Trend Micro Facebook TrendLabs Twitter Malware Blog RSS Feed You Tube - Trend Micro
Search our blog:


  • Recent Posts

  • Calendar

    July 2015
    S M T W T F S
    « Jun    
     1234
    567891011
    12131415161718
    19202122232425
    262728293031  
  • Email Subscription

  • About Us


    Author Archive - Pawan Kinger (Director, Deep Security Labs)




    Windows XP reached end of support last year and now it’s time for another end of life—Windows Server 2003. On July 14, 2015, this widely deployed Microsoft operating system will reach its end of life—a long run since its launch in April 2003. Estimates on the number of still-active Windows Server 2003 users vary from 2.6 to 11 million.

    But this new end of life will raise a whole new set of challenges. Unlike Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 is a server operating system. While Windows XP is used in home PCs and enterprise workstations/laptops, Windows 2003 offers a deeper attack surface across enterprise servers. Windows Server 2003 is (still) widely deployed for core business functions as Directory Server, File Server, DNS Server, and Email Server. Organizations depend on it to run critical business applications and support their internal services like Active Directory, File Sharing, and hosting internal websites.

    When support ends for Windows Server 2003, there won’t be a mechanism to keep it up to date, which is critical in preventing security issues. Typically, security issues would be resolved by regular support for an operating system, which involves:

    • Getting security updates to protect against vulnerabilities
    • Getting regular support on almost any issue with the product
    • Getting non-security updates, i.e., the ‘regular’ bug fixes

    Understanding the risk

    End of life for an operating system—specifically for Windows Server 2003—means the beginning of a lot of effort for your IT department. Organizations like yours must prepare to deal with missing security updates, compliance issues, fighting malware, and other non-security bugs. You will no longer receive patches for security issues or notifications of vulnerabilities. And you will no longer know when there are vulnerabilities that affect your servers.

    At the time of launch, Windows 2003 was as a much safer alternative to Windows 2000. Over time, it became clear that it had its own share of vulnerabilities. CVE Details notes that organizations with Windows Server 2003 faced close to 403 vulnerabilities with 27% of them being remote code execution vulnerabilities. Without notifications to help monitor and measure the risk associated with these vulnerabilities, you may be left facing a big hole in your server security.

    To understand the risk further, let’s see how a similar situation played out for Windows 2000, which reached its end of support on July 13, 2010. There have been several vulnerabilities reported in other versions of Windows operating systems since then. But how many of them affected Windows 2000? One example would be the vulnerability MS10-061, which did affect Windows 2000. It should be noted that there was no security patch for it.

    Unfortunately, you could be facing a similar situation for Windows Server 2003. After July 14, you will no longer be notified of new vulnerabilities and there will no longer be any notifications or patches available to help protect your systems. But you can still take action to keep your out-of-date systems secure before it’s too late. Now is the time for serious planning and careful risk assessment.

    What should system administrators do?

    Migrating to a more recent operating system is definitely the preferred option. But many organizations may face a number of barriers to timely migration—constraints such as limited budget, lack of technical expertise, and reliance on legacy applications.

    Knowing that many organizations will delay migration, attackers will be actively looking for valuable data on out-of-support servers. To prevent intrusions, you need to assess the risk of the data residing on those servers. You need to determine whether the data is secured by itself. If not, you need to ensure advanced security controls are in place. The security capabilities that will best help you to maximize protection of your Windows Server 2003 environment include intrusion prevention system, integrity monitoring, and anti-malware solutions.

    How can Trend Micro help?

    Trend Micro Deep Security uses a combination of the best technologies to protect all of your servers, whether they are out of support or not. Trend Micro Intrusion Prevention System uses virtual patching to help you protect against vulnerabilities in your operating system and in applications running on those servers. It also helps to keep malware off your servers using the power of the Trend Micro Smart Protection Network (SPN) to share critical information.

    Finally, Deep Security helps you monitor any suspicious system changes to your servers using their integrity monitoring capabilities. You can rest easy knowing that you have maximum protection for your end-of-life servers until you can migrate to newer platforms.

    Stay up to date on vulnerabilities and to learn more about how Trend Micro can help protect your organization.

     
    Posted in Vulnerabilities |



    Support for Windows XP ended over a year ago. By any standard, Windows XP ranks as one of the most influential versions of Windows ever, thanks to its longevity and widespread adoption by enterprises around the world. However, the end of support should have served as a clear signpost to users and organizations to immediately upgrade to newer systems.

    A year later, remarkably, Windows XP isn’t quite dead yet. Its exact share can be debated. Net Market Share data suggests its share as of March 2015 is at around 17%. StatCounter has this figure at over 11%. Analytics data from US government websites can be used to get an estimate as well; this data places XP market share at just under 5%.

