MSRC blog on the current 0-day .ani vulnerability

B

Bill Sanderson MVP

http://blogs.technet.com/msrc/archive/2007/03/30/update-on-microsoft-security-advisory-935423.aspx

Hello everyone,

This is Christopher Budd. We’ve gotten some questions from customers around
the security advisory that we released yesterday, Microsoft Security
Advisory (935423). Specifically, we’ve been getting questions about:

· When we learned about the vulnerability

· When we learned about the attack

· What we’re doing to help protect customers

· When we expect to release an update

· Our recommendation around 3rd party workarounds or updates



I wanted to take a few minutes to answer these questions and give you the
latest information on the situation.

When we learned about the vulnerability

We were first made aware of the vulnerability in Windows Animated Cursor
Handling on December 20, 2006 when it was responsibly reported to us by a
security researcher at Determina. My colleague Adrian Stone took the report
and immediately began an investigation, working with Determina on the issue.
We have been working on this investigation since December to fully
understand the issue and have been working to develop a comprehensive update
as part of our standard MSRC process. Determina has been and continues to
work with us responsibly on this issue, and we thank them for helping us to
protect customers.

When we learned about the attack

We first learned about the attack when were notified on Wednesday March 28,
2007 afternoon by McAfee through our Microsoft Security Response Alliance
(MSRA) program. McAfee contacted us about a new, limited attack using an
unknown method. We immediately initiated our Software Security Incident
Response Process (SSIRP) to investigate the issue. Our investigation
determined that the attack was utilizing this particular vulnerability. Our
security teams worked overnight, and we released Microsoft Security Advisory
(935423) on the morning of March 29, 2007 with information about the
situation and steps that customers can take to protect themselves.

It is important to note that this issue wasn’t publicly disclosed by
Determina. Sometimes issues that are reported to us responsibly by a
security researcher are later found independently by other researchers who
choose not to handle that issue responsibly and that is the case here.

What we’re doing to help protect customers

When we initiate our SSIRP process for an issue like this, our teams work
constantly until the issue is resolved and customers are protected. We
published the security advisory as part of that process, but that’s not all
we do, and we don’t stop once we publish the advisory. As part of our SSIRP
process we have multiple teams focused on ongoing work that can help better
protect customers while we are working on a security update and we’re using
them fully in this incident.

Our teams that focus on working with our partners through the MSRA have
provided information to these partners through the MSRA that they can use to
build signatures for products such as antivirus and intrusion detection and
protection systems. These signatures can detect and protect against attempts
to exploit the specific vulnerability. We also work with these partners to
constantly monitor the threat environment for any changes which helps us
with our ongoing assessment of the situation. We’ve also worked with
partners and law enforcement to remove malicious sites that are attempting
to exploit this vulnerability when our investigations have uncovered them.

We also have people like Jonathan on our security teams who continuously
investigate the technical issues to better understand them and come up with
more and better ways customers can protect themselves. As we have new
information from our ongoing monitoring, research, and communications with
partners, we update the security advisory with that information. So for
example, we made an update last night to the advisory after our ongoing
research found that “read as plain text” wasn’t a comprehensive protection
for Outlook Express and would not always protect Windows Mail when
forwarding or replying to the attackers’ email. We also updated the advisory
to show that while the attacks are still limited, they were no longer
targeted based on information from our ongoing monitoring.

When an update will be released

Our teams are actively working on a security update for this issue and we
currently plan to release it as part of our regular monthly update process.
That said, we are actively monitoring this situation as part of our process
and will always consider releasing an out of cycle update if we have a
quality update available and customers are at serious risk: we have done
this before and can do it here if appropriate. However, we always try to
release updates as part of our regular monthly release cycle because
customers have told us that it’s easier for them to test and deploy updates
when they’re released as part of a predictable process.

3rd party workarounds or updates

While we appreciate that these are provided to help protect customers, we do
recommend that customers only apply security updates and mitigations
provided by the original software vendor. This is because as the maker of
the software, we can give our security updates and guidance thorough testing
and evaluation for quality and application compatibility purposes. We’re not
able to provide similar testing for independent third party security updates
or mitigations.

I hope this helps answer questions people have about the situation and what
we’re doing. We will continue to monitor and investigate this situation and
make new information available through the MSRC weblog and our security
advisory as we have it.

