Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Windows Buffer Overflow!
CERT ^ | Mar 17th | Me

Posted on 03/17/2003 11:42:53 AM PST by taxcontrol

A buffer overflow vulnerability exists in Microsoft IIS 5.0 running on Microsoft Windows 2000. IIS 5.0 is installed and running by default on Microsoft Windows 2000 systems. This vulnerability may allow a remote attacker to run arbitrary code on the victim machine.

An exploit is publicly available for this vulnerability, which increases the urgency that system administrators apply a patch.

See http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2003-09.html for details.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Technical
KEYWORDS: windowssecurity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last
Folks, this is VERY DANGEROUS.

The service is ON by default and can result in a total compromise of the server. Patch is available - fix it now or you WILL get burned.

The exploit is already in the wild.

1 posted on 03/17/2003 11:42:53 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Not casting any stones. Just passing on a security alert as I'm in the security field. So, heads up.
2 posted on 03/17/2003 11:44:19 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Saw nothing about WinXP.

Thoughts, anyone?

3 posted on 03/17/2003 11:51:16 AM PST by Airborne Longhorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Thanks for the post. I applied the patch already.

I have to say, it's nice that the patches are easy to apply, but it's hell trying to build a server up from scratch. (Even with Windows Update it's a pain.)

I'm running SQL Server 2000, IIS 5, VS .NET, .NET matrix, etc., so there are numerous updates one has to perform in order to have a stable and secure system.

I really hope that Windows 2003 tackles these security problems IN THE FIRST RELEASE and not in patches.
4 posted on 03/17/2003 12:16:54 PM PST by 1stFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Ah, Microsoft's contribution to the Iraq Effort:

A THREAT TO UNITED STATES NATIONAL SECURITY DURING WARTIME

Are there any jokers left who actually recommend IIS to their CIOS???? Please let me know so I can short the stock.

5 posted on 03/17/2003 12:20:09 PM PST by chilepepper (Gnocchi Seuton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
thanks for the alert
6 posted on 03/17/2003 12:21:47 PM PST by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1stFreedom
Indeed. I currently have two Win 2k clusters running SQL 2k, Exch 2k, IIS 5, and various file shares. Rebuilding them from scratch is a pain!
7 posted on 03/17/2003 12:25:38 PM PST by Ignatz (Scribe of the Unwritten Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
No hoax, and incidentally it's flagged as "critical, patch immediately". Here's the email from NTBugtraq by way of the incidents.org mailing list:

From: Windows NTBugtraq Mailing List
On Behalf Of Russ
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 13:20
To: NTBUGTRAQ@LISTSERV.NTBUGTRAQ.COM
Subject: Alert: Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS03-007

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS03-007.asp

Unchecked buffer in Windows component could cause web server
compromise (815021)

Originally posted: March 17, 2003

Summary

Who should read this bulletin: Systems administrators running
Microsoft ® Windows ® 2000

Impact of vulnerability: Run code of attacker's choice

Maximum Severity Rating: Critical

Recommendation: Systems administrators should apply the patch
immediately

Affected Software:
- Microsoft Windows 2000

Technical description:

Microsoft Windows 2000 supports the World Wide Web
Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV) protocol.
WebDAV, defined in RFC 2518, is a set of extensions to the
Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (HTTP) that provide a standard
for editing and file management between computers on the
Internet. A security vulnerability is present in a Windows
component used by WebDAV, and results because the component
contains an unchecked buffer.

An attacker could exploit the vulnerability by sending a
specially formed HTTP request to a machine running Internet
Information Server (IIS).  The request could cause the server
to fail or to execute code of the attacker's choice. The code
would run in the security context of the IIS service (which,
by default, runs in the LocalSystem context).

Although Microsoft has supplied a patch for this
vulnerability and recommends customers install the patch
immediately, additional tools and preventive measures have
been provided that customers can use to block the
exploitation of this vulnerability while they are assessing
the impact and compatibility of the patch. These temporary
workarounds and tools are discussed in the "Workarounds"
section in the FAQ below.

