Vulnerabilities > CVE-2011-0920 - Improper Authentication vulnerability in IBM Lotus Domino

047910
CVSS 9.3 - CRITICAL
Attack vector
NETWORK
Attack complexity
MEDIUM
Privileges required
NONE
Confidentiality impact
COMPLETE
Integrity impact
COMPLETE
Availability impact
COMPLETE
network
ibm
CWE-287
critical
nessus
exploit available

Summary

The Remote Console in IBM Lotus Domino, when a certain unsupported configuration involving UNC share pathnames is used, allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors, aka SPR PRAD89WGRS.

Vulnerable Configurations

Part Description Count
Application
Ibm
1

Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)

  • Authentication Abuse
    An attacker obtains unauthorized access to an application, service or device either through knowledge of the inherent weaknesses of an authentication mechanism, or by exploiting a flaw in the authentication scheme's implementation. In such an attack an authentication mechanism is functioning but a carefully controlled sequence of events causes the mechanism to grant access to the attacker. This attack may exploit assumptions made by the target's authentication procedures, such as assumptions regarding trust relationships or assumptions regarding the generation of secret values. This attack differs from Authentication Bypass attacks in that Authentication Abuse allows the attacker to be certified as a valid user through illegitimate means, while Authentication Bypass allows the user to access protected material without ever being certified as an authenticated user. This attack does not rely on prior sessions established by successfully authenticating users, as relied upon for the "Exploitation of Session Variables, Resource IDs and other Trusted Credentials" attack patterns.
  • Exploiting Trust in Client (aka Make the Client Invisible)
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by placing themselves in the communication channel between client and server such that communication directly to the server is possible where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
  • Utilizing REST's Trust in the System Resource to Register Man in the Middle
    This attack utilizes a REST(REpresentational State Transfer)-style applications' trust in the system resources and environment to place man in the middle once SSL is terminated. Rest applications premise is that they leverage existing infrastructure to deliver web services functionality. An example of this is a Rest application that uses HTTP Get methods and receives a HTTP response with an XML document. These Rest style web services are deployed on existing infrastructure such as Apache and IIS web servers with no SOAP stack required. Unfortunately from a security standpoint, there frequently is no interoperable identity security mechanism deployed, so Rest developers often fall back to SSL to deliver security. In large data centers, SSL is typically terminated at the edge of the network - at the firewall, load balancer, or router. Once the SSL is terminated the HTTP request is in the clear (unless developers have hashed or encrypted the values, but this is rare). The attacker can utilize a sniffer such as Wireshark to snapshot the credentials, such as username and password that are passed in the clear once SSL is terminated. Once the attacker gathers these credentials, they can submit requests to the web service provider just as authorized user do. There is not typically an authentication on the client side, beyond what is passed in the request itself so once this is compromised, then this is generally sufficient to compromise the service's authentication scheme.
  • Man in the Middle Attack
    This type of attack targets the communication between two components (typically client and server). The attacker places himself in the communication channel between the two components. Whenever one component attempts to communicate with the other (data flow, authentication challenges, etc.), the data first goes to the attacker, who has the opportunity to observe or alter it, and it is then passed on to the other component as if it was never intercepted. This interposition is transparent leaving the two compromised components unaware of the potential corruption or leakage of their communications. The potential for Man-in-the-Middle attacks yields an implicit lack of trust in communication or identify between two components.

Exploit-Db

descriptionIBM Lotus Domino Server Controller Authentication Bypass Vulnerability. CVE-2011-0920,CVE-2011-1519. Remote exploit for jsp platform
idEDB-ID:18179
last seen2016-02-02
modified2011-11-30
published2011-11-30
reporterAlexey Sintsov
sourcehttps://www.exploit-db.com/download/18179/
titleIBM Lotus Domino Server Controller Authentication Bypass Vulnerability

Nessus

NASL familyWeb Servers
NASL idDOMINO_8_5_3.NASL
descriptionAccording to its banner, the version of Lotus Domino on the remote host is 8.5.x prior to 8.5.3, and is, therefore, affected by the following vulnerabilities : - A heap-based buffer overflow error exists in the file ndiiop.exe related to the DIIOP implementation and GIOP request handling. (CVE-2011-0914) - A stack-based buffer overflow error exists in the file nrouter.exe related to the
last seen2020-06-01
modified2020-06-02
plugin id66239
published2013-04-26
reporterThis script is Copyright (C) 2013-2018 Tenable Network Security, Inc.
sourcehttps://www.tenable.com/plugins/nessus/66239
titleIBM Lotus Domino 8.5.x < 8.5.3 Multiple Vulnerabilities
code
#
# (C) Tenable Network Security, Inc.
#

include("compat.inc");

if (description)
{
  script_id(66239);
  script_version("1.5");
  script_cvs_date("Date: 2018/11/15 20:50:25");

  script_cve_id(
    "CVE-2011-0914",
    "CVE-2011-0915",
    "CVE-2011-0916",
    "CVE-2011-0917",
    "CVE-2011-0920",
    "CVE-2011-3575"
  );
  script_bugtraq_id(46231, 46232, 46245, 46361, 49705);
  script_xref(name:"EDB-ID", value:"16190");

  script_name(english:"IBM Lotus Domino 8.5.x < 8.5.3 Multiple Vulnerabilities");
  script_summary(english:"Checks version of Lotus Domino");