Thanks.

Christopher

*This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.*


--
 
G

Guest

This might be a good time to switch to using your Backup/Emergency copy of
FireFox if you have one.

"Craig Schmugar, a virus researcher for McAfee Avert Labs, the research arm
of McAfee... ...So far, he said, attacks have been limited to Web surfing
with Internet Explorer versions 6 or 7. Firefox, the open-source browser from
Mozilla, does not yet seem vulnerable."


But who knows what else we might find out.

Be careful out there boys and girls,
"Shields Up, Scripts Off"

?:-\
Tim
Only the Paranoid Survive
 
G

Guest

Bill Sanderson MVP said:

Here we go again. So much of this is incomprehensible to me that I barely
know what questions to ask. Since I don't use an email client and never open
an email from any address I don't recognise, I don't think I'm too worried
about the email side of things.

But can someone please tell me in simple terms what, if any, security
settings I should apply to IE6 to guard against this exploit? Or are there
none? Is that the problem?
 
G

Guest

But can someone please tell me what security settings I should apply to IE6
to guard against this exploit? Or are there none? Is that the problem?
There are none, That is the problem.

?:-(
Tim
Geek w/o Portfolio
Tantum Suspiciosissimi Supersunt
 
G

Guest

If I understand correctlly, the exploit relates to the animated cursor
element which itself forms part of the Windows OS so presumeably there is
nothing you can do, right now, to configure IE (as Tim suggests) except
becareful what sites you go to. For this I use McAfee`s Site Advisor plus
which will prevent you from going to any suspect site unless you decide to
overide its warning. For me this has worked very well with both IE7 and
Firefox. On the email side of things, the security advisory also suggests we
should be careful of opening both `known` and `unknown emails.`

Stu
 
G

Guest

Robin,
You posted in reply to my post, so I will try to give an answer, but I am
not the best person for this.

Simply put, You browse to a site which has the exploit in it's html code!
I'm am not trying to be curt or funny. It is that simple.

Or you open a malicious email [this part is really confusing about which
readers in what mode [preview or open] and if you try to forward or reply in
some of them].

It's scary I tell you. I don't use MS mail programs myself, but am
currently reading all of my mail thru the Yahoo site just to be safe.

Someone has posted a temporary patch out there but I'm not going to use it
[or link to it] till someone like BillS gives some feed back about it and
about how easy it is to Uninstall.

Sorry I could not give a better reply,

?:-(
Tim
Geek w/o Portfolio
Tantum Suspiciosissimi Supersunt
 
G

Guest

Stu,

I use the McAfee Site Advisor [not plus] extension in my Firefox.
Is there a way to test if it will "prevent you from going to any suspect
site unless you decide to overide its warning". I've seen the red flag [icon
bar] but would like to know how to see if it will prompt me before going to a
Really Bad [exploit] site.
Does it use/need JavaScript, as I generally have it turned off or blocked
using the NoScript extention. Does it make a pop up window that says "Are
you sure" or what?

Thanks in Advance,
?:)

:

For this I use McAfee`s Site Advisor plus
 
G

Guest

Hi Tim

Good question and one which I have never had the courage to try before I
upgraded to the plus version although I strongly suspect it would not which
is probably why you have to pay a few bucks for the extra protection plus
gives you. With plus if you select a red, amber or untested link you will
automatically be redirected to a McAfee warning page where you can carefully
study the site reports before proceeding further. If you decide not to
proceed then there is a back link button which will return you to the page
you were viewing before. As for Java. It doesn`t seem to need it as I`ve used
with it turned on and off. In fact, right now I have it off.

Hope this helps.

Stu

Tim Clark said:
Stu,

I use the McAfee Site Advisor [not plus] extension in my Firefox.
Is there a way to test if it will "prevent you from going to any suspect
site unless you decide to overide its warning". I've seen the red flag [icon
bar] but would like to know how to see if it will prompt me before going to a
Really Bad [exploit] site.
Does it use/need JavaScript, as I generally have it turned off or blocked
using the NoScript extention. Does it make a pop up window that says "Are
you sure" or what?

