Vulnerabilities > CVE-2006-1865 - Argument Injection or Modification vulnerability in Beagle Project Beagle
Attack vector
UNKNOWN Attack complexity
UNKNOWN Privileges required
UNKNOWN Confidentiality impact
UNKNOWN Integrity impact
UNKNOWN Availability impact
UNKNOWN Summary
Argument injection vulnerability in Beagle before 0.2.5 allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands via crafted filenames that inject command line arguments when Beagle launches external helper applications while indexing.
Vulnerable Configurations
Part | Description | Count |
---|---|---|
Application | 1 |
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
- Try All Common Application Switches and Options An attacker attempts to invoke all common switches and options in the target application for the purpose of discovering weaknesses in the target. For example, in some applications, adding a --debug switch causes debugging information to be displayed, which can sometimes reveal sensitive processing or configuration information to an attacker. This attack differs from other forms of API abuse in that the attacker is blindly attempting to invoke options in the hope that one of them will work rather than specifically targeting a known option. Nonetheless, even if the attacker is familiar with the published options of a targeted application this attack method may still be fruitful as it might discover unpublicized functionality.
- Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious Payloads This type of attack involves an attacker leveraging meta-characters in email headers to inject improper behavior into email programs. Email software has become increasingly sophisticated and feature-rich. In addition, email applications are ubiquitous and connected directly to the Web making them ideal targets to launch and propagate attacks. As the user demand for new functionality in email applications grows, they become more like browsers with complex rendering and plug in routines. As more email functionality is included and abstracted from the user, this creates opportunities for attackers. Virtually all email applications do not list email header information by default, however the email header contains valuable attacker vectors for the attacker to exploit particularly if the behavior of the email client application is known. Meta-characters are hidden from the user, but can contain scripts, enumerations, probes, and other attacks against the user's system.
- HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP) An attacker overrides or adds HTTP GET/POST parameters by injecting query string delimiters. Via HPP it may be possible to override existing hardcoded HTTP parameters, modify the application behaviors, access and, potentially exploit, uncontrollable variables, and bypass input validation checkpoints and WAF rules.
- OS Command Injection In this type of an attack, an adversary injects operating system commands into existing application functions. An application that uses untrusted input to build command strings is vulnerable. An adversary can leverage OS command injection in an application to elevate privileges, execute arbitrary commands and compromise the underlying operating system.
Nessus
NASL family | Fedora Local Security Checks |
NASL id | FEDORA_2006-440.NASL |
description | This upgrade to 0.2.5 fixes various bugs, including making the firefox extension work again. It also contains fixes for a minor security issue where you could inject command line argument into the indexer helpers. Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues. |
last seen | 2020-06-01 |
modified | 2020-06-02 |
plugin id | 21273 |
published | 2006-04-26 |
reporter | This script is Copyright (C) 2006-2019 Tenable Network Security, Inc. |
source | https://www.tenable.com/plugins/nessus/21273 |
title | Fedora Core 5 : beagle-0.2.5-1.fc5.1 (2006-440) |
code |
|
References
- http://lists.seifried.org/pipermail/security/2006-April/013163.html
- http://lists.seifried.org/pipermail/security/2006-April/013163.html
- http://scary.beasts.org/security/CESA-2006-002.html
- http://scary.beasts.org/security/CESA-2006-002.html
- http://secunia.com/advisories/19778
- http://secunia.com/advisories/19778
- http://secunia.com/advisories/19781
- http://secunia.com/advisories/19781
- http://secunia.com/advisories/19897
- http://secunia.com/advisories/19897
- http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/2006_04_28.html
- http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/2006_04_28.html
- http://www.osvdb.org/24938
- http://www.osvdb.org/24938
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/17611
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/17611
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189282
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189282
- https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/26104
- https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/26104