Last Updated: 2012-07-10 22:21:57 UTC
by Swa Frantzen (Version: 2)
Overview of the July 2012 Microsoft patches and their status.
|#||Affected||Contra Indications - KB||Known Exploits||Microsoft rating(**)||ISC rating(*)|
|MS12‑043||The well know memory corruption vulnerability in Microsoft XML Core Services (MSXML). Note that the updates for XML core services 5.0 are still missing.
Replaces MS08-069 and MS10-051.
|XML core services
|KB 2722479||The patch for the problem first described in SA 2719615. Is used according to Microsoft in limited targeted attacks.||Severity:Critical
|MS12‑044||The usual MSIE cumulative patch fixing an additional 2 vulnerabilities that allow random code execution with the rights of the logged on user.
|KB 2719177||No publicly known exploits||Severity:Critical
|MS12‑045||An vulnerability in ActiveX Data Objects (ADO), part of Microsoft Data Access Components (MDAC), allows random code execution with the rights of the logged on user.|
|KB 2698365||No publicly known exploits||Severity:Critical
|MS12‑046||A vulnerability in how Visual Basic for Applications loads DLLs allows random code execution with the rights of the logged on user. This is one more in a long list of bulletins that are related to Security Advisory 2269637.
This can be attacked through webdav or other file sharing methods.
Note that -as is usually the case with VBA- there might still be vulnerable VBE6.dll files lingering on patched systems as Microsoft does not patch all vulnerable dll's installed by third parties.
||Is used according to Microsoft in limited targeted attacks.
Symantec confirms exploitation.
|MS12‑047||Multiple vulnerabilities in the windows kernel mode drivers allow escalation of privileges.
|Windows kernel mode drivers
|KB 2718523||No publicly known exploits; Microsoft claims CVE-2012-1890 was publicly released.||Severity:Important
|MS12‑048||A vulnerability in handling file and directory names allows random code execution.
Can be exploited by as little as opening an attachment of an email.
||No publicly known exploits||Severity:Important
|MS12‑049||A TLS protocol vulnerability relating to CBC cyphers that allows the encryption to be broken. Relates to the Windows Secure Channel (SChannel) and the Cryptography API: Next Generation (CNG) components.
Replaces MS10-049, MS12-006 and MS10-085.
||Microsoft claims CVE-2012-1870 is public and that proof of concept code was released.||Severity:Important
|MS12‑050||Multiple vulnerabilities in Sharepoint, InfoPath and Groove Server allow escalation of privileges.
CVE-2012-1858 was already discussed and fixed in MS12-037 and MS12-039 last month.
||CVE-2012-1858 was publicly discussed and fixed by Microsoft in last month's batch.||Severity:Important
|MS12‑051||Folder permission problems in Office for Mac 2011 allows other users to cause unsuspecting users to execute code unintentionally. This upgrades Office 2011 for Mac to version 14.2.3 .
|Office for Mac
||Microsoft claims the vulnerability was publicly discussed.||Severity:Important
|Less Urgent||Less Urgent|
We appreciate updates
US based customers can call Microsoft for free patch related support on 1-866-PCSAFETY
- We use 4 levels:
- PATCH NOW: Typically used where we see immediate danger of exploitation. Typical environments will want to deploy these patches ASAP. Workarounds are typically not accepted by users or are not possible. This rating is often used when typical deployments make it vulnerable and exploits are being used or easy to obtain or make.
- Critical: Anything that needs little to become "interesting" for the dark side. Best approach is to test and deploy ASAP. Workarounds can give more time to test.
- Important: Things where more testing and other measures can help.
- Less Urgent: Typically we expect the impact if left unpatched to be not that big a deal in the short term. Do not forget them however.
- The difference between the client and server rating is based on how you use the affected machine. We take into account the typical client and server deployment in the usage of the machine and the common measures people typically have in place already. Measures we presume are simple best practices for servers such as not using outlook, MSIE, word etc. to do traditional office or leisure work.
- The rating is not a risk analysis as such. It is a rating of importance of the vulnerability and the perceived or even predicted threat for affected systems. The rating does not account for the number of affected systems there are. It is for an affected system in a typical worst-case role.
- Only the organization itself is in a position to do a full risk analysis involving the presence (or lack of) affected systems, the actually implemented measures, the impact on their operation and the value of the assets involved.
- All patches released by a vendor are important enough to have a close look if you use the affected systems. There is little incentive for vendors to publicize patches that do not have some form of risk to them.
(**): The exploitability rating we show is the worst of them all due to the too large number of ratings Microsoft assigns to some of the patches.
Swa Frantzen -- Section 66