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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAOSRhRO=xLGTdza0sxi_E5e+8tEpH8Zv9zcGMACrkaLNiYk2SQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 06:45:59 -0500 From: Dan Rosenberg <dan.j.rosenberg@...il.com> To: Darren Martyn <d.martyn.fulldisclosure@...il.com> Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, Nahuel Grisolia <nahuel.grisolia@...il.com> Subject: Re: Microsoft Windows vulnerability in TCP/IP Could Allow Remote Code Execution (2588516) On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Darren Martyn <d.martyn.fulldisclosure@...il.com> wrote: > Balls, I forgot to add this to the last message, but has anyone examined the > patch yet? I can only imagine it would be VERY interesting to look at... > <sarcasm> Or that it opens all UDP ports so that there are no closed ones to > exploit </sarcasm> > Yet another bug class (refcount overflows) that the PaX Team eradicated years ago and everyone else is still scrambling to catch up. People seem incredulous that the bug can be triggered by sending traffic to closed ports. Keep in mind that the only way your networking stack knows to reject packets that are directed towards closed ports is to do some preliminary parsing of those packets, namely allocating some control structures, receiving at least the physical/link layer frame, IP header, and transport layer header, and parsing out the port and destination address. There's plenty of things that can go wrong before the kernel decides "this is for a port that's not open" and drops it, which appears to be what happened here. Doesn't make the bug any less terrible, but it's not quite as surprising as people seem to think. > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Darren Martyn > <d.martyn.fulldisclosure@...il.com> wrote: >> >> So... Another Conficker type worm possible from this bug if everyone cocks >> up and fails to patch? >> While I'd love to see an exploit from a purely academic perspective, it doesn't appear that this is the type of bug where exploitation is going to be reliable enough to support a worm. The reference counter in question is most likely 32 bits, but even giving the benefit of the doubt and saying it's a 16-bit refcount, that's still 2^16 events (probably receiving a certain UDP packet) that need to be triggered precisely in order to cause a refcount overflow and then trigger a remote kernel use-after-free condition, which wouldn't be trivial to exploit even by itself. On an unreliable network like the Internet, it seems unlikely that the kind of traffic volume required to trigger this bug could be generated without dropping a single packet. Reliable DoS seems more likely though. -Dan >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Nahuel Grisolia >> <nahuel.grisolia@...il.com> wrote: >>> >>> Kingcope, where's the exploit? >>> >>> :P >>> >>> On Nov 8, 2011, at 6:53 PM, Henri Salo wrote: >>> >>> > http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms11-083 >>> > >>> > "The vulnerability could allow remote code execution if an attacker >>> > sends a continuous flow of specially crafted UDP packets to a closed port on >>> > a target system." >>> > >>> > Microsoft did it once again. >>> > >>> > - Henri Salo >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. >>> > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html >>> > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. >>> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html >>> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ >> >> >> >> -- >> My Homepage :D >> > > > > -- > My Homepage :D > > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists