this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
26 points (96.4% liked)
Security
674 readers
5 users here now
A community for discussion about cybersecurity, hacking, cybersecurity news, exploits, bounties etc.
Rules :
- All instance-wide rules apply.
- Keep it totally legal.
- Remember the human, be civil.
- Be helpful, don't be rude.
Icon base by Delapouite under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
even in your hypothetical of a file name passed in through the args, either the attacker has enough access to run said tool with whatever args they want, or, they have taken over that process and can inject whatever args they want.
either attack vector requires a prior breach of the system. you’re owned either way.
the only way this actually works as an exploit is if there are poorly written services out there that blindly call through to
CreateProcessthat take in user sourced input without any sanitization, which if you’re doing that then no duh you’re gonna have a bad time.cmd.exeis always going to be invoked if you’re executing a batch script, it’s literally the interpreter for .bat files. the issue is, as usual, code that might be blindly taking user input and not even bothering to sanitize it before using it.But that’s exactly the problem: these applications were sanitizing the input using the APIs provided by their language standard libraries. Except that sanitization proved insufficient because the requirements for sanitization differ greatly when the command is interpreted by
cmd.exeas opposed to running regular executables. This is such a big footgun in the Windows API that it was overlooked by seemingly every major programming language implementation out there.