This is a copy of an email that I sent to Russ Cooper of NTbugtraq disagreeing with his recent analysis of 60 IIS 6 vulnerabilities.   Even when counting “vulnerabilities” with the server role as a web server, Russ’ counts are bit off.  I’ll let you guys do the math…..


 

I have to respectfully disagree with Russ that he made his analysis of “60 IIS 6 vulnerabilities” and the basis upon which he made this analysis clear cut in his first email to the NTbugtraq listserve on June 2nd. In his June 4th email he makes it clearer the methodology of his “counting”: He stated in his second email that “When I did this, I included all of the products that are installed by default on such a system (although I did create a category for W2K server which did not include IIS, something you can't get by default.) OE, IE, Media Player, VM, MDAC, (not MSDE), were all included, even on W2K3.”

 

http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/ntbugtraq/2004-q2/0063.html

http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/ntbugtraq/2004-q2/0080.html

 

This gets back to the long long age old argument of “them” versus “us”  and how do you compare two different systems and platforms. Russ said “we helped our customers stay  secure despite only recommending 3 Microsoft patches be applied  urgently last year”. That statement to me indicates that not all of  the 60 “IIS 6.0” vulnerabilities are created equal.

 

 So I [just for grins] took a look at each of these 60 vulnerabilities…  No matter how you count the vulnerabilities… I’ve got some issues with Russ’s count of the IIS 6 vulnerabilities.

 

 In the listing below I list the Security bulletins and my comments as  an Administrator who patches for this stuff. My comments are basically my “threat analysis”. All this discussion indicates is the timing of my patching, not the application or non application of the patch. My “methodology” is that if Shavlik’s HfnetchkPro says I need it, it gets applied no matter what. It’s just a question of timing, not a question of whether it does or does not get applied.

 

 This discussion also points out the interesting use of tool as verified by knowledge. When the bulletins come out and I read them for  what they apply to, I will be therefore be expecting them to “show up” as patches to be applied by my Patch Tool of choice, Shavliks’ hfnetchkPro. Therefore, I am confirming what my tool is telling me that I need to patch. I selected this patch tool because I need to patch right “now”, this moment. Scan, push, patch, reboot, rescan to confirm, done. This technique works for me and is just one of many techniques you can do with Shavlik's patch tool.. If there is a critical issue and the folks in big server land are “patching their perimeter servers, that means I’m patching that Tuesday night.

 

 Currently I feel that my workstations are my biggest threat vectors so  the analysis I’ve made below where I don’t consider Internet Explorer patches on my server to be significant issue, on my desktops, the  exact opposite is true. Russ indicates that IE patches may be more of a “home” issue, whereas in my environment, I feel that it is a desktop  issue as well.

 

 I was chatting with Brian Desmond who patches a lot more systems than  I do and he uses SUS [he’s an educational environment] and he said about 75% of his network is turned off at any point in time. Thus he  uses a different patch management technique to manage his network and has the workstations grab the patches as they come online. I think  it’s wise to have a process in place, no matter what size you are, but that’s just my opinion.

 

 Here’s my analysis – as always, your mileage may vary --- this is just  my two cents -- I think I'll leave it to the admins and researchers out here to do their own final count.

 


 

 MS03-004 (2 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-004:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-004.mspx

 KB 810847 This is a IE patch prior to date of shipment for Windows

 2003 and not on my SBS2k3 per scan by Shavlik hfnetchkPro? I’m not

 certain this is a vulnerability for Windows 2003/IIS 6.0?

 Improper Cross Domain Security Validation with dialog box CAN-2003-1326

 Improper Cross Domain Security Validation with ShowHelp functionality

 CAN-2003-1328

  


 

 MS03-014 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-014:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-014.mspx

 Outlook Express patch – KB 330994 Not sure about this one? Again this

 is not on my box and right around the time that Windows 2003 shipped.

 But assuming it is a Win2k3/IIS 6.0 issue… I don’t use my server for

 email, thus would not be a “put down my Mountain Dew and run screaming

 to the server to patch” bulletin.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2002-0980

  


 

 MS03-015 (7 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-015:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-015.mspx

 CU IE KB 813489 Is this for Win2k3 system? It is not on my system and

 it was right around the shipment of Windows 2003?

 URLMON.DLL Buffer Overrun: CAN-2003-0113

 File Upload Control vulnerability: CAN-2003-0114

 Third Party plug-in rendering: CAN-2003-0115

 Model Dialog script execution: CAN-2003-0116

 

 In the spirit of full disclosure, I’m not a security researcher; I’m

 an administrator so I’m not sure why there are 7 vulnerabilities

 counted by Russ and 4 CAN vulnerability tracking numbers listed? I

 can’t tell the methodology that Russ is using for that count, so I

 won't comment either way.

 


 

 MS03-017 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-017:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-017.mspx

 Media player skins. I could care less about downloading skins on any

 media player on my server.

 Customers running Windows Media Player 7.1 and Windows Media Player

 for Windows XP (Version 8) should apply the patch.

 I have media player 9 on my server anyway? I don’t have this bulletin

 on my SBS 2k3/Win2k3 server? Not on my SBS2k3 per scan by Shavlik

 hfnetchkPro. Thus, I confirmed that I have Windows media 9 on my SBS

 2k3 [Windows 2003] and thus this does not apply. For the record the

 only time I opened up the media player on my server was to check what

 version I had for this exercise.

 


 

 MS03-020 (2 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-020:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-020.mspx

 CU IE By default, Internet Explorer on Windows Server 2003 runs in

 Enhanced Security Configuration. This default configuration of

 Internet Explorer blocks these attacks. If Internet Explorer Enhanced

 Security Configuration has been disabled, the protections put in place

 that prevent these vulnerabilities from being exploited would be removed.

 Object Tag Vulnerability: CAN-2003-0344

 File Download Dialog Vulnerability: CAN-2003-0309

  


 

 My server lists that I have 03-023 which Russ does not, which according

 to his methodology of "what should be on a IIS 6.0 box" should be

 included according to my read. By default SBS 2003 is running IIS 6.0

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-023.mspx

 Affected software Windows 2003

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0469

  


 

 MS03-026 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-026:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-026.mspx

 Our first RPC vuln.. yup I was patching that night…that said the ports

 in question should be blocked… port 135, 139, 445 or 593

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0352

 


 My server lists that I have 03-030 which you don’t list, which according

 to your methodology should be included Microsoft Security Bulletin

 MS03-030:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-030.mspx

 Microsoft DirectX 8.1 on Windows XP or Windows Server 2003

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0346

 


 

 MS03-032 (5 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-032:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-032.mspx

 CU IE - By default, Internet Explorer on Windows Server 2003 runs in

 Enhanced Security Configuration. This default configuration of

 Internet Explorer blocks these attacks. If Internet Explorer Enhanced

 Security Configuration has been disabled, the protections put in place

 that prevent these vulnerabilities from being exploited would be

 removed. Again, have that in place, don’t surf at the server… I only

 see three CAN vulns?

 BR549.DLL Buffer Overrun:CAN-2003-0530

 Browser Cache Script Execution in My Computer Zone:CAN-2003-0531

 Object Type Vulnerability:CAN-2003-0532

  


 

 MS03-033 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-033:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-033.mspx

 MDAC vuln… depends on if that server is listing on the SQL ports

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0353 

[UPDATE Bernard Cheah IIS MVP points out that this does not affect MDAC 2.8, thus this is not a needed patch]

 


 

 MS03-034 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-034:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-034.mspx

 Netbios flaw… I hope you don’t have port 137 open on a IIS web server.

 If you do, you deserve to be hacked. Low vulnerability, this one

 didn’t phase me in the least….

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0661

 


 

 MS03-039 (2 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-039:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-039.mspx

 RPC vuln

 I can tell you exactly where I was when this one came out.. I was

 patching pretty quickly on this one. And this list three CAN

 identifiers not two? But again, I’m not sure of Russ’ methodology on

 counting “raw” vulnerabilities.

 Buffer Overrun: CAN-2003-0715

 Buffer Overrun: CAN-2003-0528

 Denial of Service: CAN-2003-0605

 


 

 MS03-040 (3 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-040.mspx

 CU IE By default, Internet Explorer on Windows Server 2003 runs in

 Enhanced Security Configuration. This default configuration of

 Internet Explorer blocks automatic exploitation of this attack. If

 Internet Explorer Enhanced Security Configuration has been disabled,

 the protections put in place that prevent this vulnerability from

 being automatically exploited would be removed. This ones moderate…

 not breaking a sweat… I only see two CAN identifiers in this bulletin?

 • Object Tag vulnerability in Popup Window: CAN-2003-0838

 • Object Tag vulnerability with XML data binding: CAN-2003-0809

 


 

 MS03-041 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-041:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-041.mspx

 Authenicode vuln

 “By default, Internet Explorer on Windows Server 2003 runs in Enhanced

 Security Configuration. This default configuration of Internet

 Explorer blocks automatic exploitation of this attack. If Internet

 Explorer Enhanced Security Configuration has been disabled, the

 protections put in place that prevent this vulnerability from being

 automatically exploited would be removed. “ I don’t surf and don’t

 take off the IE locking… not breaking a sweat.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0660

  


 

 MS03-043 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-043:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-043.mspx

 Messenger service overrun

 “On Windows Server 2003 systems, the Messenger Service is disabled by

 default.” Not breaking a sweat on this one… I’ll patch when I get

 around to it.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0717

 


 

 MS03-044 (2 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Article MS03-044:

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-044.mspx

 Help and support center… this one was interesting to me at the time

 since it was rated critical but I’m not surfing or emailing at the

 server so I would have not rated it quite so critical.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0711

 


 

 MS03-045 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-045: List box/combo box vuln

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-045.mspx

 An attacker must have valid logon credentials to exploit the

 vulnerability. The vulnerability could not be exploited remotely.

 Properly-secured systems are at little risk from this vulnerability.

 Standard best practices recommend only allowing trusted users to log

 on to systems interactively.

 This one is low threat vector and someone has to logon… not even

 breaking a sweat on this one. This one I noticed has only one CAN

 identifier but Russ says 2? Not sure on that one.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0659

[actually it's the 03-044 that he says 2 and the CAN lists one, not this one... so we all make mistakes]

 

 


 MS03-048 (5 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-048: IE cumulative

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS03-048.mspx

 “By default, Internet Explorer on Windows Server 2003 runs in Enhanced

 Security Configuration. This default configuration of Internet

 Explorer blocks automatic exploitation of this attack. If Internet

 Explorer Enhanced Security Configuration has been disabled, the

 protections that are put in place that prevent these vulnerabilities

 from being automatically exploited would be removed. “ Repeat after

 me… “we don’t surf on servers” I’ll patch but I’m not breaking a sweat.

 • ExecCommand Cross Domain Vulnerability: CAN-2003-0814

 • Function Pointer Override Cross Domain Vulnerability: CAN-2003-0815

 • Script URLs Cross Domain Vulnerability: CAN-2003-0816

 • XML Object Vulnerability: CAN-2003-0817

 • Drag-and-Drop Operation Vulnerability: : CAN-2003-0823

 


 

 MS04-001 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-001: ISA server patch

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-001.mspx

 Hmmm… this one is interesting….Why this one is in here I’m not sure…

 for one it’s a ISA server patch and if Russ is including it because it

 mentions Small Business Server 2003 because we have IIS 6.0, the

 vulnerability is only in the premium version and the H323 attack

 vector isn’t even a threat to us sense it’s not enabled by default

 anyway [we never used it on SBS 2000, they shut it off on SBS 2003]

 This is not a IIS 6.0 vulnerability in my book. I patched this in my

 network, but unless you have ISA server [and you might even just be

 running with IPsec filters on that web server anyway, this one is ISA

 server vulnerability and not on a default installed IIS 6.0 and not

 necessarily on a default installed SBS 2003.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0819

 


 

 MS04-003 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-003: MDAC vulns

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-003.mspx

 This one may or may not be of interest to folks depending on if a

 database resides on that IIS and if you have the SQL server ports open.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0903

 


 

 MS04-004 (5 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-004: The IE Phishing one

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-004.mspx

 Repeat after me… We don’t surf on our servers. This one, didn’t even

 phase me one bit… IE is in enhanced lockdown and again, I’m not

 surfing from that box at all to worry about phishing and spoofing.

 Patched but did not break a sweat on this one.

 • Travel Log Cross Domain Vulnerability CAN-2003-1026

 • Function Pointer Drag and Drop Vulnerability CAN-2003-1027

 • Improper URL Canonicalization Vulnerability CAN-2003-1025

 

 


 

 

 MS04-006 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-006: WINS vulnerability

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-006.mspx

 This one is an interesting one…I would hope that you would not have

 WINS running on a web server but who am I to say, and who knows what

 applications running on that server may need it. Furthermore and more

 importantly, I hope that you would not have those ports being open. In

 SBSland because of Exchange we are still running with WINS, but given

 that I don’t open these ports from the outside, not breaking a sweat

 over this one.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0825

 

 


 

 MS04-007 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-007: This is that ANS.1 patch

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-007.mspx

 This one I patched on that night. I read the Eeye bulletins on this,

 saw the "chatter" on the listserves, and put down Mountain Dew and

 patched the fleet that night. Yes, that night. "Chatter" on the

 listserves had others patching their perimeter machines without

 testing whatsoever. When I hear that I'll risk it and know I've got

 backups in place. Interestingly enough, this wasn't the "nasty" that

 the "chatter" thought it would be. But I was ready for it anyway.

 Vulnerability identifier: CAN-2003-0818

 


 

 

 

 MS04-011 (8 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-011: Security Update for Microsoft

 Windows (835732):

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-011.mspx Eeye

 is listed in here along with the buzzwords ANS.1 and SSL. There’s also

 enough who’s who of security researchers listed in this one to make me

 put this one on the fast track. I thought this had 14 vulnerabilities

 as well? But again, I’m not a security researcher. For me it’s just

 one bulletin.

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0533

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0663

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0719

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0806

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0906

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0907

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0908

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0909

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0910

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0117

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0118

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=%20CAN-2004-0119

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=%20CAN-2004-0120

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=%20CAN-2004-0123

 

 


 

 MS04-012 (3 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-012: Cumulative Update for Microsoft

 RPC/DCOM (828741):

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-012.mspx

 Anything with DCOM, Bindview and EEye in the description, I’m

 patching. I don’t care what it is. That said most of these in there

 are going to be banging on ports that I have shut tight from the

 outside anyway. The one specific item about IIS 6.0 “IIS 6.0 mode uses

 RPC over HTTP v2. IIS 6.0 mode does not contain the vulnerability”

 indicates a mitigation factor.

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0813

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0116

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2003-0807

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0124

 

  


 

 MS04-013 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-013: Cumulative Security Update for

 Outlook Express (837009):

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-013.mspx

 I don’t know about you but no one reads emails from my servers and IE

 is still in that annoying lockdown mode. I’ll patch during the normal

 cycle but I’m not breaking a sweat over this one.

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0380

 


 

 MS04-014 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-014: Vulnerability in the Microsoft

 Jet Database Engine Could Allow Code Execution (837001):

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-014.mspx

 vulnerability exists in the Microsoft Jet Database Engine (Jet) that

 could allow remote code execution on an affected system. An attacker

 could exploit the vulnerability by creating a specially crafted

 database query and sending it through an application that is using Jet

 on an affected system. Affects a Windows 2003 server running IIS? Yes.

 Enough to make be run to the server screaming? No. But I patched

 during my normal cycle anyway.

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0197

 

 


 

MS04-015 (1 vulnerabilities)

 Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-015: Vulnerability in Help and

 Support Center Could Allow Remote Code Execution (840374):

 http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/Bulletin/MS04-015.mspx

 “A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the Help and Support

 Center because of the way that it handles HCP URL validation. An

 attacker could exploit the vulnerability by constructing a malicious

 HCP URL that could potentially allow remote code execution if a user

 visited a malicious Web site or viewed a malicious e-mail message. An

 attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could take

 complete control of an affected system. However, significant user

 interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability.” Affects a

 Windows 2003 server running IIS? Yes. Enough to make be run to the

 server screaming? No. But I patched during my normal cycle anyway.

 http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CAN-2004-0199

 


 

 Bottom line I think this exercise proves that you need a patch scanning/patch management tool, but that's just my opinion. Just a  reminder... next Tuesday is patch day. And Microsoft now has Security bulletins via RSS feeds --  http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/secrss.aspx  I now have this feed in Newsgator to "push" me the bulletin info.

 

 Susan

 the wacko SBSer