Vulnerabilities > CVE-2016-1444 - Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Cisco products
Attack vector
NETWORK Attack complexity
LOW Privileges required
NONE Confidentiality impact
LOW Integrity impact
LOW Availability impact
NONE Summary
The Mobile and Remote Access (MRA) component in Cisco TelePresence Video Communication Server (VCS) X8.1 through X8.7 and Expressway X8.1 through X8.6 mishandles certificates, which allows remote attackers to bypass authentication via an arbitrary trusted certificate, aka Bug ID CSCuz64601.
Vulnerable Configurations
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables This attack pattern involves causing a buffer overflow through manipulation of environment variables. Once the attacker finds that they can modify an environment variable, they may try to overflow associated buffers. This attack leverages implicit trust often placed in environment variables.
- Server Side Include (SSI) Injection An attacker can use Server Side Include (SSI) Injection to send code to a web application that then gets executed by the web server. Doing so enables the attacker to achieve similar results to Cross Site Scripting, viz., arbitrary code execution and information disclosure, albeit on a more limited scale, since the SSI directives are nowhere near as powerful as a full-fledged scripting language. Nonetheless, the attacker can conveniently gain access to sensitive files, such as password files, and execute shell commands.
- Cross Zone Scripting An attacker is able to cause a victim to load content into their web-browser that bypasses security zone controls and gain access to increased privileges to execute scripting code or other web objects such as unsigned ActiveX controls or applets. This is a privilege elevation attack targeted at zone-based web-browser security. In a zone-based model, pages belong to one of a set of zones corresponding to the level of privilege assigned to that page. Pages in an untrusted zone would have a lesser level of access to the system and/or be restricted in the types of executable content it was allowed to invoke. In a cross-zone scripting attack, a page that should be assigned to a less privileged zone is granted the privileges of a more trusted zone. This can be accomplished by exploiting bugs in the browser, exploiting incorrect configuration in the zone controls, through a cross-site scripting attack that causes the attackers' content to be treated as coming from a more trusted page, or by leveraging some piece of system functionality that is accessible from both the trusted and less trusted zone. This attack differs from "Restful Privilege Escalation" in that the latter correlates to the inadequate securing of RESTful access methods (such as HTTP DELETE) on the server, while cross-zone scripting attacks the concept of security zones as implemented by a browser.
- Cross Site Scripting through Log Files An attacker may leverage a system weakness where logs are susceptible to log injection to insert scripts into the system's logs. If these logs are later viewed by an administrator through a thin administrative interface and the log data is not properly HTML encoded before being written to the page, the attackers' scripts stored in the log will be executed in the administrative interface with potentially serious consequences. This attack pattern is really a combination of two other attack patterns: log injection and stored cross site scripting.
- Command Line Execution through SQL Injection An attacker uses standard SQL injection methods to inject data into the command line for execution. This could be done directly through misuse of directives such as MSSQL_xp_cmdshell or indirectly through injection of data into the database that would be interpreted as shell commands. Sometime later, an unscrupulous backend application (or could be part of the functionality of the same application) fetches the injected data stored in the database and uses this data as command line arguments without performing proper validation. The malicious data escapes that data plane by spawning new commands to be executed on the host.
Nessus
NASL family | CISCO |
NASL id | CISCO_TELEPRESENCE_VCS_MULTIPLE_880.NASL |
description | According to its self-reported version, the Cisco TelePresence Video Communication Server (VCS) / Expressway running on the remote host is 8.x prior to 8.8. It is, therefore, affected by multiple vulnerabilities : - A security feature bypass vulnerability exists, known as Bar Mitzvah, due to improper combination of state data with key data by the RC4 cipher algorithm during the initialization phase. A man-in-the-middle attacker can exploit this, via a brute-force attack using LSB values, to decrypt the traffic. (CVE-2015-2808) - A flaw exists in the web framework of TelePresence Video Communication Server (VCS) Expressway due to missing authorization checks on certain administrative pages. An authenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to bypass read-only restrictions and install Tandberg Linux Packages (TLPs) without proper authorization. (CVE-2015-6413) - A flaw exists in certificate management and validation for the Mobile and Remote Access (MRA) component due to improper input validation of a trusted certificate. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, using a trusted certificate, to bypass authentication and gain access to internal HTTP system resources. (CVE-2016-1444) - A heap buffer overflow condition exists in the EVP_EncodeUpdate() function within file crypto/evp/encode.c that is triggered when handling a large amount of input data. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition. (CVE-2016-2105) - A heap buffer overflow condition exists in the EVP_EncryptUpdate() function within file crypto/evp/evp_enc.c that is triggered when handling a large amount of input data after a previous call occurs to the same function with a partial block. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition. (CVE-2016-2106) - Multiple flaws exist in the aesni_cbc_hmac_sha1_cipher() function in file crypto/evp/e_aes_cbc_hmac_sha1.c and the aesni_cbc_hmac_sha256_cipher() function in file crypto/evp/e_aes_cbc_hmac_sha256.c that are triggered when the connection uses an AES-CBC cipher and AES-NI is supported by the server. A man-in-the-middle attacker can exploit these to conduct a padding oracle attack, resulting in the ability to decrypt the network traffic. (CVE-2016-2107) - A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the ASN.1 encoder due to an underflow condition that occurs when attempting to encode the value zero represented as a negative integer. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to corrupt memory, resulting in the execution of arbitrary code. (CVE-2016-2108) - Multiple unspecified flaws exist in the d2i BIO functions when reading ASN.1 data from a BIO due to invalid encoding causing a large allocation of memory. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit these to cause a denial of service condition through resource exhaustion. (CVE-2016-2109) - An out-of-bounds read error exists in the X509_NAME_oneline() function within file crypto/x509/x509_obj.c when handling very long ASN.1 strings. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to disclose the contents of stack memory. (CVE-2016-2176) - An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the file system permissions due to certain files having overly permissive permissions. An unauthenticated, local attacker can exploit this to disclose sensitive information. (Cisco bug ID CSCuw55636) Note that Cisco bug ID CSCuw55636 and CVE-2015-6413 only affect versions 8.6.x prior to 8.8. |
last seen | 2020-06-01 |
modified | 2020-06-02 |
plugin id | 92045 |
published | 2016-07-14 |
reporter | This script is Copyright (C) 2016-2019 and is owned by Tenable, Inc. or an Affiliate thereof. |
source | https://www.tenable.com/plugins/nessus/92045 |
title | Cisco TelePresence VCS / Expressway 8.x < 8.8 Multiple Vulnerabilities (Bar Mitzvah) |
References
- http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20160706-vcs
- http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20160706-vcs
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/91669
- http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/91669
- http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1036237
- http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1036237