ID CVE-2007-5191
Summary mount and umount in util-linux and loop-aes-utils call the setuid and setgid functions in the wrong order and do not check the return values, which might allow attackers to gain privileges via helpers such as mount.nfs.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • cpe:2.3:a:andries_brouwer:util-linux:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:a:andries_brouwer:util-linux:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:a:debian_loop-aes_team:loop-aes-utils:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:a:debian_loop-aes_team:loop-aes-utils:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
CVSS
Base: 6.9 (as of 15-10-2018 - 21:41)
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
LOCAL MEDIUM NONE
Impact
ConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE
cvss-vector via4 AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
oval via4
accepted 2013-04-29T04:01:38.804-04:00
class vulnerability
contributors
  • name Aharon Chernin
    organization SCAP.com, LLC
  • name Dragos Prisaca
    organization G2, Inc.
definition_extensions
  • comment The operating system installed on the system is Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:11782
  • comment CentOS Linux 3.x
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:16651
  • comment The operating system installed on the system is Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:11831
  • comment CentOS Linux 4.x
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:16636
  • comment Oracle Linux 4.x
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:15990
  • comment The operating system installed on the system is Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:11414
  • comment The operating system installed on the system is CentOS Linux 5.x
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:15802
  • comment Oracle Linux 5.x
    oval oval:org.mitre.oval:def:15459
description mount and umount in util-linux and loop-aes-utils call the setuid and setgid functions in the wrong order and do not check the return values, which might allow attackers to gain privileges via helpers such as mount.nfs.
family unix
id oval:org.mitre.oval:def:10101
status accepted
submitted 2010-07-09T03:56:16-04:00
title mount and umount in util-linux and loop-aes-utils call the setuid and setgid functions in the wrong order and do not check the return values, which might allow attackers to gain privileges via helpers such as mount.nfs.
version 24
redhat via4
advisories
bugzilla
id 320041
title CVE-2007-5191 util-linux (u)mount doesn't drop privileges properly when calling helpers
oval
OR
  • AND
    • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 is installed
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhba:tst:20070026001
    • OR
      • AND
        • comment losetup is earlier than 0:2.11y-31.24
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969004
        • comment losetup is signed with Red Hat master key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969005
      • AND
        • comment mount is earlier than 0:2.11y-31.24
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969006
        • comment mount is signed with Red Hat master key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969007
      • AND
        • comment util-linux is earlier than 0:2.11y-31.24
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969002
        • comment util-linux is signed with Red Hat master key
          oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070235003
  • AND
    • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 is installed
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhba:tst:20070304001
    • comment util-linux is earlier than 0:2.12a-17.el4_6.1
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969009
    • comment util-linux is signed with Red Hat master key
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070235003
  • AND
    • comment Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 is installed
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhba:tst:20070331001
    • comment util-linux is earlier than 0:2.13-0.45.el5_1.1
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhsa:tst:20070969011
    • comment util-linux is signed with Red Hat redhatrelease key
      oval oval:com.redhat.rhba:tst:20090070003
rhsa
id RHSA-2007:0969
released 2007-11-15
severity Moderate
title RHSA-2007:0969: util-linux security update (Moderate)
rpms
  • losetup-0:2.11y-31.24
  • mount-0:2.11y-31.24
  • util-linux-0:2.11y-31.24
  • util-linux-0:2.12a-17.el4_6.1
  • util-linux-0:2.13-0.45.el5_1.1
refmap via4
bid 25973
bugtraq
  • 20080108 VMSA-2008-0001 Moderate OpenPegasus PAM Authentication Buffer Overflow and updated service console packages
  • 20080123 UPDATED VMSA-2008-0001.1 Moderate OpenPegasus PAM Authentication Buffer Overflow and updated service console packages
confirm
debian
  • DSA-1449
  • DSA-1450
fedora FEDORA-2007-2462
gentoo GLSA-200710-18
mandriva MDKSA-2007:198
mlist [Security-announce] 20080107 VMSA-2008-0001 Moderate OpenPegasus PAM Authentication Buffer Overflow and updated service console packages
sectrack 1018782
secunia
  • 27104
  • 27122
  • 27145
  • 27188
  • 27283
  • 27354
  • 27399
  • 27687
  • 28348
  • 28349
  • 28368
  • 28469
suse SUSE-SR:2007:022
ubuntu USN-533-1
vupen
  • ADV-2007-3417
  • ADV-2008-0064
statements via4
contributor Mark J Cox
lastmodified 2009-06-01
organization Red Hat
statement Updates are available to address this issue: https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0969.html
Last major update 15-10-2018 - 21:41
Published 04-10-2007 - 16:17
Back to Top