CVE-2019-1347 : Détail

CVE-2019-1347

6.5
/
Moyen
Overflow
3.76%V3
Network
2019-10-10
11h28 +00:00
2019-10-10
14h06 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

A denial of service vulnerability exists when Windows improperly handles objects in memory, aka 'Windows Denial of Service Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2019-1343, CVE-2019-1346.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-125 Out-of-bounds Read
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 6.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.

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.

Required

Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited. For example, a successful exploit may only be possible during the installation of an application by a system administrator.

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.

None

There is no loss of integrity within 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 7.1 AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C [email protected]

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 : 47489

Date de publication : 2019-10-09 22h00 +00:00
Auteur : Google Security Research
EDB Vérifié : Yes

We have encountered a Windows kernel crash in memcpy() called by nt!MiRelocateImage while trying to load a malformed PE image into the process address space as a data file (i.e. LoadLibraryEx(LOAD_LIBRARY_AS_DATAFILE | LOAD_LIBRARY_AS_IMAGE_RESOURCE)). An example crash log generated after triggering the bug is shown below: --- cut --- *** Fatal System Error: 0x00000050 (0xFFFFF8017519A200,0x0000000000000000,0xFFFFF801713CF660,0x0000000000000000) A fatal system error has occurred. [...] ******************************************************************************* * * * 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: fffff8017519a200, memory referenced. Arg2: 0000000000000000, value 0 = read operation, 1 = write operation. Arg3: fffff801713cf660, If non-zero, the instruction address which referenced the bad memory address. Arg4: 0000000000000000, (reserved) [...] TRAP_FRAME: ffffc50241846ba0 -- (.trap 0xffffc50241846ba0) NOTE: The trap frame does not contain all registers. Some register values may be zeroed or incorrect. rax=ffffcf84d2228de0 rbx=0000000000000000 rcx=ffffcf84d2228fb8 rdx=0000287ca2f71248 rsi=0000000000000000 rdi=0000000000000000 rip=fffff801713cf660 rsp=ffffc50241846d38 rbp=ffffc50241846fb0 r8=000000000000000c r9=0000000000000001 r10=00000000ffffffff r11=ffffcf84d2228fb8 r12=0000000000000000 r13=0000000000000000 r14=0000000000000000 r15=0000000000000000 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz na pe cy nt!memcpy+0x20: fffff801`713cf660 488b0411 mov rax,qword ptr [rcx+rdx] ds:fffff801`7519a200=???????????????? Resetting default scope LAST_CONTROL_TRANSFER: from fffff801714a6642 to fffff801713c46a0 STACK_TEXT: ffffc502`41846158 fffff801`714a6642 : fffff801`7519a200 00000000`00000003 ffffc502`418462c0 fffff801`71322be0 : nt!DbgBreakPointWithStatus ffffc502`41846160 fffff801`714a5d32 : fffff801`00000003 ffffc502`418462c0 fffff801`713d0f60 00000000`00000050 : nt!KiBugCheckDebugBreak+0x12 ffffc502`418461c0 fffff801`713bca07 : ffffce67`3399cf80 fffff801`714d0110 00000000`00000000 fffff801`71663900 : nt!KeBugCheck2+0x952 ffffc502`418468c0 fffff801`713e0161 : 00000000`00000050 fffff801`7519a200 00000000`00000000 ffffc502`41846ba0 : nt!KeBugCheckEx+0x107 ffffc502`41846900 fffff801`7127aaef : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 fffff801`7519a200 : nt!MiSystemFault+0x1d3171 ffffc502`41846a00 fffff801`713ca920 : ffffcf84`cb274000 fffff801`713c79e5 00000000`00000000 fffff801`751a0c00 : nt!MmAccessFault+0x34f ffffc502`41846ba0 fffff801`713cf660 : fffff801`7188246d 00000000`6cc30000 ffffc502`41846fb0 ffffcf84`d2228d70 : nt!KiPageFault+0x360 ffffc502`41846d38 fffff801`7188246d : 00000000`6cc30000 ffffc502`41846fb0 ffffcf84`d2228d70 00000000`00000000 : nt!memcpy+0x20 ffffc502`41846d40 fffff801`717fc8a3 : ffffc502`41847180 ffffc502`41847180 ffffc502`41846fb0 ffffc502`41847180 : nt!MiRelocateImage+0x3dd