Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Warns of Zero-Day Attacks
wiredmikey writes "Microsoft released an advisory today warning users about a new zero-day under attack in targeted campaigns occurring in the Middle East and South Asia. According to Microsoft, the vulnerability resides in the Microsoft Graphics component and impacts certain versions of Windows, Microsoft Office and Lync. The problem exists in the way specially-crafted TIFF images are handled. To exploit the vulnerability, an attacker would have to convince a user to preview or open a specially-crafted email message, open a malicious file or browse malicious Web content. If exploited successfully, the vulnerability can be used to remotely execute code. The vulnerability affects Office 2003, 2007 and 2010 as well as Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista. Right now, Microsoft Word documents are the current vector for attack."
Don't they already put that warning on the box?
so when the summary says "the attacker would have to convince the user..." what they really mean is that it would happen automatically with no user interaction. I could send you an email, and just by clicking on it, it shows in the preview pane and BAM you're owned. This sounds like it would be an XP thing, but since it applies to office 2007 and 2010, presumably it applies to windows 7 as well?
I bet NSA is pissed, because one of their favorite pwnage tools is now public :(
Microsoft, Apple, and even our dear Linux all have had issues with previewing malcrafted images. If seeing this on a patch notes shocks you I'll assume you haven't read many patch notes. TIFF is surprising as that hasn't been a huge attack vector, but I've seen in the hundreds of notes I've read as an IT peon where formats have been an issue. More often it is PDF, EMF, WMF, but TIFF isn't out of the question
It is a file format that is pretty low on the level of requiring correct formatting and is more or less abandoned by its owner, Adobe. I bet their is a grip of EPS exploits out there for Microsoft's viewer, but very few people would open those. Everyone know EPS is "an Adobe" and forward them on to the graphics department.
I guess Linux has never and never will have any security exploits possible against it. So yeah, good luck with that. And to anyone else who thinks using Linux online is the end all and be all for security. No system is safe.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
They know what causes the bug. They know where the bug is located. But they can't provide a fix for the bug?
Kudos. That's the laziest response to a vulnerability I've ever heard of.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Easy. You have something (like a header) that leads the image decoder to allocate a certain amount of memory on the stack (a buffer) for an expected piece of data. Then you have the decompressed data be larger then it was advertised or calculated, overflowing the buffer and so overwriting other items on the stack, like the return address. By changing the return address you can point it back at the buffer, which when the CPU tries to read those bytes as code instead of data it turns out they do bad things.
Vulnerabilities in media decoders are a prime vector for infection since they are usually processed automatically. The only reason you are seeing it in software from 'a decade ago' is that hackers face so much competition from white hat researchers when it comes to browsers, fighting for vulnerabilities from a usually shrinking pool. With fewer opportunities some are turning to media decoders found in applications like Office. It's a less effective vector since it requires several actions from the user, but the upside is that these applications are often not as aggressively patched as browsers have become which means a single vulnerability might work for months.
For a comparison it's been almost a year since the last arbitrary code vulnerability was reported in FireFox's GIF decoder, and 2 years since the JPEG decoder was last turned into an attack vector (to the best of my knowledge). IE, Chrome and Safari have experienced similar droughts, with all the major browsers only having 1 or 2 image based vulnerabilities reported annually for the last few years, and usually by researchers who allow it to be patched quickly rather then as a zero day being exploited. Of course other types of media exist. CSS/HTML5 has rapidly become a media format in of itself and a little over a month ago FireFox was vulnerable to arbitrary code execution due to the way it decoded animations in CSS stylesheets (this was reported by Google and patched with the release of FF 24). TL;DR Researchers are hogging all the good browser vulnerabilities, so hackers are playing in the dusty old rooms nobody has visited in years.
"To exploit the vulnerability, an attacker would have to convince a user to preview or open a specially-crafted email message, open a malicious file or browse malicious Web content."
Thankfully it's proven difficult over the years to get a Windows user to do any of those things....
Do you have ESP?
"Microsoft released an advisory today warning users about a new zero-day flaw that we'll fix when we damn well feel like it. The digital holy war is targeting the Middle East and South Asia. According to Microsoft, the vulnerability resides in the Microsoft Graphics component and impacts certain versions of Windows, Microsoft Office and Some Failed Skype Imitation. The problem exists in our poorly written TIFF reader. To exploit the vulnerability, an attacker will email you and when you open it, you are fucked. It will download and install malware and there is nothing you can do about it. The vulnerability affects those new versions of Office that we insisted you needed to upgrade to and Shoddy Server 2008 and Windows 7 - 1. Right now, opening a Microsoft Word document could ruin your week or your month."
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
TIFF is a scary format in general because it's been extended in so many bizarre ways to support document mangagement systems. For ex, there's actually a standard for embedding PDFs inside of a TIFF (rather than visa-versa).
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Problem is, most email to fax gateways use either TIFF or PDF, and most of them are TIFF. Though PDF isn't any better (in fact, historically it is much worse, security wise) given that most people seem to use adobe reader to open them.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Microsoft Warns of Zero-Day Attacks
Use Linux.
aaaaaaa