Vulnerabilities > CVE-2017-5818 - Improper Input Validation vulnerability in HP Intelligent Management Center 7.3

047910
CVSS 7.8 - HIGH
Attack vector
NETWORK
Attack complexity
LOW
Privileges required
NONE
Confidentiality impact
NONE
Integrity impact
NONE
Availability impact
COMPLETE
network
low complexity
hp
CWE-20
nessus

Summary

A Remote Code Execution vulnerability in HPE Intelligent Management Center (iMC) PLAT version 7.3 E0504P04 was found.

Vulnerable Configurations

Part Description Count
Application
Hp
3

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 familyWindows
    NASL idHP_INTELLIGENT_MANAGEMENT_CENTER_7_3_E0504P04.NASL
    descriptionThe version of HPE Intelligent Management Center (iMC) PLAT installed on the Windows host is prior to 7.3 E0504P04. It is, therefore, affected by multiple vulnerabilities : - An unspecified flaw exists that allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5815) - A command injection vulnerability exists in the dbman service due to improper validation of user-supplied input before it is passed to a system call. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted opcode 10008 request, to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands with SYSTEM privileges. (CVE-2017-5816) - Multiple command injection vulnerabilities exist in the dbman service due to improper validation of user-supplied input before it is passed to a system call. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit these, via a specially crafted opcode 10007 request, to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands with SYSTEM privileges. (CVE-2017-5817, CVE-2017-5819) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10007 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to delete arbitrary files with SYSTEM privileges. (CVE-2017-5818) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10004 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5820) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10006 and 10010 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5821) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10010 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5822) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10013 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5823) - A NULL pointer deference flaw exists, specifically in the asn1_item_embed_d2i() function within file crypto/asn1/tasn_dec.c, when handling the ASN.1 CHOICE type, which results in a NULL value being passed to the structure callback if an attempt is made to free certain invalid encodings. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition. (CVE-2016-7053) - A heap overflow condition exists in the chacha20_poly1305_cipher() function within file crypto/evp/e_chacha20_poly1305.c when handling TLS connections using *-CHACHA20-POLY1305 cipher suites. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition. (CVE-2016-7054) - A carry propagation error exists in the Broadwell-specific Montgomery multiplication procedure when handling input lengths divisible by but longer than 256 bits. This can result in transient authentication and key negotiation failures or reproducible erroneous outcomes of public-key operations with specially crafted input. A man-in-the-middle attacker can possibly exploit this issue to compromise ECDH key negotiations that utilize Brainpool P-512 curves. (CVE-2016-7055) - An unspecified remote code execution vulnerability exists that allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-8948) - A stack-based buffer overflow condition exists due to improper validation of input when copying data. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition or the execution of arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-8956) Note that Intelligent Management Center (iMC) is an HPE product; however, it is branded as H3C.
    last seen2020-06-01
    modified2020-06-02
    plugin id100869
    published2017-06-19
    reporterThis script is Copyright (C) 2017-2018 Tenable Network Security, Inc.
    sourcehttps://www.tenable.com/plugins/nessus/100869
    titleH3C / HPE Intelligent Management Center PLAT < 7.3 E0504P04 Multiple Vulnerabilities
  • NASL familyMisc.
    NASL idHP_IMC_73_E0504P04.NASL
    descriptionThe version of HPE Intelligent Management Center (iMC) PLAT installed on the remote host is prior to 7.3 E0504P04. It is, therefore, affected by multiple vulnerabilities : - A NULL pointer deference flaw exists, specifically in the asn1_item_embed_d2i() function within file crypto/asn1/tasn_dec.c, when handling the ASN.1 CHOICE type, which results in a NULL value being passed to the structure callback if an attempt is made to free certain invalid encodings. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition. (CVE-2016-7053) - A heap overflow condition exists in the chacha20_poly1305_cipher() function within file crypto/evp/e_chacha20_poly1305.c when handling TLS connections using *-CHACHA20-POLY1305 cipher suites. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition. (CVE-2016-7054) - A carry propagation error exists in the Broadwell-specific Montgomery multiplication procedure when handling input lengths divisible by but longer than 256 bits. This can result in transient authentication and key negotiation failures or reproducible erroneous outcomes of public-key operations with specially crafted input. A man-in-the-middle attacker can possibly exploit this issue to compromise ECDH key negotiations that utilize Brainpool P-512 curves. (CVE-2016-7055) - An unspecified flaw exists that allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5815) - A command injection vulnerability exists in the dbman service due to improper validation of user-supplied input before it is passed to a system call. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted opcode 10008 request, to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands with SYSTEM privileges. (CVE-2017-5816) - Multiple command injection vulnerabilities exist in the dbman service due to improper validation of user-supplied input before it is passed to a system call. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit these, via a specially crafted opcode 10007 request, to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands with SYSTEM privileges. (CVE-2017-5817, CVE-2017-5819) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10007 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to delete arbitrary files with SYSTEM privileges. (CVE-2017-5818) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10004 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5820) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10006 and 10010 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5821) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10010 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5822) - A flaw exists in the dbman service when handling opcode 10013 requests due to improper validation of user-supplied input. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted request, to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-5823) - An unspecified remote code execution vulnerability exists that allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-8948) - A stack-based buffer overflow condition exists due to improper validation of input when copying data. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this to cause a denial of service condition or the execution of arbitrary code. (CVE-2017-8956) Note that Intelligent Management Center (iMC) is an HPE product; however, it is branded as H3C.
    last seen2020-06-01
    modified2020-06-02
    plugin id100868
    published2017-06-19
    reporterThis script is Copyright (C) 2017-2018 Tenable Network Security, Inc.
    sourcehttps://www.tenable.com/plugins/nessus/100868
    titleH3C / HPE Intelligent Management Center PLAT < 7.3 E0504P04 Multiple Vulnerabilities