ID CVE-2014-8990
Summary default-rsyncssh.lua in Lsyncd 2.1.5 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in a filename.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • Debian Linux 7.0
    cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux:7.0
  • Fedora 19
    cpe:2.3:o:fedoraproject:fedora:19
  • Fedora 20
    cpe:2.3:o:fedoraproject:fedora:20
  • cpe:2.3:a:lsyncd_project:lsyncd:2.1.5
    cpe:2.3:a:lsyncd_project:lsyncd:2.1.5
CVSS
Base: 7.5 (as of 02-09-2016 - 20:27)
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-77
CAPEC
  • Cause Web Server Misclassification
    An attack of this type exploits a Web server's decision to take action based on filename or file extension. Because different file types are handled by different server processes, misclassification may force the Web server to take unexpected action, or expected actions in an unexpected sequence. This may cause the server to exhaust resources, supply debug or system data to the attacker, or bind an attacker to a remote process. This type of vulnerability has been found in many widely used servers including IIS, Lotus Domino, and Orion. The attacker's job in this case is straightforward, standard communication protocols and methods are used and are generally appended with malicious information at the tail end of an otherwise legitimate request. The attack payload varies, but it could be special characters like a period or simply appending a tag that has a special meaning for operations on the server side like .jsp for a java application server. The essence of this attack is that the attacker deceives the server into executing functionality based on the name of the request, i.e. login.jsp, not the contents.
  • LDAP Injection
    An attacker manipulates or crafts an LDAP query for the purpose of undermining the security of the target. Some applications use user input to create LDAP queries that are processed by an LDAP server. For example, a user might provide their username during authentication and the username might be inserted in an LDAP query during the authentication process. An attacker could use this input to inject additional commands into an LDAP query that could disclose sensitive information. For example, entering a * in the aforementioned query might return information about all users on the system. This attack is very similar to an SQL injection attack in that it manipulates a query to gather additional information or coerce a particular return value.
  • Command Delimiters
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that allows an attacker's commands to be concatenated onto a legitimate command with the intent of targeting other resources such as the file system or database. The system that uses a filter or a blacklist input validation, as opposed to whitelist validation is vulnerable to an attacker who predicts delimiters (or combinations of delimiters) not present in the filter or blacklist. As with other injection attacks, the attacker uses the command delimiter payload as an entry point to tunnel through the application and activate additional attacks through SQL queries, shell commands, network scanning, and so on.
  • File System Function Injection, Content Based
    An attack of this type exploits the host's trust in executing remote content including binary files. The files are poisoned with a malicious payload (targeting the file systems accessible by the target software) by the attacker and may be passed through standard channels such as via email, and standard web content like PDF and multimedia files. The attacker exploits known vulnerabilities or handling routines in the target processes. Vulnerabilities of this type have been found in a wide variety of commercial applications from Microsoft Office to Adobe Acrobat and Apple Safari web browser. When the attacker knows the standard handling routines and can identify vulnerabilities and entry points they can be exploited by otherwise seemingly normal content. Once the attack is executed, the attackers' program can access relative directories such as C:\Program Files or other standard system directories to launch further attacks. In a worst case scenario, these programs are combined with other propagation logic and work as a virus.
  • Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers
    An attacker supplies the target software with input data that contains sequences of special characters designed to bypass input validation logic. This exploit relies on the target making multiples passes over the input data and processing a "layer" of special characters with each pass. In this manner, the attacker can disguise input that would otherwise be rejected as invalid by concealing it with layers of special/escape characters that are stripped off by subsequent processing steps. The goal is to first discover cases where the input validation layer executes before one or more parsing layers. That is, user input may go through the following logic in an application: In such cases, the attacker will need to provide input that will pass through the input validator, but after passing through parser2, will be converted into something that the input validator was supposed to stop.
  • Argument Injection
    An attacker changes the behavior or state of a targeted application through injecting data or command syntax through the targets use of non-validated and non-filtered arguments of exposed services or methods.
  • Manipulating Writeable Configuration Files
    Generally these are manually edited files that are not in the preview of the system administrators, any ability on the attackers' behalf to modify these files, for example in a CVS repository, gives unauthorized access directly to the application, the same as authorized users.
  • 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
PARTIAL PARTIAL PARTIAL
nessus via4
  • NASL family Fedora Local Security Checks
    NASL id FEDORA_2014-15338.NASL
    description Fix bad shell argument escaping Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-12-05
    plugin id 79770
    published 2014-12-07
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=79770
    title Fedora 21 : lsyncd-2.1.5-6.fc21 (2014-15338)
  • NASL family Fedora Local Security Checks
    NASL id FEDORA_2014-15393.NASL
    description Fix bad shell argument escaping Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-12-05
    plugin id 79673
    published 2014-12-03
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=79673
    title Fedora 20 : lsyncd-2.1.4-4.fc20.1 (2014-15393)
  • NASL family Fedora Local Security Checks
    NASL id FEDORA_2014-15373.NASL
    description Fix bad shell argument escaping Note that Tenable Network Security has extracted the preceding description block directly from the Fedora security advisory. Tenable has attempted to automatically clean and format it as much as possible without introducing additional issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-12-05
    plugin id 79672
    published 2014-12-03
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=79672
    title Fedora 19 : lsyncd-2.1.4-4.fc19.1 (2014-15373)
  • NASL family Gentoo Local Security Checks
    NASL id GENTOO_GLSA-201702-05.NASL
    description The remote host is affected by the vulnerability described in GLSA-201702-05 (Lsyncd: Remote execution of arbitrary code) default-rsyncssh.lua in Lsyncd performed insufficient sanitising of filenames. Impact : An attacker, able to control files processed by Lsyncd, could possibly execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the process or cause a Denial of Service condition. Workaround : There is no known workaround at this time.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2017-02-13
    plugin id 97111
    published 2017-02-13
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=97111
    title GLSA-201702-05 : Lsyncd: Remote execution of arbitrary code
  • NASL family Debian Local Security Checks
    NASL id DEBIAN_DSA-3130.NASL
    description It was discovered that lsyncd, a daemon to synchronize local directories using rsync, performed insufficient sanitising of filenames which might result in the execution of arbitrary commands.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-28
    plugin id 80574
    published 2015-01-19
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=80574
    title Debian DSA-3130-1 : lsyncd - security update
refmap via4
bid 71179
confirm
debian DSA-3130
fedora
  • FEDORA-2014-15373
  • FEDORA-2014-15393
gentoo GLSA-201702-05
mlist
  • [oss-security] 20141119 CVE request: lsyncd command injection
  • [oss-security] 20141120 Re: CVE request: lsyncd command injection
secunia 62321
Last major update 02-01-2017 - 21:59
Published 05-12-2014 - 11:59
Last modified 30-06-2017 - 21:29
Back to Top