Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0309162021240.18337@mail.securityfocus.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:21:30 -0600 (MDT)
From: Dave Ahmad <da@...urityfocus.com>
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Exploiting Multiple Flaws in Symantec Antivirus
 2004 for Windows Mobile (fwd)




David Mirza Ahmad
Symantec

PGP: 0x26005712
8D 9A B1 33 82 3D B3 D0 40 EB  AB F0 1E 67 C6 1A 26 00 57 12
--
The battle for the past is for the future.
We must be the winners of the memory war.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Return-Path: <full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com>
Delivered-To: da@...l.securityfocus.com
Received: (qmail 13412 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2003 00:03:50 -0000
Delivered-To: vulq@...urityfocus.com
Received: (qmail 13392 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2003 00:03:49 -0000
Received: from netsys.com (199.201.233.10)
  by mail.securityfocus.com with SMTP; 17 Sep 2003 00:03:48 -0000
Received: from NETSYS.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by netsys.com (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h8GNXJ613371;
	Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:33:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtp3.hushmail.com (smtp3.hushmail.com [65.39.178.135])
	by netsys.com (8.11.6p2/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h8GJxOL08425
	for <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:59:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailserver2.hushmail.com (mailserver2.hushmail.com
    [65.39.178.21])
	by smtp3.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8040310E5DC
	for <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailserver2.hushmail.com (localhost.hushmail.com [127.0.0.1])
	by mailserver2.hushmail.com (8.12.6/8.12.3) with ESMTP id
    h8GJxMKs062435
	for <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from auto9115@...hmail.com)
Received: (from nobody@...alhost)
	by mailserver2.hushmail.com (8.12.6/8.12.3/Submit) id h8GJxMA9062434
	for full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <200309161959.h8GJxMA9062434@...lserver2.hushmail.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Cc:
From: <auto9115@...hmail.com>
Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Exploiting Multiple Flaws in Symantec Antivirus
    2004 for Windows Mobile
Sender: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
Errors-To: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
X-BeenThere: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.netsys.com/mailman/listinfo/full-disclosure>,

    <mailto:full-disclosure-request@...ts.netsys.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Discussion of security issues <full-disclosure.lists.netsys.com>
List-Post: <mailto:full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>
List-Help: <mailto:full-disclosure-request@...ts.netsys.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.netsys.com/mailman/listinfo/full-disclosure>,
	<mailto:full-disclosure-request@...ts.netsys.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.netsys.com/pipermail/full-disclosure/>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:59:22 -0700

Exploiting Multiple Flaws in Symantec Antivirus 2004 for Windows Mobile
Version tested: 3.0.0.194 (latest version)
Date: Sept. 13, 2003

Background: Viruses have started to show up on Personal Data Assistants
(PDAs) and handheld wireless devices. Although there are currently no
viruses in the wild that infect the Windows CE operating system, may
companies have released virus scanners for Windows Mobile (formerly PocketPC).
 Examples include PC-cillin, Airscanner, F-secure, and McAfee. Since
McAfee was recently selected to go OEM on all new Dell Axim handhelds,
 Symantec scrambled to get a product out. They have just released their
final version (available for $39.99 for a one year license), but unfortunately,
 in the scramble to release it they apparently forgot to test it to see
if it is working ;)

Vulnerability #1: Real-time scanning appears to not work.

Symantec is currently the only AV company that claims to do real-time
scanning in the background on Windows CE. This claim gives them a significant
market advantage.  However, we can see that it is not true real-time
scanning. For example, if the scanner is active in memory and you open
the famous Eicar test virus (eicar.exe) into RAM, the scanner does not
detect it. It is not until you "save" a copy of a file with the Eicar
to your file system does Symantec detect it.  So it is not real-time
scanning of viral code, but rather just a simple monitor to activate
a scan any time a file is saved.  Therefore, this does not protect against
hostile code active in RAM.

Vulnerability #2: The Virus scanner does not appear to work at all!

Like any antivirus scanner, Symantec detects the Eicar test virus (eicar.exe
or eicar.txt). At least, at first glance it appears to detect it. However,
 you can easily defeat this by adding a few bytes of random text before
or after the Eicar string.  For example, if you use a hex/text editor
to add a few random bytes of text before and after the string, then Symantec
won't detect it!  However, other AVs easily detect it, as they should.
An AV scanner should be able to detect a byte stream anywhere in the
file, but Symantec is easily bypassed with this rudimentary trick.

These exploits have not been submitted to Bugtraq, since that mailing
list is now owned by  Symantec, and they have more "selective" full disclosure
than this list.

Don Cheatham
Wireless Network Engineer



Concerned about your privacy? Follow this link to get
FREE encrypted email: https://www.hushmail.com/?l=2

Free, ultra-private instant messaging with Hush Messenger
https://www.hushmail.com/services.php?subloc=messenger&l=434

Promote security and make money with the Hushmail Affiliate Program:
https://www.hushmail.com/about.php?subloc=affiliate&l=427

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists