Threat Level: green Handler on Duty: Pedro Bueno

SANS ISC InfoSec Handlers Diary Blog


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

Adobe Acrobat (reader) patches released

Published: 2009-05-12
Last Updated: 2009-05-12 23:13:26 UTC
by Swa Frantzen (Version: 1)
3 comment(s)

While patching your macs and windows machines on reboot Wednesday tomorrow, don't forget to patch adobe's acrobat (reader) just as well.

CVE-2009-1492 and CVE-2009-1493 are fixed.

http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb09-06.html

--
Swa Frantzen -- Section 66

Keywords: Adobe patches
3 comment(s)

Apple patches and updates

Published: 2009-05-12
Last Updated: 2009-05-12 23:07:09 UTC
by Swa Frantzen (Version: 1)
1 comment(s)

Apple released patches today:

  • Apple OS X 10.5.7 update  / Security update 2009-002

    10.5.7 is an update of the operating system (much like a service pack in the windows world) and contains functionality as well as security updates.

    The security content of this update is:

    • Apache: CVE-2008-2939, CVE-2008-0456
    • ATS: CVE-2009-0154
    • BIND (update to 9.3.6-P1 or 9.4.2-P1): CVE-2009-0025
    • CFNetwork: CVE-2009-0144, CVE-2009-0157
    • CoreGraphics: CVE-2009-0155, CVE-2009-0146, CVE-2009-0147, CVE-2009-0165
    • Cscope: CVE-2009-0148
    • CUPS: CVE-2009-0164
    • Disk Images: CVE-2009-0150, CVE-2009-0149
    • Enscript (update to 1.6.4): CVE-2004-1184, CVE-2004-1185, CVE-2004-1186, CVE-2008-3863
    • Flash Player plug-in (update to 10.0.22.87 or 9.0.159.0): CVE-2009-0519, CVE-2009-0520, CVE-2009-0114
    • Help Viewer: CVE-2009-0942, CVE-2009-0943
    • iChat: CVE-2009-0152
    • International Components for Unicode: CVE-2009-0153
    • IPSec:CVE-2008-3651, CVE-2008-3652
    • Kerberos: CVE-2009-0845, CVE-2009-0846, CVE-2009-0847, CVE-2009-0844
    • Kernel: CVE-2008-1517
    • Launch Services: CVE-2009-0156
    • libxml: CVE-2008-3529
    • Net-SNMP: CVE-2008-4309
    • Network Time: CVE-2009-0021, CVE-2009-0159
    • Networking: CVE-2008-3530
    • OpenSSL: CVE-2008-5077
    • PHP: CVE-2008-3659, CVE-2008-2829, CVE-2008-3660, CVE-2008-2666, CVE-2008-2371, CVE-2008-2665, CVE-2008-3658, CVE-2008-5557 (upgrade to 5.2.8)
    • QuickDraw Manager: CVE-2009-0160, CVE-2009-0010
    • Ruby (a.o. update to 1.8.6-p287): CVE-2008-3443, CVE-2008-3655, CVE-2008-3656, CVE-2008-3657, CVE-2008-3790, CVE-2009-0161
    • Safari: CVE-2009-0162
    • Spotlight: CVE-2009-0944
    • system_cmds
    • telnet: CVE-2009-0158
    • WebKit: CVE-2009-0945
    • X11 (a.o. updates to FreeType 2.3.8, libpng 1.2.35): CVE-2006-0747, CVE-2007-2754, CVE-2008-2383, CVE-2008-1382, CVE-2009-0040, CVE-2009-0946

    as always, this update is all or nothing, o no mixing and matching of what you need more urgently than other.

  • Safari 4 beta
    • libxml:  CVE-2008-3529
    • Safari:  CVE-2009-0162
    • WebKit:  CVE-2009-0945
  • Safari 3.2.3
    • libxml:  CVE-2008-3529
    • Safari:  CVE-2009-0162
    • WebKit:  CVE-2009-0945

--
Swa Frantzen -- Section 66

 

1 comment(s)

MSFT's version of responsible disclosure

Published: 2009-05-12
Last Updated: 2009-05-12 20:22:19 UTC
by Swa Frantzen (Version: 3)
0 comment(s)

Microsoft is the one big company screaming loudest of all over "responsible disclosure".