Mitigating factors:
- URLScan, which is a part of the IIS Lockdown Tool will
block this attack in its default configurations
- The vulnerability can only be exploited remotely if an
attacker can establish a web session with an affected server

Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0109

8 posted on 03/17/2003 12:26:29 PM PST by clueless idiot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chilepepper
Ah, Microsoft's contribution to the Iraq Effort:

Considering that Apache has an even wider install base, it's even more of a "threat", troll...

Apache buffer overflow threat
9 posted on 03/17/2003 12:33:30 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
It was known how to avoid buffer overflow errors at least back as far as 1971 and probably earlier. Continuing to have such errors (as in Windows and Unix variants) is bordering on the criminally negligent.
10 posted on 03/17/2003 12:33:51 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chilepepper
Here's another Apache buffer overflow:

http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/487/
11 posted on 03/17/2003 12:35:14 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: chilepepper
Another Apache bug from last month...

Apache Web Server MIME Boundary Information Disclosure Vulnerability
12 posted on 03/17/2003 12:36:52 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: chilepepper
Yet another from last month...

Apache Web Server ETag Header Information Disclosure Weakness

Sensing a pattern yet?
13 posted on 03/17/2003 12:37:59 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
bump
14 posted on 03/17/2003 12:41:18 PM PST by RippleFire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000; chilepepper
Come on guys.

Let's not start the old Windows vs Open debate again. Let's be professional and pass this on to as many folks that we know might be impacted.


15 posted on 03/17/2003 12:45:51 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: chilepepper
Plenty more where those came from...

Apache Jakarta Tomcat 3 URL parsing vulnerability (Archive)
Last modified on: 2003-01-30

Apache Tomcat Example Web Application Cross Site Scripting Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2003-01-26

Apache Tomcat Web.XML File Contents Disclosure Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2003-01-26

Apache Tomcat Null Byte Directory/File Disclosure Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2003-01-26

Apache Web Server Default Script Mapping Bypass Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2003-01-22

Apache Web Server MS-DOS Device Name Denial Of Service Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)

Apache Web Server MS-DOS Device Name Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2003-01-22

Apache Web Server Illegal Character HTTP Request File Disclosure Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2003-01-22

Apache/Tomcat Denial Of Service And Information Leakage Vulnerability (Archive)
Last modified on: 2002-12-04

Apache/Tomcat Mod_JK Chunked Encoding Denial Of Service Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2002-12-04

Apache mod_php File Descriptor Leakage Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2002-11-06

apache mod_ssl cross-site scripting vulnerability (Advisories)
Last modified on: 2002-10-29

Apache 2 WebDAV CGI POST Request Information Disclosure Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2002-10-29

Apache HTPasswd Insecure Temporary File Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2002-10-17

Apache HTDigest Arbitrary Command Execution Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2002-10-17

Apache HTDigest Insecure Temporary File Vulnerability (Vulnerabilities)
Last modified on: 2002-10-17
16 posted on 03/17/2003 12:46:27 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Come on guys. Let's not start the old Windows vs Open debate again. Let's be professional and pass this on to as many folks that we know might be impacted.

I agree. But I'm not going to sit here and get kicked by that troll over issues that clearly affect other platforms.
17 posted on 03/17/2003 12:47:22 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic; Bush2000; chilepepper
It was known how to avoid buffer overflow errors at least back as far as 1971 and probably earlier. Continuing to have such errors (as in Windows and Unix variants) is bordering on the criminally negligent.

You know, of course, such unabashed hatred exposes you for what you really are -- nothing less than... a... a TROLL!</sarcasm>

18 posted on 03/17/2003 12:47:30 PM PST by newgeezer (We learn by trail and errror. :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Seeing all these Apache vulns you're posting, it seems you're a little touchy on the subject. Do you not want to see this hole patched quickly?

And before you go off on me about Apache/Linux, etc--yes they do have bugs, as you have to defensively pointed out. This just doesn't seem to be the thread to start a war about it, though.

19 posted on 03/17/2003 12:49:03 PM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Sensing a pattern yet?

Do you mean the pattern concerning your obsession of trying to defend all things Microsoft by pointing out other's faults? Your zealotry is quite ridiculous.

20 posted on 03/17/2003 12:51:35 PM PST by cashion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson