Perimeter
7/13/2009
03:03 PM
John H. Sawyer
John H. Sawyer
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%
Repost This

Internet Explorer Hit With 1-2 Punch Of Zero-Day Attacks

It's Monday: Do you know what Web browser your users are running? If it's Internet Explorer, don't look now, but for two weeks in a row, IE has taken two jabs straight to the face with ActiveX zero-day exploits that let attackers stomp all over users who are tricked into clicking on a malicious link or get redirected from a compromised site. Browser alternatives starting to look a little more enticing?

It's Monday: Do you know what Web browser your users are running? If it's Internet Explorer, don't look now, but for two weeks in a row, IE has taken two jabs straight to the face with ActiveX zero-day exploits that let attackers stomp all over users who are tricked into clicking on a malicious link or get redirected from a compromised site. Browser alternatives starting to look a little more enticing?I'm not a fan of browser bigots that are always quoting browser usage statistics, but the fact remains that there are many more users of IE than other browsers like Firefox, Safari, and Chrome. Why is that? Are corporate environments locked into using IE because of a particular application that the company is dependent upon? I'm sure a few of you are slowly nodding your heads.

I've seen it before, and unfortunately, a little too close to home, where older versions of IE and Firefox were required because the Web app designers were inept...or, let's be kind and instead say that they were too busy working on important, mission-critical features to focus on meeting standards and compatibility requirements for newer browsers.

Enterprises that have made the decision to stick with IE because it's comfortable and known, or because it's required for their Web application, might want to reconsider their decision. Last week, it was a vulnerability in an ActiveX Video Control, and today it's a Office Web Components ActiveX Control. Other browsers have vulnerabilities, but let's face it -- which is a more likely target, an IE or Firefox user?

The biggest thing going against these actively exploited vulnerabilities is that they can't go beyond the privileges of the user running Internet Explorer. That's good news for those of you practicing the principle of least privilege as discussed in "Least-Privilege Technology Still Swimming Upstream, But Making Progress," but we all know that's not everyone.

What else can you do? There are a few different approaches that can be taken. For example, if you must use IE, then disable all ActiveX controls unless they are absolutely required (this can get cumbersome if you make the wrong choices and have to keep enabling ones you were wrong about). Two browsers could be installed -- with IE can be restricted to only allow access to the legacy apps, while another browser could be used for browsing the Web. Another browser could be used entirely, and the user agent changed whenever accessing the legacy app. A great example of the last option is Firefox and the User Agent Switcher add-on, which I've found works surprisingly often.

I guess what it comes down to is what level of risk are you comfortable taking. Do you use a browser that's less likely to be targeted, or do you go with one that can be better managed centrally? And can you be sure your antivirus and IPs would prevent an attack before it gets to the vulnerable browser? Tough questions.

John H. Sawyer is a senior security engineer on the IT Security Team at the University of Florida. The views and opinions expressed in this blog are his own and do not represent the views and opinions of the UF IT Security Team or the University of Florida. When John's not fighting flaming, malware-infested machines or performing autopsies on blitzed boxes, he can usually be found hanging with his family, bouncing a baby on one knee and balancing a laptop on the other. Special to Dark Reading.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-3946
Published: 2014-04-24
Cisco IOS before 15.3(2)S allows remote attackers to bypass interface ACL restrictions in opportunistic circumstances by sending IPv6 packets in an unspecified scenario in which expected packet drops do not occur for "a small percentage" of the packets, aka Bug ID CSCty73682.

CVE-2012-5723
Published: 2014-04-24
Cisco ASR 1000 devices with software before 3.8S, when BDI routing is enabled, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via crafted (1) broadcast or (2) multicast ICMP packets with fragmentation, aka Bug ID CSCub55948.

CVE-2013-6738
Published: 2014-04-24
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in IBM SmartCloud Analytics Log Analysis 1.1 and 1.2 before 1.2.0.0-CSI-SCALA-IF0003 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via an invalid query parameter in a response from an OAuth authorization endpoint.

CVE-2014-0188
Published: 2014-04-24
The openshift-origin-broker in Red Hat OpenShift Enterprise 2.0.5, 1.2.7, and earlier does not properly handle authentication requests from the remote-user auth plugin, which allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and impersonate arbitrary users via the X-Remote-User header in a request to...

CVE-2014-2391
Published: 2014-04-24
The password recovery service in Open-Xchange AppSuite before 7.2.2-rev20, 7.4.1 before 7.4.1-rev11, and 7.4.2 before 7.4.2-rev13 makes an improper decision about the sensitivity of a string representing a previously used but currently invalid password, which allows remote attackers to obtain potent...

Best of the Web