Ethical Hacking

Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package.
Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute

Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors.




Network Security Snort-Signatures
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Snort-sigs] FPs for 4166 (Shell.Explorer) - "common" print function

Subject: Re: [Snort-sigs] FPs for 4166 (Shell.Explorer) - "common" print functions
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:12:44 -0500
These particular instances appear to be as you say -- legitimate uses of an ActiveX object that is prone to abuse. Looking at the BID and CVE entries here, it's clear that this object has been implicated as a culprit in the IE Drag & Drop vulnerability, which allows for remote code execution. While the MS reference may have been a bit unclear -- it's there because MS05-014 lists MS04-038 as a necessary prerequisite for a workaround, and MS04-038 does contain a fix for a Drag & Drop vuln -- I'd say that it's obvious this object can cause some serious problems if abused correctly. Hopefully the addition of MS05-014 as a reference will make this even more clear.

You may wish to simply disable this rule, depending upon your site's ActiveX policies, how up-to-date your patches are, etc. Since there is legitimate value in this rule for some people, however, it's unlikely to change any time soon.

Alex Kirk
Research Analyst
Sourcefire, Inc.

Getting lots of alerts on sid:416, "Shell.Explorer ActiveX Object Access". Using this object is perhaps walking on thin ice, but I am seeing it coming from what I would have thought to be legitimate sources. Are these just legitimate cases of questionable scripting style? Some of the flagged text from known sites:

jobsearch.ma.monster.com spits out this script fragment (3 different times):

{
var WebBrowser = '<OBJECT ID="WebBrowser1" WIDTH=0 HEIGHT=0 CLASSID="CLSID:8856F961-340A-11D0-A96B-00C04FD705A2"></OBJECT>';
document.body.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeEnd', WebBrowser);
WebBrowser1.ExecWB(6, 2);
//Use a 1 vs. a 2 for a prompting dialog box
WebBrowser1.outerHTML = ""; }


education.uoregon.edu gives us several variations of:

if (da && !pr && !mac) with (document) {
writeln('<OBJECT ID="WB" WIDTH="0" HEIGHT="0" CLASSID="clsid:8856F961-340A-11D0-A96B-00C04FD705A2"></OBJECT>');
writeln('<' + 'SCRIPT LANGUAGE="VBScript">');
writeln('Sub window_onunload');
writeln(' On Error Resume Next');
writeln(' Set WB = nothing');
writeln('End Sub');


www.smartcomputing.com (sic) has a similar fragment to monster.com's:

{
var WebBrowser = '<OBJECT ID="WebBrowser1" WIDTH=0 HEIGHT=0 CLASSID="CLSID:8856F961-340A-11D0-A96B-00C04FD705A2"></OBJECT>';
document.body.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeEnd', WebBrowser);
WebBrowser1.ExecWB(6, 2);//Use a 1 vs. a 2 for a prompting dialog box WebBrowser1.outerHTML = ""; }


In fact, after seeing that www.cisco.com also spit out something similar, they all contain variations of this function (finally got it all in one packet):

// Print Function
function printit(){ if (window.print) {
window.print() ; } else {
var WebBrowser = '<OBJECT ID="WebBrowser1" WIDTH=0 HEIGHT=0 CLASSID="CLSID:8856F961-340A-11D0-A96B-00C04FD705A2"></OBJECT>';
document.body.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeEnd', WebBrowser);
WebBrowser1.ExecWB(6, 2);
// Use a 1 vs. a 2 for a prompting dialog box WebBrowser1.outerHTML = ""; }


And now after looking further still, all are variations on a procedure to print a document on various combinations of platforms and browsers.

Any further detail on what an "evil" incarnation of Shell.Explorer might contain to differentiate it from these examples?

Jeff


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Snort-sigs mailing list
Snort-sigs@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-sigs




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Snort-sigs mailing list
Snort-sigs@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-sigs

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>