Overview of the February 2010 Microsoft patches and their status.
| # |
Affected |
Contra Indications |
Known Exploits |
Microsoft rating |
ISC rating(*) |
| clients |
servers |
| MS10-003 |
Vulnerability in Microsoft Office (MSO) Could Allow Remote Code Execution (Windows and OS X) (Replaces MS09-062) |
Office
CVE-2010-0243 |
KB 978214 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Important
Exploitability: 1 |
Critical |
Important |
| MS10-004 |
Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Office PowerPoint Could Allow Remote Code Execution (Windows and OS X) |
Powerpoint
CVE-2010-0029
CVE-2010-0030
CVE-2010-0031
CVE-2010-0032
CVE-2010-0033
CVE-2010-0034 |
KB 975416 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 2,1,1,1,1,1 |
Critical |
Important |
| MS10-005 |
Vulnerability in Microsoft Paint Could Allow Remote Code Execution |
Microsoft Paint
CVE-2010-0028 |
KB 978706 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Moderate
Exploitability: 2 |
Critical |
Moderate |
| MS10-006 |
Vulnerabilities in SMB Client Could Allow Remote Code Execution (Replaces MS06-030 MS08-068 ) |
SMB
CVE-2010-0016
CVE-2009-0017 |
KB 978251 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 2,1 |
Critical |
Critical |
| MS10-007 |
Vulnerability in Windows Shell Handler Could Allow Remote Code Execution |
ShellExecute API
CVE-2010-0027 |
KB 975713 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 1 |
Critical |
Important |
| MS10-008 |
Cumulative Security Update of ActiveX Kill Bits (Replaces MS09-055) |
ActiveX
CVE-2010-0252 |
KB 978262 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Critical
Exploitability: ? |
Critical |
Important |
| MS10-009 |
Vulnerabilities in Windows TCP/IP Could Allow Remote Code Execution |
IPv6
CVE-2010-0239
CVE-2010-0240
CVE-2010-0241
CVE-2010-0242 |
KB 974145 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 2,2,2,3 |
Critical |
Critical |
| MS10-010 |
Hyper-V Instruction Set Validation Vulnerability |
Hyper-V
CVE-2010-0026 |
KB 977894 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Important
Exploitability: 3 |
Important |
Important |
| MS10-011 |
Vulnerability in Windows Client/Server Run-time Subsystem Could Allow Elevation of Privileges |
CSRSS
CVE-2010-0023 |
KB 978037 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Important
Exploitability: 1 |
Important |
Important |
| MS10-012 |
Vulnerabiliites in SMB Server Could Allow Remote Code Execution (Replaces MS09-001) |
SMB Server
CVE-2010-0020
CVE-2010-0021
CVE-2010-0022
CVE-2010-0231 |
KB 971468 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Important
Exploitability: 2,2,3,1 |
Important |
Critical |
| MS10-013 |
Vulnerability in Microsoft DirectShow Could Allow Remote Code Execution MS09-038 (Replaces MS09-038 MS09-028 ) |
DirectShow
CVE-2010-0250 |
KB 977935 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Critical
Exploitability: 1 |
Critical |
Important |
| MS10-014 |
Vulnerability in Kerberos Could Allow Denial of Service |
Kerberos
CVE-2010-0035 |
KB 977290 |
no known exploits. |
Severity:Important
Exploitability: 3 |
Important |
Important |
| MS10-015 |
Vulnerabilities in Windows Kernel Could Allow Elevation of Privilege |
Windows Kernel
CVE-2010-0232
CVE-2010-0233 |
KB 977165 |
exploit available |
Severity:Important
Exploitability: 1,2 |
Important |
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
------
Johannes B. Ullrich, Ph.D.
SANS Technology Institute
Twitter
IPv6 Fundamentals: IPv6 Security Training
I will be teaching next: Intrusion Detection In-Depth - SANS Doha March 2022 |
Johannes
4351 Posts
ISC HandlerFeb 9th 2010 |
|
reported BSOD problem due to an update from 9 Feb 2010 Patch Tuesday.
see URL:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9155419/Windows_patch_cripples_XP_with_blue_screen_users_claim?source=CTWNLE_nlt_dailyam_2010-02-11
appears to be KB977165 causing BSOD
|
Anonymous
|
https://www.sans.edu
