ID CVE-2002-0013
Summary Vulnerabilities in the SNMPv1 request handling of a large number of SNMP implementations allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service or gain privileges via (1) GetRequest, (2) GetNextRequest, and (3) SetRequest messages, as demonstrated by the PROTOS c06-SNMPv1 test suite. NOTE: It is highly likely that this candidate will be SPLIT into multiple candidates, one or more for each vendor. This and other SNMP-related candidates will be updated when more accurate information is available.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • cpe:2.3:a:snmp:snmp
    cpe:2.3:a:snmp:snmp
CVSS
Base: 10.0 (as of 01-01-2004 - 00:00)
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-264
CAPEC
  • Accessing, Modifying or Executing Executable Files
    An attack of this type exploits a system's configuration that allows an attacker to either directly access an executable file, for example through shell access; or in a possible worst case allows an attacker to upload a file and then execute it. Web servers, ftp servers, and message oriented middleware systems which have many integration points are particularly vulnerable, because both the programmers and the administrators must be in synch regarding the interfaces and the correct privileges for each interface.
  • Leverage Executable Code in Non-Executable Files
    An attack of this type exploits a system's trust in configuration and resource files, when the executable loads the resource (such as an image file or configuration file) the attacker has modified the file to either execute malicious code directly or manipulate the target process (e.g. application server) to execute based on the malicious configuration parameters. Since systems are increasingly interrelated mashing up resources from local and remote sources the possibility of this attack occurring is high. The attack can be directed at a client system, such as causing buffer overrun through loading seemingly benign image files, as in Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-028 where specially crafted JPEG files could cause a buffer overrun once loaded into the browser. Another example targets clients reading pdf files. In this case the attacker simply appends javascript to the end of a legitimate url for a pdf (http://www.gnucitizen.org/blog/danger-danger-danger/) http://path/to/pdf/file.pdf#whatever_name_you_want=javascript:your_code_here The client assumes that they are reading a pdf, but the attacker has modified the resource and loaded executable javascript into the client's browser process. The attack can also target server processes. The attacker edits the resource or configuration file, for example a web.xml file used to configure security permissions for a J2EE app server, adding role name "public" grants all users with the public role the ability to use the administration functionality. The server trusts its configuration file to be correct, but when they are manipulated, the attacker gains full control.
  • Blue Boxing
    This type of attack against older telephone switches and trunks has been around for decades. A tone is sent by an adversary to impersonate a supervisor signal which has the effect of rerouting or usurping command of the line. While the US infrastructure proper may not contain widespread vulnerabilities to this type of attack, many companies are connected globally through call centers and business process outsourcing. These international systems may be operated in countries which have not upgraded Telco infrastructure and so are vulnerable to Blue boxing. Blue boxing is a result of failure on the part of the system to enforce strong authorization for administrative functions. While the infrastructure is different than standard current applications like web applications, there are historical lessons to be learned to upgrade the access control for administrative functions.
  • Restful Privilege Elevation
    Rest uses standard HTTP (Get, Put, Delete) style permissions methods, but these are not necessarily correlated generally with back end programs. Strict interpretation of HTTP get methods means that these HTTP Get services should not be used to delete information on the server, but there is no access control mechanism to back up this logic. This means that unless the services are properly ACL'd and the application's service implementation are following these guidelines then an HTTP request can easily execute a delete or update on the server side. The attacker identifies a HTTP Get URL such as http://victimsite/updateOrder, which calls out to a program to update orders on a database or other resource. The URL is not idempotent so the request can be submitted multiple times by the attacker, additionally, the attacker may be able to exploit the URL published as a Get method that actually performs updates (instead of merely retrieving data). This may result in malicious or inadvertent altering of data on the server.
  • Target Programs with Elevated Privileges
    This attack targets programs running with elevated privileges. The attacker would try to leverage a bug in the running program and get arbitrary code to execute with elevated privileges. For instance an attacker would look for programs that write to the system directories or registry keys (such as HKLM, which stores a number of critical Windows environment variables). These programs are typically running with elevated privileges and have usually not been designed with security in mind. Such programs are excellent exploit targets because they yield lots of power when they break. The malicious user try to execute its code at the same level as a privileged system call.