ffffc502`41846eb0 fffff801`717dca20 : ffff9d05`96f58160 ffffc502`41847180 ffffc502`41847180 ffff9d05`96f58130 : nt!MiCreateNewSection+0x5ef ffffc502`41847010 fffff801`717dcd24 : ffffc502`41847040 ffffcf84`d24b8b00 ffff9d05`96f58160 00000000`00000000 : nt!MiCreateImageOrDataSection+0x2d0 ffffc502`41847100 fffff801`717dc37f : 00000000`11000000 ffffc502`418474c0 00000000`00000001 00000000`00000002 : nt!MiCreateSection+0xf4 ffffc502`41847280 fffff801`717dc110 : 00000000`0828cf48 00000000`00000005 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000001 : nt!MiCreateSectionCommon+0x1ff ffffc502`41847360 fffff801`713ce115 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : nt!NtCreateSection+0x60 ffffc502`418473d0 00007ffb`a3edc9a4 : 00007ffb`a1c71ae7 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000001 00000000`00000000 : nt!KiSystemServiceCopyEnd+0x25 00000000`0828ced8 00007ffb`a1c71ae7 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000001 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : ntdll!NtCreateSection+0x14 00000000`0828cee0 00007ffb`a1c75640 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000022 : KERNELBASE!BasepLoadLibraryAsDataFileInternal+0x2e7 00000000`0828d110 00007ffb`a1c5c41d : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : KERNELBASE!LoadLibraryExW+0xe0 00000000`0828d180 00007ffb`a22603d1 : 00000000`055c1640 00000000`00000000 00006d1c`2a8cc01b 00007ffb`a29c643e : KERNELBASE!GetFileVersionInfoSizeExW+0x3d 00000000`0828d1e0 00007ffb`a226035c : 00000000`00002234 00007ffb`a29cdba3 00000000`00002234 00000000`00000000 : SHELL32!_LoadVersionInfo+0x39 00000000`0828d250 00007ffb`a155c1c1 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000020 00000000`40040000 : SHELL32!CVersionPropertyStore::Initialize+0x2c [...] --- cut --- The issue reproduces on Windows 8.1, Windows 10 and their corresponding Server editions (32-bit and 64-bit, Special Pools not required). The crash occurs when any system component calls LoadLibraryEx(LOAD_LIBRARY_AS_DATAFILE | LOAD_LIBRARY_AS_IMAGE_RESOURCE) against the file, either directly or through another API such as GetFileVersionInfoSizeExW() or GetFileVersionInfoW(). In practice, this means that as soon as the file is displayed in Explorer, or the user hovers the cursor over it, or tries to open the file properties, or tries to rename it or perform any other similar action, the system will panic. In other words, just downloading such a file may permanently block the user's machine until they remove it through Recovery Mode etc. The attack scenario is similar to the one described in https://www.fortinet.com/blog/threat-research/microsoft-windows-remote-kernel-crash-vulnerability.html. Due to the nature of the bug (OOB read), it could be also potentially exploited as an information disclosure primitive. We haven't managed to significantly minimize the test cases, but we determined that the crash is related to the invalid value of the Base Relocation Table directory address in the PE headers. Attached is an archive with two proof-of-concept PE images and the corresponding original files used to generate them. Please be careful when unpacking the ZIP as Windows may crash immediately once it sees the corrupted files on disk. Proof of Concept: https://gitlab.com/exploit-database/exploitdb-bin-sploits/-/raw/main/bin-sploits/47489.zip

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1607

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1703

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1709

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1803

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1809

Microsoft>>Windows_10 >> Version 1903

Microsoft>>Windows_8.1 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_rt_8.1 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2016 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2016 >> Version 1803

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2016 >> Version 1903

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2019 >> Version -

Références