bugtraq - RE: SAV9 Functionality Hole

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:13:41 -0000
From: <batchelornpe@...tschool.org.uk>
To: <bugtraq@...urityfocus.com>
Subject: RE: SAV9 Functionality Hole - misses virus files

SAV can be *configured* to behave like this. 

I believe that such a configuration was a work-around to a bug in an older
version relating to word documents opening read-only across a network.

Could I just add my voice to those requesting more detailed documentation as
to how SAV actually works? Sometimes it really does feel like those of us on
Gold Support contracts are scratching around in the dark. 

Nick Batchelor

-----Original Message-----
From: me3@...ralfibre.com [mailto:me3@...ralfibre.com] 
Sent: 15 March 2005 06:27
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: SAV9 Functionality Hole - misses virus files

Product: Symantec AntiVirus Corporate Edition 9.0

Vulnerability: Files saved on the server but opened remotely via SMB are not
scanned.

SAV9 runs as a client - server application. The client receives updates, the
server pushes them out. This has no bearing on the platforms on which they
run, nor on scanning operation. The server could run on an NT4 workstation
and the clients on your 2003 servers.

When SAV9 is protecting the file server, and an unprotected client saves
files to a share on the server, the files are not scanned.
When another unprotected client opens these files, they are not scanned by
the server.
The server will only find these files during a scheduled scan.

Symantec documentation mentions file share scanning but makes no
differentiation between opening the file on the client or the server. The
documentation is misleading.
Technical support was advised and again recited the same misleading
statement.

Picture this
1. Consultant visits and saves infected file to server 2. Client with laptop
that didn't get latest update as was offline, comes in to work and opens
file off the "safe, prrotected" server - infected laptop.

This also means from a licencing standpoint, the only point of running SAV
on your file servers is to protect it when apps are run locally on that
server. If you don't run apps on your server, there is little point in
running SAV on it. 

So much for defence in depth.

Testing Trend ServerProtect showed it instantly detected and deleted the
virus on save.

Other AV products still to be tested.

Other questions relate to files published / saved through other protcols
such as HTTP, SMB, Frontpage Server Extensions, TFTP, etc etc.

Conclusion
The API that Symantec is using is not on file open from the file system, but
rather file open by the local desktop - this allows files to be saved and
opened without being scanned.

Paul Young