<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Vulnerability on Insinuator.net - Bold Statements</title>
    <link>https://insinuator.net/tags/vulnerability/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Vulnerability on Insinuator.net - Bold Statements</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://insinuator.net/tags/vulnerability/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Disclosure: Input Validation Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Bookings</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2025/05/disclosure-input-validation-vulnerabilities-in-microsoft-bookings/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2025/05/disclosure-input-validation-vulnerabilities-in-microsoft-bookings/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In a recent customer project, we discovered vulnerabilities in Microsoft&#xA;Bookings, an online appointment scheduling tool integrated into Microsoft 365,&#xA;allowing companies to have customers book meetings in available times&#xA;themselves. The findings originate from insufficient input validation on the&#xA;public meeting scheduling endpoint. Although Microsoft has largely mitigated&#xA;this vulnerability, our analysis provides important insights into potential&#xA;risks and areas for improvement.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h2 id=&#34;introduction--context&#34;&gt;Introduction &amp;amp; Context&lt;/h2&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Microsoft Bookings is a service that allows organizations to manage appointments&#xA;and meetings via a web interface. With integration to services such as Microsoft&#xA;Teams, the security of the booking process is critical. This blog post outlines&#xA;our technical analysis of the vulnerability, including proof-of-concept details&#xA;and an overview of the vendor response.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Full Disclosure: Multiple Rundeck Job Command Injections</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2025/05/full-disclosure-multiple-rundeck-job-command-injections/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2025/05/full-disclosure-multiple-rundeck-job-command-injections/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;During a red-teaming-style customer project, we managed to get access to an&#xA;&lt;a href=&#34;https://www.rundeck.com/&#34;&gt;Rundeck&lt;/a&gt; API token. Rundeck is a job scheduler and&#xA;runbook automation platform designed to automate routine IT tasks across&#xA;multiple systems. At first, we were excited about this API token because if we&#xA;could create new Rundeck jobs, we could execute arbitrary code on the Rundeck&#xA;nodes and move laterally from there. However, it turned out that with this token&#xA;we only had permissions to run existing jobs.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Vulnerability Disclosure: Restricted Shell Breakout (CVE-2025-1950) and Privilege Escalation (CVE-2025-1951) in IBM Power Hardware Management Console (HMC)</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2025/04/vulnerability-disclosure-restricted-shell-breakout-cve-2025-1950-and-privilege-escalation-cve-2025-1951-in-ibm-power-hardware-management-console-hmc/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2025/04/vulnerability-disclosure-restricted-shell-breakout-cve-2025-1950-and-privilege-escalation-cve-2025-1951-in-ibm-power-hardware-management-console-hmc/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We discovered a private key for accessing an IBM Hardware Management Console&#xA;(HMC) during a recent red team engagement. The IBM Hardware Management Console&#xA;(HMC) is a dedicated management system used to control and manage IBM servers,&#xA;especially those running on Power Systems (like IBM Power9/Power10) and&#xA;mainframes (z Systems). After brief research, we identified two security&#xA;vulnerabilities that can be leveraged to gain root access to the HMC.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Access for most users via SSH is limited through the &lt;code&gt;hmcbash&lt;/code&gt;, a restricted&#xA;shell environment. Using &lt;code&gt;LD_PRELOAD&lt;/code&gt;, attackers can break out of the restricted&#xA;bash and gain access to additional binaries installed on the system. With the&#xA;restrictions lifted, attackers can use a &lt;code&gt;setuid&lt;/code&gt; binary, &lt;code&gt;copysshkey&lt;/code&gt;, to&#xA;elevate privileges to &lt;code&gt;root&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Hilarious Buffer Overflow  Mitigation and TCL Injection in CheckPoint Gaia Portal</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2022/12/hilarious-buffer-overflow-mitigation-and-tcl-injection-in-checkpoint-gaia-portal/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2022/12/hilarious-buffer-overflow-mitigation-and-tcl-injection-in-checkpoint-gaia-portal/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Hey there,&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I am going to disclose two bug classes I found a while ago in CheckPoint R77.30:&#xA;Two buffer overflows in the username (no shit) and HTTP method of a request to&#xA;the administrative UI pre-auth and some interesting injections into the TCL web&#xA;interface.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Let’s start with the TCL part. The web interface reacted pretty weird when a&#xA;payload contained a colon. Diving deeper into this it became clear that a colon&#xA;would actually cause an error from the TCL interpreter. By going down this&#xA;rabbit hole and learning some TCL (:D) you could see that injecting a colon&#xA;breaks some part of the application code, probably because colons are control&#xA;characters in TCL e.g. preceding a global variable in TCL (::MyVar) or&#xA;separating namespaces.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>VMware NSX-T MITM Vulnerability (CVE-2020-3993)</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2020/11/vmware-nsx-t-mitm-vulnerability-cve-2020-3993/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2020/11/vmware-nsx-t-mitm-vulnerability-cve-2020-3993/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;NSX-T is a Software-Defined-Networking (SDN) solution of VMware which, as its basic functionality, supports spanning logical networks across VMs on distributed ESXi and KVM hypervisors. The central controller of the SDN is the NSX-T Manager Cluster which is responsible for deploying the network configurations to the hypervisor hosts.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;This summer, I looked into the mechanism which is used to add new KVM hypervisor nodes to the SDN via the NSX-T Manager. By tracing what happens on the KVM host, I discovered that the KVM hypervisor got instructed to download the NSX-T software packages from the NSX-T Manager via unencrypted HTTP and install them without any verification. This enables a Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) attacker on the network path to replace the downloaded packages with malicious ones and compromise the KVM hosts.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Forklift &amp;lt;=3.3.9 and &amp;lt;=3.4 Local Privilege Escalations on macOS (CVE-2020-15349/CVE-2020-27192)</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2020/11/forklift-lt3.3.9-and-lt3.4-local-privilege-escalations-on-macos-cve-2020-15349/cve-2020-27192/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2020/11/forklift-lt3.3.9-and-lt3.4-local-privilege-escalations-on-macos-cve-2020-15349/cve-2020-27192/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I have started to have a look at my local installed helpers on macOS. These helpers are used as an interface for applications to perform privileged operations on the system. Thus, it is quite a nice attack surface to search for Local Privilege Escalations.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Forklift is an advanced dual pane file manager for macOS. It is well known under macOS power users.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;As part of my investigation I identified vulnerabilities in Forklift allowing local privilege escalation.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Jenkins – Groovy Sandbox breakout (SECURITY-1538 / CVE-2019-10393, CVE-2019-10394, CVE-2019-10399, CVE-2019-10400)</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2019/09/jenkins-groovy-sandbox-breakout-security-1538-/-cve-2019-10393-cve-2019-10394-cve-2019-10399-cve-2019-10400/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2019/09/jenkins-groovy-sandbox-breakout-security-1538-/-cve-2019-10393-cve-2019-10394-cve-2019-10399-cve-2019-10400/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Recently, I discovered a sandbox breakout in the Groovy Sandbox used by the Jenkins script-security Plugin in their Pipeline Plugin for build scripts. We responsibly disclosed this vulnerability and in the current version of Jenkins it has been fixed and the according &lt;a href=&#34;https://jenkins.io/security/advisory/2019-09-12/&#34;&gt;Jenkins Security Advisory 2019-09-12&lt;/a&gt; has been published. In this blogpost I want to report a bit on the technical details of the vulnerability.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;h1 id=&#34;description&#34;&gt;Description&lt;/h1&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The groovy sandbox transforms some AST nodes of the script to add security checks. For example&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>LibreOffice – A Python Interpreter (code execution vulnerability CVE-2019-9848)</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2019/07/libreoffice-a-python-interpreter-code-execution-vulnerability-cve-2019-9848/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2019/07/libreoffice-a-python-interpreter-code-execution-vulnerability-cve-2019-9848/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;While waiting for a download to complete, I stumbled across an interesting &lt;a href=&#34;https://insert-script.blogspot.com/2019/02/libreoffice-cve-2018-16858-remote-code.html&#34;&gt;blogpost&lt;/a&gt;. The author describes a flaw in LibreOffice that allowed an attacker to execute code. Since this was quite recent, I was interested if my version is vulnerable to this attack and how they fixed it. Thus, I looked at the sources and luckily it was fixed. What I didn’t know before however was, that macros shipped with LibreOffice are executed without prompting the user, even on the highest macro security setting. So, if there would be a system macro from LibreOffice with a bug that allows to execute code, the user would not even get a prompt and the code would be executed right away. Therefor, I started to have a closer look at the source code and found out that exactly this is the case!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Multiple Vulnerabilities in Nexus Repository Manager</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2018/11/multiple-vulnerabilities-in-nexus-repository-manager/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2018/11/multiple-vulnerabilities-in-nexus-repository-manager/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Recently, we identified security issues in the Nexus Repository Manager software developed by Sonatype. The tested versions were OSS 3.12.1-01 and OSS 3.13.1-01.