<p>Microsoft is investigating reports of a remote code execution vulnerability in MSHTML that affects Microsoft Windows. Microsoft is aware…
<p>Microsoft is investigating reports of a remote code execution vulnerability in MSHTML that affects Microsoft Windows. Microsoft is aware of targeted attacks that attempt to exploit this vulnerability by using specially-crafted Microsoft Office documents.</p> <p>An attacker could craft a malicious ActiveX control to be used by a Microsoft Office document that hosts the browser rendering engine. The attacker would then have to convince the user to open the malicious document. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than users who operate with administrative user rights.</p> <p>Microsoft Defender Antivirus and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint both provide detection and protections for the known vulnerability. Customers should keep antimalware products up to date. Customers who utilize automatic updates do not need to take additional action. Enterprise customers who manage updates should select the detection build 1.349.22.0 or newer and deploy it across their environments. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint alerts will be displayed as: “Suspicious Cpl File Execution”.</p> <p>Upon completion of this investigation, Microsoft will take the appropriate action to help protect our customers. This may include providing a security update through our monthly release process or providing an out-of-cycle security update, depending on customer needs.</p> <p>Please see the <strong>Mitigations</strong> and <strong>Workaround</strong> sections for important information about steps you can take to protect your system from this vulnerability.</p> <p><strong>UPDATE</strong> September 14, 2021: Microsoft has released security updates to address this vulnerability. Please see the Security Updates table for the applicable update for your system. We recommend that you install these updates immediately. Please see the FAQ for important information about which updates are applicable to your system.</p>
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/22.html →Open in CWE collection →This attack targets the encoding of the URL combined with the encoding of the slash characters. An attacker can take advantage of the multiple ways of encoding a URL and abuse the interpretation of the URL. A URL may contain special character that need special syntax handling in order to be interpreted. Special characters are represented using a percentage character followed by two digits representing the octet code of the original character (%HEX-CODE). For instance US-ASCII space character would be represented with %20. This is often referred as escaped ending or percent-encoding. Since the server decodes the URL from the requests, it may restrict the access to some URL paths by validating and filtering out the URL requests it received. An attacker will try to craft an URL with a sequence of special characters which once interpreted by the server will be equivalent to a forbidden URL. It can be difficult to protect against this attack since the URL can contain other format of encoding such as UTF-8 encoding, Unicode-encoding, etc.
https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/64.html →Open in CAPEC collection →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.
https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/76.html →Open in CAPEC collection →This attack targets the use of the backslash in alternate encoding. An adversary can provide a backslash as a leading character and causes a parser to believe that the next character is special. This is called an escape. By using that trick, the adversary tries to exploit alternate ways to encode the same character which leads to filter problems and opens avenues to attack.
https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/78.html →Open in CAPEC collection →This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An adversary 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 adversary 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.
https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/79.html →Open in CAPEC collection →An adversary uses path manipulation methods to exploit insufficient input validation of a target to obtain access to data that should be not be retrievable by ordinary well-formed requests. A typical variety of this attack involves specifying a path to a desired file together with dot-dot-slash characters, resulting in the file access API or function traversing out of the intended directory structure and into the root file system. By replacing or modifying the expected path information the access function or API retrieves the file desired by the attacker. These attacks either involve the attacker providing a complete path to a targeted file or using control characters (e.g. path separators (/ or \) and/or dots (.)) to reach desired directories or files.
https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/126.html →Open in CAPEC collection →| Product | Vendor | Status |
|---|---|---|
| windows_10_1507 | * | Exploited |
| windows_10_1607 | * | Exploited |
| windows_10_1809 | * | Exploited |
| windows_10_1909 | * | Exploited |
| windows_10_2004 | * | Exploited |
| windows_10_20h2 | * | Exploited |
| windows_10_21h1 | * | Exploited |
| windows_7 | * | Exploited |
| windows_8.1 | * | Exploited |
| windows_rt_8.1 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_2004 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_2008 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_2012 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_2016 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_2019 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_2022 | * | Exploited |
| windows_server_20h2 | * | Exploited |
| Windows | Microsoft | Exploited |
| Windows | Microsoft | Exploited |
| Windows | Microsoft | Exploited |