ID CVE-2017-9000
Summary ArubaOS, all versions prior to 6.3.1.25, 6.4 prior to 6.4.4.16, 6.5.x prior to 6.5.1.9, 6.5.2, 6.5.3 prior to 6.5.3.3, 6.5.4 prior to 6.5.4.2, 8.x prior to 8.1.0.4 FIPS and non-FIPS versions of software are both affected equally is vulnerable to unauthenticated arbitrary file access. An unauthenticated user with network access to an Aruba mobility controller on TCP port 8080 or 8081 may be able to access arbitrary files stored on the mobility controller. Ports 8080 and 8081 are used for captive portal functionality and are listening, by default, on all IP interfaces of the mobility controller, including captive portal interfaces. The attacker could access files which could contain passwords, keys, and other sensitive information that could lead to full system compromise.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • cpe:2.3:o:hp:arubaos:6.5.2
    cpe:2.3:o:hp:arubaos:6.5.2
CVSS
Base: 5.0
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-200
CAPEC
  • Subverting Environment Variable Values
    The attacker directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The attacker's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the attacker.
  • Footprinting
    An attacker engages in probing and exploration activity to identify constituents and properties of the target. Footprinting is a general term to describe a variety of information gathering techniques, often used by attackers in preparation for some attack. It consists of using tools to learn as much as possible about the composition, configuration, and security mechanisms of the targeted application, system or network. Information that might be collected during a footprinting effort could include open ports, applications and their versions, network topology, and similar information. While footprinting is not intended to be damaging (although certain activities, such as network scans, can sometimes cause disruptions to vulnerable applications inadvertently) it may often pave the way for more damaging attacks.
  • Exploiting Trust in Client (aka Make the Client Invisible)
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by placing themselves in the communication channel between client and server such that communication directly to the server is possible where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
  • Browser Fingerprinting
    An attacker carefully crafts small snippets of Java Script to efficiently detect the type of browser the potential victim is using. Many web-based attacks need prior knowledge of the web browser including the version of browser to ensure successful exploitation of a vulnerability. Having this knowledge allows an attacker to target the victim with attacks that specifically exploit known or zero day weaknesses in the type and version of the browser used by the victim. Automating this process via Java Script as a part of the same delivery system used to exploit the browser is considered more efficient as the attacker can supply a browser fingerprinting method and integrate it with exploit code, all contained in Java Script and in response to the same web page request by the browser.
  • Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
    This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
  • Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)
    This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
  • Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding
    This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An attacker would try to exploit common filtering problems related to the use of the slashes characters to gain access to resources on the target host. Directory-driven systems, such as file systems and databases, typically use the slash character to indicate traversal between directories or other container components. For murky historical reasons, PCs (and, as a result, Microsoft OSs) choose to use a backslash, whereas the UNIX world typically makes use of the forward slash. The schizophrenic result is that many MS-based systems are required to understand both forms of the slash. This gives the attacker many opportunities to discover and abuse a number of common filtering problems. The goal of this pattern is to discover server software that only applies filters to one version, but not the other.
nessus via4
NASL family Misc.
NASL id ARUBAOS_2017_006.NASL
description The version of ArubaOS installed on the remote host is affected by multiple vulnerabilities, including SQL Injection, remote code execution, arbitrary file access, and multiple memory corruption flaws.
last seen 2019-01-16
modified 2018-11-15
plugin id 104176
published 2017-10-25
reporter Tenable
source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=104176
title ArubaOS Multiple Vulnerabilities (2017-006)
refmap via4
confirm http://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/alert/ARUBA-PSA-2017-006.txt
sectrack 1039580
Last major update 07-08-2018 - 21:29
Published 06-08-2018 - 16:29
Last modified 18-10-2018 - 08:34
Back to Top