Vulnerabilities > CVE-2009-1160 - Permissions, Privileges, and Access Controls vulnerability in Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance 5500 and PIX

047910
CVSS 4.3 - MEDIUM
Attack vector
NETWORK
Attack complexity
MEDIUM
Privileges required
NONE
Confidentiality impact
PARTIAL
Integrity impact
NONE
Availability impact
NONE

Summary

Cisco Adaptive Security Appliances (ASA) 5500 Series and PIX Security Appliances 7.0 before 7.0(8)1, 7.1 before 7.1(2)74, 7.2 before 7.2(4)9, and 8.0 before 8.0(4)5 do not properly implement the implicit deny statement, which might allow remote attackers to successfully send packets that bypass intended access restrictions, aka Bug ID CSCsq91277.

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)

  • Accessing, Modifying or Executing Executable Files
    An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an attacker to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an attacker to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
  • Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files
    An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files, when the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high. The attack can be directed at a client system, such as causing buffer overrun through loading seemingly benign image files, as in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-028 where specially crafted JPEG files could cause a buffer overrun once loaded into the browser. Another example targets clients reading pdf files. In this case the attacker simply appends javascript to the end of a legitimate url for a pdf (http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/danger-danger-danger/) http://path/to/pdf/file.pdf#whatever_name_you_want=javascript:your_code_here The client assumes that they are reading a pdf, but the attacker has modified the resource and loaded executable javascript into the client's browser process. The attack can also target server processes. The attacker edits the resource or configuration file, for example a web.xml file used to configure security permissions for a J2EE app server, adding role name "public" grants all users with the public role the ability to use the administration functionality. The server trusts its configuration file to be correct, but when they are manipulated, the attacker gains full control.
  • Blue Boxing
    This type of attack against older telephone switches and trunks has been around for decades. A tone is sent by an adversary to impersonate a supervisor signal which has the effect of rerouting or usurping command of the line. While the US infrastructure proper may not contain widespread vulnerabilities to this type of attack, many companies are connected globally through call centers and business process outsourcing. These international systems may be operated in countries which have not upgraded Telco infrastructure and so are vulnerable to Blue boxing. Blue boxing is a result of failure on the part of the system to enforce strong authorization for administrative functions. While the infrastructure is different than standard current applications like web applications, there are historical lessons to be learned to upgrade the access control for administrative functions.
  • Restful Privilege Elevation
    Rest uses standard HTTP (Get, Put, Delete) style permissions methods, but these are not necessarily correlated generally with back end programs. Strict interpretation of HTTP get methods means that these HTTP Get services should not be used to delete information on the server, but there is no access control mechanism to back up this logic. This means that unless the services are properly ACL'd and the application's service implementation are following these guidelines then an HTTP request can easily execute a delete or update on the server side. The attacker identifies a HTTP Get URL such as http://victimsite/updateOrder, which calls out to a program to update orders on a database or other resource. The URL is not idempotent so the request can be submitted multiple times by the attacker, additionally, the attacker may be able to exploit the URL published as a Get method that actually performs updates (instead of merely retrieving data). This may result in malicious or inadvertent altering of data on the server.
  • Target Programs with Elevated Privileges
    This attack targets programs running with elevated privileges. The attacker would try to leverage a bug in the running program and get arbitrary code to execute with elevated privileges. For instance an attacker would look for programs that write to the system directories or registry keys (such as HKLM, which stores a number of critical Windows environment variables). These programs are typically running with elevated privileges and have usually not been designed with security in mind. Such programs are excellent exploit targets because they yield lots of power when they break. The malicious user try to execute its code at the same level as a privileged system call.

Seebug

bulletinFamilyexploit
description安全公告 月度Top10安全漏洞 每日漏洞播报 Cisco PIX/ASA拒绝服务,ACL绕过及验证绕过漏洞 发布时间:2009-04-09 录入:启明星辰 BUGTRAQ ID: 34429 CVE ID:CVE-2009-1155 CVE-2009-1156 CVE-2009-1157 CVE-2009-1158 CVE-2009-1159 CVE-2009-1160 CNCVE ID:CNCVE-20091155 CNCVE-20091156 CNCVE-20091157 CNCVE-20091158 CNCVE-20091159 CNCVE-20091160 Cisco PIX是一款防火墙设备,可为用户和应用提供策略强化、多载体攻击防护和安全连接服务;自适应安全设备(ASA)是可提供安全和VPN服务的模块化平台。 Cisco PIX/ASA存在多个安全漏洞,允许攻击者使设备重载,伪造通信绕过ACL规则或获得对设备的未授权访问。 VPN验证绕过问题: 设备配置了IPsec或者基于SSL远程访问VPN,如果开启Override Account Disabled功能,可导致VPN用户可绕过验证访问设备。 特殊构建的HTTP报文拒绝服务漏洞: 特殊构建的SSL或者HTTP报文可导致配置了终止SSL VPN连接的Cisco ASA设备触发拒绝服务条件。此漏洞可通过任意ASDM访问启用的接口上触发,成功利用可设备重载,需要TCP三次握手利用此漏洞。 特殊构建的TCP报文拒绝服务漏洞: 特殊构建的TCP报文可导致Cisco ASA或Cisco PIX设备内存泄漏,成功攻击可导致拒绝服务攻击。 特殊构建的H.232报文拒绝服务漏洞: 特殊构建的H.232报文可导致配置了H.232检测的Cisco ASA设备触发拒绝服务条件。H.232检测默认启用。成功攻击可导致设备重载,不需要三次握手即可利用此漏洞。 SQL*Net报文拒绝服务漏洞: 特殊的一系列SQL*Net报文可导致配置了SQL*Net检测的Cisco ASA和Cisco PIX设备产生拒绝服务。SQL*Net检测默认启用,成功利用漏洞可导致设备重载。 访问控制列表绕过漏洞: 访问列表包含一个隐含的拒绝行为,适用于那些不匹配任何允许或者ACL中拒绝ACEs规则,并走到ACL规则末端的报文。这个隐含拒绝行为的设计不需要任何配置,所有通信走到ACL规则末端可被隐含ACE应用。Cisco ASA和Cisco PIX存在安全漏洞,允许通信绕过隐含拒绝ACE。 Cisco PIX/ASA 8.1 Cisco PIX/ASA 8.0 Cisco PIX/ASA 7.2 Cisco PIX/ASA 7.1 Cisco PIX/ASA 7.0 可参考如下安全公告获得补丁信息: <a href=http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_advisory09186a0080a994f6.shtml#@ID target=_blank rel=external nofollow>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/products_security_advisory09186a0080a994f6.shtml#@ID</a>
idSSV:5029
last seen2017-11-19
modified2009-04-10
published2009-04-10
reporterRoot
titleCisco PIX/ASA拒绝服务,ACL绕过及验证绕过漏洞