They want an unlimited amount to time to release their patches before those who found the problem are allowed to publish (but they can publish the second after Microsoft released the patch, all is fine for Microsoft (well, for their customer it's a bit of a different matter of course). Of course attackers couldn't care less about disclosure, and even some vulnerability researchers don't care for the credit line that Microsoft offers, nor the brand "irresponsible" it might earn them.

Still a policy typically cuts both ways: you need to obey the rules yourself just as well as demand it from all others involved.

So, let's have a look at MS09-017:

  • An unprecedented number of CVEs fixed in one patch.
  • Vulnerabilities in Office 2004 and 2008
  • Vulnerabilities in Works 8.5 and 9.0
  • No fixes available for Office 2004, Office 2008, Works 8.5 nor Works 9.0

We all know from past experience the reverse engineering of patches back into exploits starts at the time -if not before- the patches are released. Typically it takes between hours and a few days or so to complete this if it's easy to exploit (actually the new Microsoft rating of exploitability points out they are pretty easy).

So in the end Microsoft just released what hackers need to attack:

  • CVE-2009-0224 on Office 2004, Office 2008, XML convertor tools on mac, works 8.5 and works 9.0, as according to Microsoft themselves this vulnerability was not publicly known.
  • CVE-2009-0556 on Office 2004 (this one was publicly known and used), just the attack against the old software on mac might be news to some, still no patch available.
  • CVE-2009-1130 on Office 2004, as according to Microsoft themselves this vulnerability was not publicly known.

Microsoft's note in the FAQ section of MS09-017:

I am running Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac, Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, Open XML File Format Converter for Mac, Microsoft Works 8.5, or Microsoft Works 9.0. Why are updates not available for these software?
Microsoft is able to release this current update because we have updates ready on the regular bulletin release cycle for an entire product line to address the vast majority of customers at risk. We are aware of active exploitation on versions of Microsoft Office PowerPoint running on Windows operating systems. The updates for Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac, Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, Open XML File Format Converter for Mac, Microsoft Works 8.5, Microsoft Works 9.0 are still in development. Microsoft will issue updates on the regular bulletin release cycle for these product lines when testing is complete to ensure quality.

So what do you think of Microsoft and their "responsible" behavior in releasing MS09-017 as it was done?

You can use the poll or for the finer nuances you can use the contact form for valid alternatives you would have used instead of the way Microsoft did this. We'll summarize those.

--
Swa Frantzen -- Section 66

0 comment(s)

May Black Tuesday Overview

Published: 2009-05-12
Last Updated: 2009-05-12 17:50:12 UTC
by Swa Frantzen (Version: 1)
0 comment(s)

Overview of the May 2009 Microsoft patches and their status.

# Affected Contra Indications Known Exploits Microsoft rating ISC rating(*)
clients servers
MS09-017 A multitude of vulnerabilities allow random code execution.
While Office for Mac versions and Works are affected by some of the vulnerabilities disclosed in the advisory, there are NO patches available from Microsoft at this time for these products.
Replaces MS08-051.
Powerpoint

CVE-2009-0220
CVE-2009-0221
CVE-2009-0222
CVE-2009-0223
CVE-2009-0224
CVE-2009-0225
CVE-2009-0226
CVE-2009-0227
CVE-2009-0556
CVE-2009-1128
CVE-2009-1129
CVE-2009-1130
CVE-2009-1131
CVE-2009-1137
KB 967340

CVE-2009-0556 is actively exploited with exploit code publicly known since April 2nd 2009, see also SA969136

Severity:Critical
Exploitability:
1,2,1,1,2,2,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1
PATCH NOW Important
We will update issues on this page for about a week or so as they evolve.
We appreciate updates
US based customers can call Microsoft for free patch related support on 1-866-PCSAFETY
(*): ISC rating
  • 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

--
Swa Frantzen -- Section 66

0 comment(s)
Diary Archives