Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

New Vulnerabilities Make RDP Risks Far from Remote

More than two dozen vulnerabilities raise the risk of using RDP clients to remotely manage and configure systems.

Researchers have announced a flurry of vulnerabilities in three separate implementations of RDP, the remote desktop protocol that is widely used in remote technical support and configuration operations at large enterprises and service providers.

In a presentation at their company's annual conference, Check Point security researchers detailed 25 "reverse RDP" vulnerabilities in three separate RDP clients: FreeRDP, rdesktop, and mstc.exe. Two of the clients are native to operating systems; rdesktop is the client included in distros of Kali Linux, while mstc.exe is Microsoft's RDP client included with Windows.

In all of these reverse RDP vulnerabilities, it's the remote system — not the system being connected to — that's vulnerable. As Yaniv Balmas, head of technical research at Check Point, says, "Once we have a direct channel back to your to your machine, we can practically do anything we want on that machine. We can do everything we want. The machine is ours."

While many IT professionals believe that only display and user interface data is exchanged in an RDP session, Balmas says RDP clients have more capabilities, and it's those additional capabilities that provide the source of the vulnerabilities.

In both of the open source RDP clients, Check Point found that malware on the "host" system could use a buffer overflow technique to force remote code execution on the client machine. There are actually a variety of ways to do this; so far, 19 vulnerabilities have been identified and given CVE designations in rdesktop, while six have been identified in FreeRDP.

All of these vulnerabilities were submitted to the open source community prior to public disclosure, and all have been patched. "So the remediation for the two free versions is essentially to make sure you're using the latest patched version," Balmas says.

The situation with mstc.exe is different. The researchers found that the code Microsoft uses is much stronger than that used by the open source versions. There's one feature, though, that creates an opportunity for malicious behavior: Through the RDP client, the host and remote systems share a clipboard.

As the researcher wrote in their blog post on the vulnerabilities, "If the client fails to properly canonicalize and sanitize the file paths it receives, it could be vulnerable to a path-traversal attack, allowing the server to drop arbitrary files in arbitrary paths on the client’s computer, a very strong attack primitive."

What this means in practical terms also is detailed in the post: "If a client uses the 'Copy & Paste' feature over an RDP connection, a malicious RDP server can transparently drop arbitrary files to arbitrary file locations on the client’s computer, limited only by the permissions of the client. For example, we can drop malicious scripts to the client’s 'Startup' folder, and after a reboot they will be executed on his computer, giving us full control."

The researchers were able to build code that pushed code onto the clipboard without the user's permission or awareness, Balmas says. Then, if the remote user pastes anything from the clipboard, the malicious code is also pasted to an arbitrary location.

Because the exploit involves user interaction, Microsoft does not classify this as a code vulnerability and has not been given a CVE designation. Despite that, "We consider this to be critical, or at least important for users to know, because we think that this kind of — I would call it the bug — goes unnoticed and can definitely be used by malicious actors," Balmas says.

Related Content:

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Editor at Dark Reading. In this role he focuses on product and technology coverage for the publication. In addition he works on audio and video programming for Dark Reading and contributes to activities at Interop ITX, Black Hat, INsecurity, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
kscherler
100%
0%
kscherler,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/18/2019 | 5:31:33 PM
MSTC? Isn't it MSTSC?
As a guy who has to type mstsc about 100 times a day I would ask that you please fix your spelling of the microsoft terminal services client when referencing it. You used mstc several times in your article instead of mstsc.
Engr.Zaheer
50%
50%
Engr.Zaheer,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/6/2019 | 10:20:20 AM
New Vulnerabilities Make RDP Risks Far From Remote
Will this be the issue if your are using RDP within a LAN/private environment. Its risk will be restricted to only that environment ?
Mobile Banking Malware Up 50% in First Half of 2019
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/17/2020
Active Directory Needs an Update: Here's Why
Raz Rafaeli, CEO and Co-Founder at Secret Double Octopus,  1/16/2020
Google Lets iPhone Users Turn Device into Security Key
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/15/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-16270
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
Samsung Galaxy Gear series before build RE2 includes the hcidump utility with no privilege or permission restriction. This allows an unprivileged process to dump Bluetooth HCI packets to an arbitrary file path.
CVE-2018-16271
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
The wemail_consumer_service (from the built-in application wemail) in Samsung Galaxy Gear series allows an unprivileged process to manipulate a user's mailbox, due to improper D-Bus security policy configurations. An arbitrary email can also be sent from the mailbox via the paired smartphone. This a...
CVE-2018-16272
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
The wpa_supplicant system service in Samsung Galaxy Gear series allows an unprivileged process to fully control the Wi-Fi interface, due to the lack of its D-Bus security policy configurations. This affects Tizen-based firmwares including Samsung Galaxy Gear series before build RE2.
CVE-2019-10780
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
BibTeX-ruby before 5.1.0 allows shell command injection due to unsanitized user input being passed directly to the built-in Ruby Kernel.open method through BibTeX.open.
CVE-2019-10781
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-22
In schema-inspector before 1.6.9, a maliciously crafted JavaScript object can bypass the `sanitize()` and the `validate()` function used within schema-inspector.