CVE-2012-1454 in Rising
Summary
by MITRE
The ELF file parser in Dr.Web 5.0.2.03300, eSafe 7.0.17.0, McAfee Gateway (formerly Webwasher) 2010.1C, Rising Antivirus 22.83.00.03, Fortinet Antivirus 4.2.254.0, and Panda Antivirus 10.0.2.7 allows remote attackers to bypass malware detection via an ELF file with a modified ei_version field. NOTE: this may later be SPLIT into multiple CVEs if additional information is published showing that the error occurred independently in different ELF parser implementations.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 02/16/2019
The vulnerability described in CVE-2012-1454 represents a critical weakness in multiple commercial antivirus solutions' ELF file parsing capabilities. This issue affects widely deployed security products including Dr.Web, eSafe, McAfee Gateway, Rising Antivirus, Fortinet Antivirus, and Panda Antivirus, all of which utilize flawed ELF (Executable and Linkable Format) parsers that fail to properly validate file headers. The vulnerability specifically targets the ei_version field within the ELF file header, which serves as a critical indicator of file format compatibility and integrity. This flaw demonstrates a fundamental failure in input validation and file format parsing that directly impacts the core functionality of these security solutions.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability stems from inadequate validation of ELF file structures during the parsing process. The ei_version field in ELF headers is designed to indicate the version of the ELF format used in the file, typically set to 1 for standard ELF files. However, the affected antivirus products fail to properly verify this field, allowing malicious actors to manipulate the ei_version value to bypass detection mechanisms. This modification can cause the antivirus software to either ignore the file entirely or misclassify it as legitimate, effectively neutralizing the security protections. The vulnerability aligns with CWE-20, "Improper Input Validation," and represents a classic case of insufficient data sanitization in security-critical code paths. Attackers can exploit this weakness by crafting ELF files with modified version fields that appear valid to the parser but contain malicious payloads.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is severe and far-reaching, as it compromises the fundamental integrity of multiple enterprise security solutions. Organizations relying on these affected antivirus products face significant risk of malware infiltration, as attackers can craft ELF files that evade detection mechanisms entirely. The vulnerability affects both network-based and endpoint security solutions, creating potential attack vectors across multiple layers of defense. Security professionals must consider that this weakness could enable advanced persistent threats to establish footholds within networks, as the affected products are commonly deployed in enterprise environments where network traffic is monitored and filtered. The vulnerability also demonstrates a critical gap in security testing methodologies, as it suggests that these products underwent insufficient validation of their file parsing logic against malformed inputs. This issue directly impacts the ATT&CK framework's T1059.007 technique for "Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell" and similar execution methods, as it undermines the first line of defense against potentially malicious code execution.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability require immediate action from affected organizations, including urgent patch deployment for all identified products and implementation of additional verification measures. Security teams should consider implementing supplementary file validation at network boundaries and establishing monitoring for anomalous ELF file patterns that might indicate exploitation attempts. Organizations should also conduct comprehensive vulnerability assessments to identify other potential parsing weaknesses in their security infrastructure. The remediation process must include thorough testing of patched versions to ensure that the fix does not introduce new compatibility issues with legitimate files. Additionally, security teams should consider implementing layered defense strategies that do not rely solely on signature-based detection methods, as this vulnerability demonstrates the limitations of such approaches when dealing with malformed file structures. Regular security updates and continuous monitoring of vendor advisories remain essential practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities from compromising security infrastructure.