    The risks to Windows XP have not gone away, either. A year’s worth of vulnerabilities that may affect Windows XP have not been patched—only once did Microsoft publicly release a patch for a Windows XP zero-day vulnerability. In addition, various security upgrades for later versions of Windows have not been retrofitted to Windows XP: a good example is Control Flow Guard, which is only available in Windows 8.1 Update 3 (from November 2014) and in Windows 10 (currently in Technical Preview).

    Support for Windows Server 2003 to end in July

    In just under three months, however, IT administrators will have to do the upgrade dance again. Windows Server 2003’s support will end in July this year. A survey of IT professionals by Spiceworks outlined the scale of the issue. 61% of organizations still have at least one instance of Server 2003 running; and only 15% of respondents indicated that their organizations had completed migration. Of those who plan to have some Server 2003 systems active even after the end of support, almost everyone (85%) indicated that security risks were a concern.

    As with Windows XP, we highly recommend that organizations prepare and implement migration plans—if they haven’t already. The potential risks here are even greater, considering servers are the systems at risk.

    Available solutions and recommendations

    Users running unpatched systems are advised to enable Enhanced Mitigation Experience Toolkit (EMET) on their Windows systems. EMET is a free tool by Microsoft designed to protect Windows systems even before new and undiscovered threats.

    Additionally, users who cannot upgrade to newer Windows versions are still protected against threats with our security solutions. Trend Micro Deep Security and Vulnerability Protection are both able to detect threats before they reach user systems. Trend Micro Endpoint Application Control can also lock down systems by preventing unwanted and unknown applications and processes from running.

    Deep Security will support Windows 2000 until 2017 and Windows 2003 and XP until 2020. In addition, our endpoint products will continue to be supported for these older Windows versions until 2016.

     
    Posted in Vulnerabilities |



    Security researchers Luca Carettoni and Mauro Gentile recently found during their research that even though Adobe has fixed an old vulnerability found in 2011 (CVE-2011-2461), its side effects still linger around the Internet. Your favorite websites might still be affected by this bug.

    They have shared great details in their blog post. Let’s take a quick look at the issue and how the vulnerability impacts both site owner and end users.

    What’s the issue?

    The vulnerability was in the Adobe Flex SDK, which is used to create Internet applications based on Flash (it is now owned by the Apache Software Foundation). Users who don’t typically read the fine print or the gory details probably thought patching the Flex SDK put an end to the issue. However, that was just part of it. Other departments aside from IT had to act on it as well. Application/website developers also had to review the Flash files they were hosting. Let’s take a closer look at the Adobe advisory:

    An important vulnerability has been identified in the Adobe Flex SDK … This vulnerability could lead to cross-site scripting issues in Flex applications. Adobe recommends … update their software, verify whether any SWF files in their applications are vulnerable, and update any vulnerable SWF files using the instructions and tools provided as outlined in the tech note linked in the “Solutions” section below.

    Adobe clearly recommends that users update their Flex SDK, and check any SWF in their applications that may be vulnerable and fix them too. The issue is that an unpatched Flex SDK would produce Flash files that are vulnerable, and these vulnerable Flash files could be used to launch a Same-Origin Request Forgery attack on another site.

    In simpler terms, a user could be forced to visit a malicious site, which would eventually load the vulnerable Flash file from a good site and steal the user’s cookies and data for that good site.

    How can an attacker take advantage of this vulnerability?

    If an attacker can convince you to click on a link to his malicious site, they can force you to load a vulnerable Flash file from the victim site (the site you trust, but is hosting a vulnerable Flash file) after loading a Flash object from his malicious site. Due to a bad check for origin rule this (vulnerable) Flash allows for cross domain “interaction” with the malicious site.

    Carettoni and Gentile noted: “Practically speaking, it is possible to force the affected Flash movies to perform same-origin requests and return the responses back to the attacker. Since HTTP requests contain cookies and are issued from the victim’s domain, HTTP responses may contain private information including anti-CSRF tokens and user’s data.”

    How am I affected by this vulnerability?

    You can be affected either as a web site owner and an end user. As a website owner, your users can be exploited. Their session cookies and anti-CSRF tokens can be stolen, and as a site owner, you will be liable for the consequences. As an end user, you suffer from the same issues and someone can impersonate you and carry out transactions on your behalf.

    Note that the version of Flash Player you are using doesn’t matter. It’s all about the Flash file itself being vulnerable.

    What are the recommended actions?

    As a website administrator you may opt to scan your web servers for Flash files using the ParrotNG tool. If you do have vulnerable files, you have two options:

    • Recompile your Flash files using a patched version of Adobe Flex.
    • If you don’t wish to recompile these files, use the Adobe-provided tool to patch the vulnerable SWF files.

    Adobe’s tool can also be used as an alternative to the ParrotNG one.

    There is no action for end users that is specific to this problem. In general, they should use the same techniques used to avoid becoming a victim of malicious sites in general – be careful about what links you click. Be watchful of the links you receive via social media and chat, and consider disabling Flash altogether.