Thanks in Advance,
?:)

:

For this I use McAfee`s Site Advisor plus
which will prevent you from going to any suspect site unless you decide to
overide its warning. For me this has worked very well with both IE7 and
Firefox. ...

Stu
 
T

Tom Emmelot

Hi Tim,

I use Trend and than happens this!

Regards >*< TOM >*<

Tim Clark schreef:
Stu,

I use the McAfee Site Advisor [not plus] extension in my Firefox.
Is there a way to test if it will "prevent you from going to any suspect
site unless you decide to overide its warning". I've seen the red flag [icon
bar] but would like to know how to see if it will prompt me before going to a
Really Bad [exploit] site.
Does it use/need JavaScript, as I generally have it turned off or blocked
using the NoScript extention. Does it make a pop up window that says "Are
you sure" or what?

Thanks in Advance,
?:)

:

For this I use McAfee`s Site Advisor plus
which will prevent you from going to any suspect site unless you decide to
overide its warning. For me this has worked very well with both IE7 and
Firefox. ...

Stu
 
G

Guest

Interesting Stu,

While waiting for your reply I visited the SiteAdvisor site and could not
find a "Plus" version for Firefox ,only for IE. The only version I could
find for Firefox was the free version. Perhaps the SiteAdvisor for IE uses
an activeX control to block you before going to an "exploit" site. Since FF
does not use activeX this would imply it would not work. [or that I'm just to
blind to find the Plus version for FF, got a link??]

You mention that you have "Java" [I assume you mean JavaScript] turned off .
That seems strange as well, as this newsgroup requires JavaScript [unless of
course you are not using a browser, in which case it would not matter.]

Interesting, verrrrry interesting,
?:)
Tim


Stu said:
Hi Tim

Good question and one which I have never had the courage to try before I
upgraded to the plus version although I strongly suspect it would not which
is probably why you have to pay a few bucks for the extra protection plus
gives you. With plus if you select a red, amber or untested link you will
automatically be redirected to a McAfee warning page where you can carefully
study the site reports before proceeding further. If you decide not to
proceed then there is a back link button which will return you to the page
you were viewing before. As for Java. It doesn`t seem to need it as I`ve used
with it turned on and off. In fact, right now I have it off.

Hope this helps.

Stu

Tim Clark said:
Stu,

I use the McAfee Site Advisor [not plus] extension in my Firefox.
Is there a way to test if it will "prevent you from going to any suspect
site unless you decide to overide its warning". I've seen the red flag [icon
bar] but would like to know how to see if it will prompt me before going to a
Really Bad [exploit] site.
Does it use/need JavaScript, as I generally have it turned off or blocked
using the NoScript extention. Does it make a pop up window that says "Are
you sure" or what?

Thanks in Advance,
?:)

:

For this I use McAfee`s Site Advisor plus
which will prevent you from going to any suspect site unless you decide to
overide its warning. For me this has worked very well with both IE7 and
Firefox. ...

Stu
 
G

Guest

Stu said:
If I understand correctlly, the exploit relates to the animated cursor
element which itself forms part of the Windows OS so presumeably there is
nothing you can do, right now, to configure IE (as Tim suggests) except
becareful what sites you go to.

Thanks Tim, and thanks Stu. Those are pretty effective, if depressing answers.

If one DID happen to encounter such a website.... what would happen? Would
we recognise that anything bad had happened? Or do we simply not know,
because we don't know how the vulnerability would be exploited?
 
G

Guest

Type carefully folks,

this site should be avoided at ALL costs,
I only mention it because of the obvious,

==============
microfsot [dot] com
==============

again, type CAREFULLY!!!

?:-(
Tim
Geek w/o Portfolio
Only the Paranoid Survive
 
G

Guest

You would have NO way of knowing if you were hit by the .ani exploit itself.
What it contained is another matter. Hopefully your AV provider is keeping
updated with what "packages" the exploit is trying to deliver.

Browse carefully, NOT a good day to visit New and Exciting sites!

Sorry to be so short but church starts in 20 minutes and I have to log off
for now.

Bye
?:)
Tim
 
B

Bill Sanderson MVP

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/935423.mspx

is Microsoft's current advice. It isn't designed for the average user,
however.

They mention that you should be careful opening email from either folks you
know OR folks you don't--either could be infected.

