Remote exploit released for Windows Vista SMB2 worm hole
Summary: A team of security researchers have created a reliable remote exploit capable of spawning a worm through an unpatched security hole in Microsoft's Windows operating system.
Security researchers at penetration testing firm Immunity have created a reliable remote exploit capable of spawning a worm through an unpatched security hole in Microsoft's dominant Windows operating system.
A team of exploit writers led by Kostya Kortchinsky attacked the known SMB v2 vulnerability and created a remote exploit that's been fitted into Immunity's Canvas pen-testing platform. The exploit hits all versions of Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 SP2, according to Immunity's Dave Aitel.
[ SEE: Microsoft confirms SMB2 vulnerability, warns of code execution risk ]
Immunity's Canvas is used by IDS (intrusion detection companies) and larger penetrating testing firms as a risk management tool.
Exploit writers at the freely available Metasploit Project are also close to finishing a reliable exploit for the vulnerability, according to Metasploit's HD Moore.
The vulnerability, which was originally released as a denial-of-service issue, does not affect the RTM version of Windows 7, Microsoft said. It appears Microsoft fixed the flaw in Windows 7 build ~7130, just after RC1. Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 users remain at risk.
In the absence of patch, Microsoft recommends that users disable SMB v2 and block TCP ports 139 and 445 at the firewall.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Time for an out-of-cycle patch Microsoft. nt
Why?
See replies to:
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12691-0.html?
forumID=1&threadID=68933&messageID=1317773
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12691-0.html?
forumID=1&threadID=68879&messageID=1316529
You mean like this:
And this:
http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12691-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=68933&messageID=1318329
You must have a different definition of denial than I do.
Did you even read what I wrote?
But hey, feel free to continue to put words in my mouth.
This exploit doesn't count
Cue the double standards...
It's called "Proof of concept".
But feel free not to apply the eventual(?) patch yourself, if you [i]really[/i] insist.
[i]Cue the double standards...[/i]
Huh? If this wormhole had been discovered in any Linux-based OS then [i]certain[/i] characters on these message boards would be wetting themselves in glee. So perhaps by "double standards" you are referring to how curiously quiet it is in here?
/me slips a fresh battery into Zogg's sarcasm detector ;)
Ah - so like a Nostradamus prophesy...
Naa, not really ;-)
You might be struggling. I had no problem...
Understand? Yes. Agree? No. (nt)
In this case...
Mind you, considering the stated downside of a successful hack I reckon Vista users would expect a patch ASAP.
Gee, that sounds suspiciously like a marketshare argument
low incidence of Vista machines compared to the
overall pool of potential victims[/i]
Want to rephrase?
No....
But apparently you chose not to read that.
Bothering to exploit a vulnerability most comes down to a cost-benefit analysis where market share is only one variable. Although sometimes it is done without regard to that, because "it might come in handy later."
NonZealot's fine
files:-)
Sharing files in OS X is very unintuitive
Odd...
Of course...
I guess that was lost on you.
If a house CAN be burgled, ....
@NonZealot
Look at the bright side, at least ZDNet is making their sensationalist headlines balanced.
The difference is