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"synopsis", value:"The remote web server is affected by multiple vulnerabilities.");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"description", value:
"According to its banner, the version of Lotus Domino on the remote host
is 8.5.x prior to 8.5.3, and is, therefore, affected by the following
vulnerabilities :

  - A heap-based buffer overflow error exists in the file
    ndiiop.exe related to the DIIOP implementation and GIOP
    request handling. (CVE-2011-0914)

  - A stack-based buffer overflow error exists in the file
    nrouter.exe related to the 'name' parameter in a
    'Content-Type' header and malformed Notes calendar
    meeting requests. (CVE-2011-0915)

  - A stack-based buffer overflow error exists related to
    the 'filename' parameter, MIME email messages and the
    SMTP service. (CVE-2011-0916)

  - A buffer overflow error exists in the file nLDAP.exe
    related to handling long strings in LDAP Bind
    operations. (CVE-2011-0917)

  - An authentication bypass error exists related to the
    'Remote Console' and 'UNC share pathnames'.
    (CVE-2011-0920)

  - A stack-based buffer overflow error exists in the
    function 'NSFComputeEvaluateExt' function in the file
    'Nnotes.dll' related to the 'tHPRAgentName' parameter
    in an 'fmHttpPostRequest' OpenForm action.
    (CVE-2011-3575)

Note that exploitation of several of these vulnerabilities could result
in execution of arbitrary code.");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-11-047/");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-11-048/");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-11-049/");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-11-052/");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"https://www.zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-11-110/");
  # Fix list
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?8cb395e8");
  # ZDI list
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21461514");
  # http://www.research.reversingcode.com/index.php/advisories/73-ibm-ssd-1012211
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"see_also", value:"http://www.nessus.org/u?7643c792");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"solution", value:"Upgrade to Lotus Domino 8.5.3 or later.");
  script_set_cvss_base_vector("CVSS2#AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C");
  script_set_cvss_temporal_vector("CVSS2#E:F/RL:OF/RC:C");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"exploitability_ease", value:"Exploits are available");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"exploit_available", value:"true");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"exploit_framework_core", value:"true");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"exploit_framework_canvas", value:"true");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"canvas_package", value:'D2ExploitPack');

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"vuln_publication_date", value:"2011/02/07");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"patch_publication_date", value:"2011/02/17");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"plugin_publication_date", value:"2013/04/26");

  script_set_attribute(attribute:"plugin_type", value:"remote");
  script_set_attribute(attribute:"cpe", value:"cpe:/a:ibm:lotus_domino");
  script_end_attributes();

  script_category(ACT_GATHER_INFO);
  script_family(english:"Web Servers");
  script_copyright(english:"This script is Copyright (C) 2013-2018 Tenable Network Security, Inc.");

  script_dependencies("domino_installed.nasl", "http_version.nasl");
  script_require_keys("Domino/Version");
  script_require_ports("Services/www", 80);

  exit(0);
}

include("audit.inc");
include("global_settings.inc");
include("misc_func.inc");
include("http.inc");


# Unless we're being paranoid, make sure a Domino web server is listening.
if (report_paranoia < 2)
{
  port = get_http_port(default:80);
  banner = get_http_banner(port:port);
  if (!banner) audit(AUDIT_NO_BANNER, port);
  if ("Domino" >!< banner) audit(AUDIT_NOT_LISTEN, "IBM Lotus Domino", port);
}
else port = 0;

# Check the version of Domino installed.
ver = get_kb_item_or_exit("Domino/Version");

# Check that version is granular enough
if (ver == "8") exit(1, "The version "+ver+" on port "+port+" is not granular enough to make a determination.");

# Check that version is 8.5.x
if (ver !~ "^8\.5($|[^0-9])") audit(AUDIT_NOT_LISTEN, "IBM Lotus Domino 8.5.x", port);

# Affected 8.5 < 8.5.3
if (
  ver == "8.5" ||
  ver =~ "^8\.5 FP[0-9]" ||
  ver =~ "^8\.5\.[0-2]($|[^0-9])"
)
{
  if (report_verbosity > 0)
  {
    report =
      '\n' +
      '\n  Installed version : ' + ver +
      '\n  Fixed version     : 8.5.3' +
      '\n';
    security_hole(port:port, extra:report);
  }
  else security_hole(port);
}
else audit(AUDIT_LISTEN_NOT_VULN, "IBM Lotus Domino", port, ver);