 00000000`00000002 : win32k!ulClearTypeFilter+0x214 fffff880`08279400 fffff960`0006ce00 : fffff880`0827b67b fffff880`08279928 fffff900`c1b71010 fffff960`00000b70 : win32k!xInsertMetricsPlusRFONTOBJ+0x20e fffff880`082794d0 fffff960`0006caa0 : fffff880`08279a00 fffff880`08279928 00000000`00000000 00000000`0000000a : win32k!RFONTOBJ::bGetGlyphMetricsPlus+0x1f0 fffff880`08279550 fffff960`0006c498 : 00000000`00000000 fffff880`082796f0 fffff900`c00cb010 00000000`00000008 : win32k!ESTROBJ::vCharPos_H3+0x168 fffff880`082795d0 fffff960`0006d955 : 00000000`41800000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000007 fffff880`082796f0 : win32k!ESTROBJ::vInit+0x350 fffff880`08279660 fffff960`0006d5f7 : fffff880`08279b60 fffff900`c1a40010 fffffa80`00000020 00000000`ffffffff : win32k!GreGetTextExtentExW+0x275 fffff880`08279920 fffff800`02ab8d53 : 00000000`5a010611 fffff880`00000b40 00000000`00000040 00000000`00000000 : win32k!NtGdiGetTextExtentExW+0x237 fffff880`08279a70 00000000`74da204a : 00000000`74d8c46f 00000000`00010000 00000000`74d8b947 00000000`002ff888 : nt!KiSystemServiceCopyEnd+0x13 00000000`001adca8 00000000`74d8c46f : 00000000`00010000 00000000`74d8b947 00000000`002ff888 00000000`75ad5600 : wow64win!NtGdiGetTextExtentExW+0xa 00000000`001adcb0 00000000`74dcd18f : 00000000`002ff88c 00000000`7efdb000 00000000`7efdb000 00000000`7efdd000 : wow64win!whNtGdiGetTextExtentExW+0x43 00000000`001add00 00000000`74d52776 : 00000000`779a01e4 00000000`74dc0023 00000000`00000246 00000000`002ffeec : wow64!Wow64SystemServiceEx+0xd7 00000000`001ae5c0 00000000`74dcd286 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`74d51920 00000000`777d3128 00000000`7780c4f1 : wow64cpu!ServiceNoTurbo+0x2d 00000000`001ae680 00000000`74dcc69e : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`74dc4b10 00000000`7ffe0030 : wow64!RunCpuSimulation+0xa 00000000`001ae6d0 00000000`778043c3 : 00000000`004f2d50 00000000`00000000 00000000`77902e70 00000000`777d7550 : wow64!Wow64LdrpInitialize+0x42a 00000000`001aec20 00000000`77869780 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`77876c7d 00000000`001af1d0 00000000`00000000 : ntdll!LdrpInitializeProcess+0x17e3 00000000`001af110 00000000`7781371e : 00000000`001af1d0 00000000`00000000 00000000`7efdf000 00000000`00000000 : ntdll! ?? ::FNODOBFM::`string'+0x22790 00000000`001af180 00000000`00000000 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : ntdll!LdrInitializeThunk+0xe --- cut --- The type of the bugcheck implies a pool-based buffer overflow, potentially allowing for remote code execution in the context of the Windows kernel. While we have not determined the specific root cause of the vulnerability, we have pinpointed the offending mutations to reside in the "glyf", "hmtx" and "prep" tables. The issue reproduces on Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 (64-bit), with and without Special Pools enabled for win32k.sys. Attached is an archive with the proof-of-concept mutated TTF file, the original font used to generate it and the source code of a simple harness program, which loads the given font and displays all of its glyphs at different point sizes on the screen. Running the harness against the provided font is required to trigger the crash, and it only occurs after a few seconds (while processing the 2nd LOGFONT). Proof of Concept: https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/47484.zip

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Windows_7 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version r2

References


Plus d'informations
Cliquez sur le bouton à gauche (OFF), pour autoriser l'inscription de cookie améliorant les fonctionnalités du site. Cliquez sur le bouton à gauche (Tout accepter), pour ne plus autoriser l'inscription de cookie améliorant les fonctionnalités du site.