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The following issues could be identified:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Multiple Cross-Site Scripting (&lt;a href=&#34;https://support.sonatype.com/hc/en-us/articles/360010789893-CVE-2018-16619-Nexus-Repository-Manager-XSS-October-17-2018&#34;&gt;CVE-2018-16619&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Missing Access Controls (&lt;a href=&#34;https://support.sonatype.com/hc/en-us/articles/360010789453-CVE-2018-16620-Nexus-Repository-Manager-Missing-Access-Controls-October-17-2018?_ga=2.232570207.1112299337.1542137786-592006867.1539786845&#34;&gt;CVE-2018-16620&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Java Expression Language Injection (&lt;a href=&#34;https://support.sonatype.com/hc/en-us/articles/360010789153-CVE-2018-16621-Nexus-Repository-Manager-Java-Injection-October-17-2018?_ga=2.232570207.1112299337.1542137786-592006867.1539786845&#34;&gt;CVE-2018-16621&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The vulnerabilities are fixed in version 3.14.0. See the &lt;a href=&#34;https://help.sonatype.com/repomanager3/release-notes/2018-release-notes#id-2018ReleaseNotes-RepositoryManager3.14.0&#34;&gt;release notes&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&#34;https://support.sonatype.com/hc/en-us/sections/203012668-Security-Advisories&#34;&gt;security advisories&lt;/a&gt;  for further information.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;We identified a Java Expression Language Injection in the role and user creation function. In order to exploit this issue, the attacker needs to be authenticated with high privileges, the standard anonymous user is not sufficient.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Squirrelmail Full Disclosure – TROOPERS18</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2018/03/squirrelmail-full-disclosure-troopers18/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2018/03/squirrelmail-full-disclosure-troopers18/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Birk an me basically fully disclosed a 0day in &lt;a href=&#34;http://squirrelmail.org/&#34;&gt;Squirrelmail&lt;/a&gt; yesterday. This is a short Q&amp;amp;A to answer the most common questions about the issue to calm you all down a little bit. 😉&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What is the punchline, what do I need to know?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;An attacker able to exploit this vulnerability can extract files of the server the application is running on. This may include configuration files, log files and additionally all files that are readable for all users on the system. This issue is post-authentication. That means an attacker would need valid credentials for the application to log in or needs to exploit an additional vulnerability of which we are not aware of at this point of time.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FireEye Security Bug: Connection to physical host and adjacent network possible during analysis in Live-Mode</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2017/09/fireeye-security-bug-connection-to-physical-host-and-adjacent-network-possible-during-analysis-in-live-mode/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2017/09/fireeye-security-bug-connection-to-physical-host-and-adjacent-network-possible-during-analysis-in-live-mode/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We recently identified a security issue in FireEye AX 5400, that also affected other products. We responsibly disclosed the bug to FireEye and a fix that addresses the issue has been released with version 7.7.7. The fix was also merged into the common core and is available as 8.0.1 for other products (i.e. FireEye EX).&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The related release notes can be found here:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;https://docs.fireeye.com/docs/docs_en/AX/sw/7.7.7/RN/AX_RN_7.7.7_en.pdf&#34;&gt;https://docs.fireeye.com/docs/docs_en/AX/sw/7.7.7/RN/AX_RN_7.7.7_en.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;https://docs.fireeye.com/docs/docs_en/EX/sw/8.0.1/RN/EX_RN_8.0.1_en.pdf&#34;&gt;https://docs.fireeye.com/docs/docs_en/EX/sw/8.0.1/RN/EX_RN_8.0.1_en.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;FireEye announced to post a 2017 Q3 notice with credit to us, too.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Autonomic Network Part 3: Vulnerabilities</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2017/04/autonomic-network-part-3-vulnerabilities/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2017/04/autonomic-network-part-3-vulnerabilities/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;This is the 3rd post in the series of Autonomic Network (AN), it will dedicated for discussing the vulnerabilities. I recommend reading the first 2 parts (&lt;a href=&#34;https://insinuator.net/2017/03/autonomic-network-overview/&#34;&gt;part one&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&#34;https://insinuator.net/2017/03/autonomic-network-analysis/&#34;&gt;part two&lt;/a&gt;) to be familiar with the technology and how the proprietary protocol is constructed.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Initially we will discuss 2 of the reported CVEs, but later there is more CVEs to come 😉&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Here is a quick overview on how our network looks like for 2 CVEs&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