    Trend Micro Deep Security and Vulnerability Protection customers are protected by the following rule.

    • 1004866  – Flash Authoring Flex SWF Files XSS (UPDATE: As of  Apr 1, 2015, 5:40 AM PST, this has been updated to 1004866 – Adobe Flex SDK Cross Site Scripting Vulnerability (CVE-2011-2461))

     

     
    Posted in Vulnerabilities | Comments Off on The Resurrection of CVE-2011-2461



    Researchers at Qualys have found a vulnerability in the GNU C Library (alternately known as glibc), which can be used to run arbitrary code on systems running various Linux operating systems. The vulnerability (assigned as CVE-2015-0235) has been dubbed GHOST and is the latest vulnerability to receive a “friendly” name, joining others like Heartbleed, Shellshock, and POODLE. However, closer inspection reveals that this particular vulnerability, while serious, is not easy to exploit and has a very limited attack surface.

    GHOST is a buffer overflow vulnerability triggered by calling the gethostbyname*() functions in glibc. These functions are used to resolve domain names into IP addresses by various applications. Theoretically, any application that uses these functions (practically any application that goes online) is at risk of being exploited.

    At first glance, it would seem that this poses a massive security problem. Fortunately for most users, there are many factors that mitigate any risk due to GHOST.

    First of all, this vulnerability has long been patched. The underlying problem was first introduced into glibc in 2000, but was fixed by May 2013. This means that many newer Linux operating systems were never at risk. (Like Shellshock, Windows-based systems are generally not vulnerable either.)

    Secondly, not all applications are at equal risk. Exploitation is very difficult as an attacker only has a small amount of initial exploit code that can be used: 4 or 8 bytes (depending on whether the system is a 32- or 64-bit system). Additional code must be written to an address referenced by a pointer which the attacker can modify. As a result, many apps are not at risk. So far, we are not aware of any potential web attack vectors, which reduces the attack surface considerably.

    Thirdly, the functions that are the subject of this vulnerability are obsolete. They cannot be used to translate domain names to IPv6 addresses; newer applications use the getaddrinfo() function, which does have IPv6 support.

    Taken together, the risk of actual exploits targeting GHOST is relatively small compared to other vulnerabilities like Shellshock or Heartbleed. Yes, the underlying vulnerability is problematic, but defense in depth by other vendors means that the actual risk is relatively low. So far, only Exim Mail Transfer Agent has been confirmed to be remotely exploitable, but there could more. With only four or eight bytes as the initial exploit vector, gaining further access is highly dependent on application design and memory usage. This is a significant barrier to exploitation.

    This doesn’t mean that system administrators can ignore the problem altogether, but it does mean that they can respond in a calm and orderly manner. Linux distributions have released patches that upgrade the version of glibc in use. Administrators should roll these out as soon as possible.

     



    With the New Year celebrations safely behind us, it’s time to look forward and plan for 2015. Before we can do that, however, we need to spend a few minutes to remember the vulnerabilities of 2014 and what we can take away from these.

    Every year there are several zero-days and tons of undisclosed vulnerabilities fixed by software vendors. This year was a little different:

    • The total number of disclosed vulnerabilities per year almost hit 10,000. Because of this, the maintainers of the CVE database announced that the CVE syntax would be modified, which now allows up to 10 million vulnerabilities to be assigned identifiers annually.
    • Major “named” vulnerabilities like Heartbleed, Shellshock, Poodle, and WinShock were disclosed and became widely known within the security industry. These vulnerabilities were notable for their severe impact, widespread attack surface, and difficulty in patching.
    • There was an increase in amplification distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. These attacks are used to create high volumes of traffic used in denial of service attacks. It exploits weakness in network protocols to “elicit” large volumes of response packets which can be “redirected” to a victim to cause denial of service against them.
    • Some good news – there were no Java zero-days in 2014! However, that doesn’t mean that Java vulnerabilities weren’t exploited. They are still being actively exploited by exploit kits. Users still running older versions of Java should upgrade.
    • For Adobe products, it was a mixed story. Overall, the number of vulnerabilities in Adobe products declined from 2013. However, the number of  vulnerabilities in Adobe Flash went up from 56 to 76. Vulnerabilities in Acrobat/Reader went down by almost 30%.

      Figure 1. Number of vulnerabilities in Flash Player and Acrobat/Reader

    • There were a lot of vulnerabilities found in OpenSSL, not just Heartbleed. In 2014, 24 vulnerabilities were found – which equaled the number from the previous three years combined.

    With the above events in mind, what should be some of our key takeaways from all this?

    Read the rest of this entry »

     
    Posted in Exploits, Vulnerabilities | Comments Off on Remembering the Vulnerabilities of 2014


     

    © Copyright 2013 Trend Micro Inc. All rights reserved. Legal Notice