Lucene search

K
attackerkbAttackerKBAKB:ED05D93E-5B20-4B44-BAC8-C4CB5B46254A
HistoryFeb 25, 2021 - 12:00 a.m.

CVE-2021-24085

2021-02-2500:00:00
attackerkb.com
425

8.8 High

CVSS3

Attack Vector

NETWORK

Attack Complexity

LOW

Privileges Required

LOW

User Interaction

NONE

Scope

UNCHANGED

Confidentiality Impact

HIGH

Integrity Impact

HIGH

Availability Impact

HIGH

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

9 High

CVSS2

Access Vector

NETWORK

Access Complexity

LOW

Authentication

SINGLE

Confidentiality Impact

COMPLETE

Integrity Impact

COMPLETE

Availability Impact

COMPLETE

AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C

Microsoft Exchange Server Spoofing Vulnerability This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2021-1730.

Recent assessments:

bwatters-r7 at March 03, 2021 1:51pm UTC reported:

This attack is super useful to gain privileged access to an Exchange server. Given the ubiquity of the target, it’s remote nature, the presence of a simple python PoC, and the benefits from gaining privileged access to a mail server, hackers will be reaching for this exploit frequently, even if it does require authentication.
Further complicating matters is that the requests themselves are through https, so standard deployment for NIDS likely will not catch the attack. If you’ve added certificates to your NIDS to decrypt traffic, then it might catch the attack, but that scenario is not particularly common, especially in small to midsize organizations.
Patching is the primary method for mitigating this attack, though the logs left afterward (if they are not destroyed) are straightforward and reviewed in the technical analysis here: <https://attackerkb.com/topics/taeSMPFD8J/cve-2021-24085?#rapid7-analysis&gt;

NinjaOperator at June 23, 2021 11:46pm UTC reported:

This attack is super useful to gain privileged access to an Exchange server. Given the ubiquity of the target, it’s remote nature, the presence of a simple python PoC, and the benefits from gaining privileged access to a mail server, hackers will be reaching for this exploit frequently, even if it does require authentication.
Further complicating matters is that the requests themselves are through https, so standard deployment for NIDS likely will not catch the attack. If you’ve added certificates to your NIDS to decrypt traffic, then it might catch the attack, but that scenario is not particularly common, especially in small to midsize organizations.
Patching is the primary method for mitigating this attack, though the logs left afterward (if they are not destroyed) are straightforward and reviewed in the technical analysis here: <https://attackerkb.com/topics/taeSMPFD8J/cve-2021-24085?#rapid7-analysis&gt;

Assessed Attacker Value: 5
Assessed Attacker Value: 5Assessed Attacker Value: 5

8.8 High

CVSS3

Attack Vector

NETWORK

Attack Complexity

LOW

Privileges Required

LOW

User Interaction

NONE

Scope

UNCHANGED

Confidentiality Impact

HIGH

Integrity Impact

HIGH

Availability Impact

HIGH

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

9 High

CVSS2

Access Vector

NETWORK

Access Complexity

LOW

Authentication

SINGLE

Confidentiality Impact

COMPLETE

Integrity Impact

COMPLETE

Availability Impact

COMPLETE

AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C