CVE-2018-10425 in Security Guard
Summary
by MITRE
An issue was discovered in Shanghai 2345 Security Guard 3.7.0. 2345MPCSafe.exe, 2345SafeTray.exe, and 2345Speedup.exe allow local users to bypass intended process protections, and consequently terminate processes, because SetParent is not properly considered.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 01/31/2020
This vulnerability exists in Shanghai 2345 Security Guard version 3.7.0 where multiple security components including 2345MPCSafe.exe, 2345SafeTray.exe, and 2345Speedup.exe fail to properly implement process protection mechanisms. The core technical flaw revolves around the improper handling of the SetParent API function which is critical for establishing proper process hierarchies and protection relationships. When applications use SetParent to establish parent-child process relationships, they typically expect that child processes cannot be terminated by parent processes without proper authorization. The vulnerability allows local attackers to exploit this weakness by manipulating process relationships through the SetParent function, thereby bypassing the intended protection mechanisms that should prevent unauthorized process termination. This represents a direct violation of process isolation principles and creates a privilege escalation vector within the security software itself.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is significant as it undermines the fundamental security model of the 2345 Security Guard suite. Local users can exploit this weakness to terminate critical security processes, effectively disabling or compromising the protection mechanisms that the software is designed to provide. This creates a dangerous situation where the very security tool meant to protect the system becomes a vector for system compromise. Attackers could potentially terminate security processes that monitor for malicious activity, prevent unauthorized software installations, or enforce security policies. The vulnerability is particularly concerning because it exists within security software that is typically granted elevated privileges and trusted with system-level operations. This flaw allows attackers to gain unauthorized control over process management functions that should be restricted to legitimate system administrators or the security software itself.
From a cybersecurity perspective, this vulnerability maps to CWE-276, which addresses improper privileges and access control issues in software systems. The flaw demonstrates poor privilege management and inadequate process protection implementation within the security software. The ATT&CK framework categorizes this as a privilege escalation technique where adversaries manipulate system processes to gain elevated access rights. The vulnerability also relates to technique T1055 which covers process injection and manipulation, as attackers can exploit the SetParent function to manipulate process relationships and gain unauthorized access to process termination capabilities. The lack of proper input validation and insufficient checks on parent-child process relationships creates an attack surface that allows local users to subvert the intended security architecture. This type of vulnerability is particularly dangerous because it exists within security software that is expected to enforce strict access controls and process isolation policies.
Mitigation strategies should focus on implementing proper process protection mechanisms that correctly handle SetParent function calls and establish robust parent-child process relationship validation. Security software vendors should implement comprehensive access control checks before allowing process termination operations, ensuring that only authorized processes can manipulate other processes within the system. System administrators should consider implementing additional monitoring for unusual process termination patterns and establish proper privilege separation between security components and user processes. The vulnerability highlights the importance of secure coding practices in security software development, particularly around process management and privilege handling. Regular security assessments should be conducted to identify similar weaknesses in process protection mechanisms, and software updates should be applied promptly to address such vulnerabilities. Organizations should also consider implementing additional security controls such as process integrity checking and behavior monitoring to detect exploitation attempts of similar vulnerabilities.