Threat Level: green Handler on Duty: Xavier Mertens

SANS ISC: InfoSec Handlers Diary Blog - Internet Storm Center Diary 2006-04-21 InfoSec Handlers Diary Blog


Sign Up for Free!   Forgot Password?
Log In or Sign Up for Free!

Reports of multiple OS X vulnerabilities with PoC

Published: 2006-04-21
Last Updated: 2006-04-21 19:46:40 UTC
by Adrien de Beaupre (Version: 1)
0 comment(s)

Multiple vulnerabilities have been reported in Apple Mac OS X and applications. Proof of Concept code has already been posted along with the information regarding the vulnerabilities. At this time no patches or workarounds appear to be available for the majority of the vulnerabilities. The impact is Denial of Service or arbitrary code executed remotely, and severity is highly critical.

Links to advisories:

Apple OS X 10.4.5 .tiff "LZWDecodeVector ()" Heap Overflow
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x24-advisory.php

Apple OS X BOM ArchiveHelper .zip Heap Overflow
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x25-advisory.php

Apple OS X Safari 2.0.3 Multiple Vulnerabilities
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x26-advisory.php

Apple OS X 10.4.6 "ReadBMP ()" .bmp Heap Overflow
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x27-advisory.php

Apple OS X 10.4.6 "CFAllocatorAllocate ()" .gif Heap Overflow
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x28-advisory.php

Apple OS X 10.4.6 .tiff "_cg_TIFFSetField ()" DoS
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x29-advisory.php

Apple OS X 10.4.6 .tiff "PredictorVSetField ()" Heap Overflow
http://www.security-protocols.com/sp-x30-advisory.php

Cheers,
Adrien

Keywords:
0 comment(s)

Microsoft patch problems

Published: 2006-04-21
Last Updated: 2006-04-21 15:55:13 UTC
by Adrien de Beaupre (Version: 1)
0 comment(s)

There have been reports of problems with Microsoft patch MS06-013 Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (912812). MS06-016 where the Outlook Express address book disappears. In this case removal of the patch and the address book re-appears, however the other vulnerabilities the patch address come back.

One other Microsoft patch MS06-015 will be updated due to compatibility issues. This was announced in their blog.  http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2006/04/21/425838.aspx

If you have any issues with a Microsoft patch impacting your system contact them directly, the call is free. In the US or Canada dial: 1-866 - 727 - 2389 ( 866 PC SAFETY ) In other countries/regions, contact your local Microsoft office.

Cheers,
Adrien
Keywords:
0 comment(s)

Wireless security?

Published: 2006-04-21
Last Updated: 2006-04-21 15:23:20 UTC
by Adrien de Beaupre (Version: 1)
0 comment(s)

John at nist.org pointed out that a jurisdiction in the state of New York (United States) is mandating security requirements where wireless networking is used. Sounds like a good thing, right? The thing that perplexes me is that they stop at requiring that the SSID be changed, OR that a firewall be installed. There doesn't appear to be any mention of one of the primary protection methods for wireless, namely encryption. If you wish to secure wireless you should use authentication (preferably strong), and encrypt transmissions. Changing or disabling SSID broadcasts is essentially useless, it can be guessed or sniffed. If the threat they are attempting to mitigate is identity theft of data being passed in the clear 'through the air' encryption is a must. Encrypting data only at rest is not sufficient if it is transmitted or processed insecurely. Let's face it, a firewall will not stop anyone from capturing credit card information being passed over wireless. I wonder if the lawmakers in question truly understood what they are trying to accomplish. An MSNBC story on the subject is here. A very strong (negative) opinion has been posted here. Ensuring or encouraging basic security measures have been installed on all systems is always a good thing IMHO, however does this law miss the boat? The law in question is here.

Cheers,
Adrien
Keywords:
0 comment(s)
Diary Archives