The only listed workaround involves users of Outlook 2002 or later (NOT
Outlook Express)--in those cases, read as plain text eliminates the
vulnerability.

Keeping your antivirus current, and watching for critical patches are the
things to do at this point.

The risk is with HTML content--either at a web site, or in an email.


--
 
B

Bill Sanderson MVP

I haven't looked at the third-party patch yet. In the past, some of these
have been simple and easy to install or remove, and effective, and others
not. For the moment, I'd wait.

I agree with the comments here--the main workaround is not to read email
which might contain html code except in Outlook 2002 or later with read in
plain text mode turned on--not Outlook Express. And there is no workaround
for Internet Explorer.

The number of sites and domains is still limited, but this one may be
spreading sooner than has been the case with some earlier exploits.

Microsoft has been aware of this vulnerability--responsibly and privately
disclosed to them, for some time--so it is likely that work on a patch has
been under way for some time as well.

--

Tim Clark said:
Robin,
You posted in reply to my post, so I will try to give an answer, but I am
not the best person for this.

Simply put, You browse to a site which has the exploit in it's html code!
I'm am not trying to be curt or funny. It is that simple.

Or you open a malicious email [this part is really confusing about which
readers in what mode [preview or open] and if you try to forward or reply
in
some of them].

It's scary I tell you. I don't use MS mail programs myself, but am
currently reading all of my mail thru the Yahoo site just to be safe.

Someone has posted a temporary patch out there but I'm not going to use it
[or link to it] till someone like BillS gives some feed back about it and
about how easy it is to Uninstall.

Sorry I could not give a better reply,

?:-(
Tim
Geek w/o Portfolio
Tantum Suspiciosissimi Supersunt

Robinb said:
in simple terms can you explain how you can get his exploit?
robin
"Tim Clark" wrote
 
B

Bill Sanderson MVP

The domains I have seen mentioned at isc.sans.org have been used to
distribute malware before--so they may already be blocked .

I don't believe that JavaScript is involved in this one.

--

Tim Clark said:
Stu,

I use the McAfee Site Advisor [not plus] extension in my Firefox.
Is there a way to test if it will "prevent you from going to any suspect
site unless you decide to overide its warning". I've seen the red flag
[icon
bar] but would like to know how to see if it will prompt me before going
to a
Really Bad [exploit] site.
Does it use/need JavaScript, as I generally have it turned off or blocked
using the NoScript extention. Does it make a pop up window that says "Are
you sure" or what?

Thanks in Advance,
?:)

:

For this I use McAfee`s Site Advisor plus
which will prevent you from going to any suspect site unless you decide
to
overide its warning. For me this has worked very well with both IE7 and
Firefox. ...

Stu
 
B

Bill Sanderson MVP

I haven't tested this to find out.

The exploit itself would not raise any flags, but I would expect that
Windows Defender and your antivirus would both raise warnings about whatever
package attempts to install itself via the vulnerability.

I'd like to think that a perceptive user would notice some unusual activity,
but I've never actually tested this to see what it would be like, and I
suspect that most users wouldn't notice a thing.

--
 
A

Anonymous Bob

Tim Clark said:
Type carefully folks,

this site should be avoided at ALL costs,
I only mention it because of the obvious,

==============
microfsot [dot] com
==============

again, type CAREFULLY!!!

I've read that there are now over a hundred sites are spreading the
exploits. There are also many variations. It isn't only .ani files as the
file extension could be jpeg or others.

The most comprehensive list of sites and file hashes I've seen so far is
here:
http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=2540

If you use OE under Tools | Options | Read check the box for "Read all
messages in plain text". Please note that this is *not* a total defense as
you can still be infected if you reply to or forward a message.

Be careful out there,
Bob Vanderveen
 
B

Bill Sanderson MVP

This would be an excellent site to add to a hosts file, to block access.

127.0.0.1 and the site name as below, substituting the obvious.

There are definitely times that using hosts-file based blocking may make
good sense, and this is probably one.

--

Tim Clark said:
Type carefully folks,

this site should be avoided at ALL costs,
I only mention it because of the obvious,

==============
microfsot [dot] com
==============

again, type CAREFULLY!!!

?:-(
Tim
Geek w/o Portfolio
Only the Paranoid Survive


Bill Sanderson MVP said:
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top