Skip to main content

Maxthon - Incorrect Executable File Handling and Same Origin Policy Implementation




Details

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


Incorrect Executable File Handling


The way local executable files are handled by the Maxthon browser seems related to the fact that external tools such as Calc, Desktop, and others can be launched from the browser itself. This design is insecure as it allows JavaScript to directly invoke an executable. As shown in previous exploits, this design can aid exploitation by chaining different vulnerabilities at the same time, allowing for arbitrary command execution.

This vulnerability can be exploited in multiple ways:

Scenario 1
1. User visits a page which invokes the window.open() function against an executable file – e.g. file:///C:/windows/system32/cmd.exe
2. User unblocks the pop up blocker

Scenario 1 - Impact
The window will open as a new window, SOP is not enforced and this vulnerability would allow arbitrary code execution.

Scenario 2
User is fooled into bookmarking an executable file

Scenario 2 - Impact
Executable is executed directly by Maxthon. User is not prompted to either downloading the executable or discarding the download.

Scenario 3
SOP vulnerability discovered that would allow direct access to file:// zone from an untrusted zone

Scenario 3 - Impact
Arbitrary command execution.


Same Of Origin (SOP) Incorrect Implementation

It is possible to bypass Same of Origin of Policy  (SOP) by using window.open() method against about: URI scheme. Such URI are mapped to privileged zone mx://res/*. However, by invoking directly against mx://res/, the SOP is applied and access is forbidden. The following table summarises test case conducted with window.open() method:
  1. http:// -> file:// - Prompts a popup blocker, if the user allows the pop up, the file:// window is opened.
  2. http:// -> about:* - Spawns a new window
  3. http:// -> mx://res/* - Forbidden by SOP
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.

Comments

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…

Alcatel Lucent Omnivista or: How I learned GIOP and gained Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (CVE-2016-9796)

It is time for another advisory or better a blog post about Alcatel Lucent Omnivista and its vulnerabilities. Omnivista is a central management network tool and it is typically used in medium/large organisation with a complex VoIP/SIP infrastructure.



Interestingly enough, this software belongs to the niche of "undownloadable" software and it requires a license to work as well. My "luck" came during an engagement where it was already installed and this post documents one of the many 0days discovered during such audit.

The reasons why I wanted to dedicate a single blog post on this vulnerability are several.

First, remote code execution (RCE) is always a sweet bug to show. Second, I strongly believe that documenting vulnerabilities in applications using old protocols and standards, respectively GIOP and CORBA, can be beneficial for the infosec community, since no many examples of vulnerabilities in such applications are available or published on the Internet.

Actuall…