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

Security Flaws Discovered in 40 Microsoft-Certified Device Drivers

Attackers can use vulnerable drivers to escalate privilege and execute malicious code in every part of the system.

Attackers have learned that vulnerabilities can hide in the gaps: gaps between components of a system or gaps in a process or procedure. A researcher last week at DEF CON in Las Vegas showed that device drivers — the small utility applications that allow particular pieces of hardware to work with an operating system — can bridge critical gaps for legitimate hardware and malicious hackers alike.

Jesse Michael and Mickey Shkatov, both of Eclypsium, based their research on the fact that while drivers allow communication between software and hardware, they also facilitate communication between the so-called user mode and the OS kernel. And since they operate at the permission level of the kernel, they indeed can be very powerful tools.

Malware that exploits drivers isn't new, and the simple fact that a driver vulnerability is being exploited isn't novel. There have been numerous campaigns, most recently last year's LoJax malware ascribed to Sednit, which employed driver exploits.

In Michael and Shkatov's research, though, they found more than 40 drivers from at least 20 vendors — including every major BIOS vendor — had vulnerabilities. More important than the basic number was that every vulnerable driver they discovered was certified by Microsoft, nullifying one of the most basic protection mechanisms in place for Windows systems.

Each of the vulnerabilities found facilitate privilege escalation from Ring 3 to Ring 0: at this privilege level, attackers can perform kernel virtual memory access, physical memory access, MMIO access, MSR access, control register access, PCI device access, SMBUS access, and much more.

In their presentation, the researchers showed several attack scenarios, from exploiting a driver that exists on the system but is not yet loaded, to malware that brings its own drivers with counterfeit signatures. In each of these cases, the drivers, once loaded, can carry malicious kernel patches, illicit reads and writes of specific memory locations, modifications to Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) and device firmware, and other actions that would facilitate complete system takeover.

The researchers pointed out that an attacker would need access to the system prior to exploiting a driver vulnerability. Once the initial infection is accomplished, however, the driver exploit could be a very persistent method for privilege escalation and exploit execution.

Michael and Shkatov first reported their findings to Microsoft and other vendors. Microsoft and some of the affected vendors already have issued patches for known issues, while others have not responded to the researchers.

Whether a particular vendor has patched their drivers or not, Michael and Shkatov pointed out, Windows will still allow older, unpatched drivers to run on a system, leaving risk in place until the latest version of Windows 10 is running with its new drivers.

Related Content:

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Analyst at Omdia, focusing on enterprise security management. Curtis has been writing about technologies and products in computing and networking since the early 1980s. He has been on staff and contributed to technology-industry publications ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
tdsan
50%
50%
tdsan,
User Rank: Ninja
8/27/2019 | 11:39:26 AM
Re: Need Access? Not hard to do if it's built in your country...
I agree with that point whole-heartedly, the supply chain process has to be improved in order to validate and verify if the existing solution has been compromised. I do think there needs to be baseline supplied by the OEM (vendor), when the system deviates from one micron or determine if there is something communicating with the outside world, then it needs to be re-examined. That will take a major budget at the very beginning to ensure the devices are measured to the nth degree before they are distributed to the public or utilize robotics to help with the measuring process.

I think we need to learn from the residual effects "Super-Micro" had on the economy - Bloomberg Article



The key will be the supply chain after we get a handle on that, then we will be able to move forward, but until then, we are just guessing.

T
Jon M. Kelley
50%
50%
Jon M. Kelley,
User Rank: Moderator
8/26/2019 | 11:12:48 AM
Need Access? Not hard to do if it's built in your country...
Access to the hardware could be hard to achieve at scale for a typical hacker or even hacking team, but within a country that builds many of the motherboards currently in use worldwide, it could easily be part of the cost of running the business. 
tdsan
50%
50%
tdsan,
User Rank: Ninja
8/13/2019 | 12:11:07 PM
This is the key - "need access to the device"
If users bring in their own equipment (BYOD), this is going to be a problem. Even if the system is not connected to the private/domain network, this still gives the actor the ability to exploit the network by allowing the device to communicate with the outside world like a "Zombie" or they can utilize a cable that connects to a machine with malware (KnowBe4 showed this in an earlier video, found on youtube). It seems we may have to move our solutions to be more Linux centric but that did not help either (maybe ChromeOS, does not allow to install unknown software), not sure what the answer is here except to keep the systems update-to-date (patching), this is interesting.

It seems MS needs to do a better job of validating the drivers before stating they have been certified.

T
Commentary
Ransomware Is Not the Problem
Adam Shostack, Consultant, Entrepreneur, Technologist, Game Designer,  6/9/2021
Edge-DRsplash-11-edge-ask-the-experts
How Can I Test the Security of My Home-Office Employees' Routers?
John Bock, Senior Research Scientist,  6/7/2021
News
New Ransomware Group Claiming Connection to REvil Gang Surfaces
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  6/10/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Zero Trust doesn't have to break your budget!
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27610
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-16
SAP NetWeaver ABAP Server and ABAP Platform, versions - 700, 701, 702, 731, 740, 750, 751, 752, 753, 754, 755, 804, does not create information about internal and external RFC user in consistent and distinguished format, which could lead to improper authentication and may be exploited by malicious u...
CVE-2021-34801
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-16
Valine 1.4.14 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application outage) by supplying a ua (aka User-Agent) value that only specifies the product and version.
CVE-2021-34803
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-16
TeamViewer before 14.7.48644 on Windows loads untrusted DLLs in certain situations.
CVE-2020-8299
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-16
Citrix ADC and Citrix/NetScaler Gateway 13.0 before 13.0-76.29, 12.1-61.18, 11.1-65.20, Citrix ADC 12.1-FIPS before 12.1-55.238, and Citrix SD-WAN WANOP Edition before 11.4.0, 11.3.2, 11.3.1a, 11.2.3a, 11.1.2c, 10.2.9a suffers from uncontrolled resource consumption by way of a network-based denial-o...
CVE-2020-8300
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-16
Citrix ADC and Citrix/NetScaler Gateway before 13.0-82.41, 12.1-62.23, 11.1-65.20 and Citrix ADC 12.1-FIPS before 12.1-55.238 suffer from improper access control allowing SAML authentication hijack through a phishing attack to steal a valid user session. Note that Citrix ADC or Citrix Gateway must b...