  • Manipulating Input to File System Calls
    An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.
Access
VectorComplexityAuthentication
NETWORK LOW NONE
Impact
ConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE
exploit-db via4
description Cisco IOS 11/12 Malformed SNMP Message Denial of Service Vulnerabilities. CVE-2002-0013. Dos exploit for hardware platform
id EDB-ID:21296
last seen 2016-02-02
modified 2002-02-12
published 2002-02-12
reporter kundera
source https://www.exploit-db.com/download/21296/
title Cisco IOS 11/12 Malformed SNMP Message Denial of Service Vulnerabilities
nessus via4
  • NASL family CISCO
    NASL id CSCDW67458.NASL
    description There is a vulnerability in the way the remote device handles SNMP messages. An attacker may use this flaw to crash the remote device continuously. This vulnerability is documented as Cisco bug ID CSCdw67458.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-06-27
    plugin id 10987
    published 2002-06-05
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=10987
    title Cisco Malformed SNMP Message Handling DoS (CSCdw67458)
  • NASL family SNMP
    NASL id SNMP_OVERSIZED_LENGTH_FIELD_DOS.NASL
    description It was possible to disable the remote SNMP daemon by sending a malformed packet advertising bogus length fields. An attacker may use this flaw to prevent you from using SNMP to administer your network (or use other flaws to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the SNMP daemon).
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-07-30
    plugin id 10857
    published 2002-02-13
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=10857
    title Multiple Vendor Malformed SNMP Message-Handling DoS
oval via4
  • accepted 2011-05-16T04:02:40.839-04:00
    class vulnerability
    contributors
    • name Harvey Rubinovitz
      organization The MITRE Corporation
    • name Harvey Rubinovitz
      organization The MITRE Corporation
    • name Shane Shaffer
      organization G2, Inc.
    • name Sudhir Gandhe
      organization Telos
    • name Shane Shaffer
      organization G2, Inc.
    description Vulnerabilities in the SNMPv1 request handling of a large number of SNMP implementations allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service or gain privileges via (1) GetRequest, (2) GetNextRequest, and (3) SetRequest messages, as demonstrated by the PROTOS c06-SNMPv1 test suite. NOTE: It is highly likely that this candidate will be SPLIT into multiple candidates, one or more for each vendor. This and other SNMP-related candidates will be updated when more accurate information is available.
    family windows
    id oval:org.mitre.oval:def:298
    status accepted
    submitted 2003-10-10T12:00:00.000-04:00
    title Windows 2000 SNMPv1 Trap Handling DoS and Privilege Escalation (Test 2)
    version 68
  • accepted 2016-02-08T10:00:00.000-05:00
    class vulnerability
    contributors
    • name Harvey Rubinovitz
      organization The MITRE Corporation
    • name Jonathan Baker
      organization The MITRE Corporation
    definition_extensions
    comment Microsoft Windows NT is installed
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:36
    description Vulnerabilities in the SNMPv1 request handling of a large number of SNMP implementations allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service or gain privileges via (1) GetRequest, (2) GetNextRequest, and (3) SetRequest messages, as demonstrated by the PROTOS c06-SNMPv1 test suite. NOTE: It is highly likely that this candidate will be SPLIT into multiple candidates, one or more for each vendor. This and other SNMP-related candidates will be updated when more accurate information is available.
    family windows
    id oval:org.mitre.oval:def:87
    status accepted
    submitted 2003-10-10T12:00:00.000-04:00
    title SNMPv1 Request Handling DoS and Privilege Escalation
    version 67
redhat via4
advisories
rhsa
id RHSA-2001:163
refmap via4
caldera CSSA-2002-SCO.4
cert CA-2002-03
cert-vn VU#854306
iss 20020212 PROTOS Remote SNMP Attack Tool
misc http://www.ee.oulu.fi/research/ouspg/protos/testing/c06/snmpv1/index.html
ms MS02-006
sgi 20020201-01-A
sunalert 57404
Last major update 10-09-2008 - 15:11
Published 13-02-2002 - 00:00
Last modified 12-10-2018 - 17:30
Back to Top