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. |

| Subject: | [VulnWatch] [ TZO-012006 ] Checkpoint VPN-1 SecureClient insecure usage of CreateProcess() |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:48:47 +0100 |
Dear List, Title : CheckPoint - CheckQuotes! Ref : TZO-012006-Checkpoint Author : Thierry Zoller TXT : http://secdev.zoller.lu/research/checkpoint.txt URL : http://secdev.zoller.lu/research/checkpoint.htm Introduction : ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As employees become more mobile, sophisticated VPN solutions are required to meet key security challenges such as securing access to corporate resources and protecting remote desktops. To meet the VPN client needs of any organization, Check Point offers VPN-1 SecureClient. Details : ~~~~~~~~~ During Startup, the SR_Watchdog.exe spawns the GUI process (SR_GUI.exe) through the use of the CreateProcess() function. By doing so it omits to set the 'lpApplicationName' variable and further omits to quote the path in the variable "lpCommandLine". Ref [1] This results in c:\program.bat|exe|com being called prior to Sr_GUI.exe and allows automatic startup of a potentially rogue application. In particular one could imagine a scenario where it is possible to escalate rights using this (as they are inherited from SR_Watchdog.exe). I decided that this is not worth to report to the vendor, I consider this low impact in terms of Security. (Although it might show bad coding practice). References : ~~~~~~~~~~~~ [1] http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2005-November/038789.html [2] Only an issue on Win2k were a restricted user is allowed to write to c:\ -- http://secdev.zoller.lu Thierry Zoller Fingerprint : 5D84 BFDC CD36 A951 2C45 2E57 28B3 75DD 0AC6 F1C7
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Full-disclosure] iDefense Security Advisory 01.17.06: EMC Legato Networker nsrd.exe DoS Vulnerability, labs-no-reply@idefense.com |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Full-disclosure] Fortinet Advisory: BitComet URI Buffer Overflow Vulnerability, Fortinet Research |
| Previous by Thread: | [Full-disclosure] iDefense Security Advisory 01.17.06: EMC Legato Networker nsrd.exe DoS Vulnerability, labs-no-reply@idefense.com |
| Next by Thread: | [Full-disclosure] Fortinet Advisory: BitComet URI Buffer Overflow Vulnerability, Fortinet Research |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |