MS virtualisation bug dodges defences
Redmond downplays virtual PC vuln
A newly discovered flaw in Microsoft's virtualisation technologies creates a potential mechanism for hackers to sidestep security defences.
The unpatched vulnerability creates a possible route around security threat mitigation technologies such as Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Safe Exception Handlers (SafeSEH) and Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR). The security bypass bug affects Virtual PC but not Microsoft virtualisation products based on Redmond's Hyper-V enterprise-class server technology.
The shortcoming, discovered by Core Security, creates a way for hackers to attack applications provided they are running on a virtual PC. The same applications could not be hit in the same way if they were running on a standard PC or server.
Core went public with the publication of an advisory and proof-of-concept code on Tuesday after back-and-forth discussions with Microsoft over seven months reached an impasse. The security firm reckons the unpatched bug, which involves memory management of Microsoft's Virtual Machine Monitor, opening the way to all sorts of potential problems for systems running Windows Virtual PC, Microsoft Virtual PC 2007 and Virtual Server 2005.
Redmond, by contrast, argues the alleged bug discovered by Core only offers a mechanism to "exploit security vulnerabilities already present on the system, rather than an actual vulnerability", security blogger Ryan Nardine reports.
Windows 7 uses Virtual PC technology to provide backward compatibility with older apps via XP Mode. Microsoft continues to say the use of this technology is safe, as explained in much more depth in a post on Redmond's security response blog here. ®
"exploit security vulnerabilities already present on the system"
Why, of course it does. Windows needs to be already present on the system after all.
Problem identified and solution suggested
"Redmond, by contrast, argues the alleged bug discovered by Core only offers a mechanism to "exploit security vulnerabilities already present on the system, rather than an actual vulnerability"
So is it a mechanism to "exploit security vulnerabilities already present on the system" or is it an "actual vulnerability"?
You either have security vulnerabilities already present or you don't. If you do then that's a vulnerability.
So the real problem is that MS don't know their arse from their elbow and continually write code that is about as secure as a wet paper bag. My proposed solution is to avoid windows and suggest to friends/colleagues that they do the same.
You think you have Troubles .........whenever, WOW, your Global Apps are a Spies Delight ?
"I'd be willing to bet that full on 100% of network applications which are too old and creaky to run on Windows 7 and therefore rely on XP mode are vulnerable as a very vulnerable thing, so saying "it only lets you exploit exploitable XP apps" is a bit of a null statement." ..... Russell Howe Posted Wednesday 17th March 2010 16:44 GMT
If MS do not yet realise that their Windows Base Kernel Code is Uncovered/Hacked/Cracked and all of their Operating Systems which are supposed to provide secure and undiscoverable leverage/stealthy business advantage over competing friends and adversarial foe alike, then it will be only a short time to a Big Bang Proprietary System IMPlosion which will Render their Products as the Trojans Dream Internal Mole Machine into every Thought Shared and Stored in ITs Memories/MetaDataBases.