CVE-2024-37569 in 6869i
Summary
by MITRE • 06/09/2024
An issue was discovered on Mitel 6869i through 4.5.0.41 and 5.x through 5.0.0.1018 devices. A command injection vulnerability exists in the hostname parameter taken in by the provis.html endpoint. The provis.html endpoint performs no sanitization on the hostname parameter (sent by an authenticated user), which is subsequently written to disk. During boot, the hostname parameter is executed as part of a series of shell commands. Attackers can achieve remote code execution in the root context by placing shell metacharacters in the hostname parameter.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 06/13/2024
This vulnerability affects Mitel 6869i IP phones and related devices running firmware versions 4.5.0.41 and earlier in the 4.x series, as well as 5.x versions through 5.0.0.1018. The issue resides within the provis.html endpoint which processes the hostname parameter without any input sanitization or validation. This represents a classic command injection flaw that allows authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges. The vulnerability stems from the device's failure to properly sanitize user input before storing it to disk, where it is later executed during the device boot process as part of shell command sequences. The attack vector requires authentication since the hostname parameter is only processed by authenticated users, but once exploited, the attacker gains complete control over the device's operating system with the highest possible privileges. This vulnerability directly maps to CWE-77 Command Injection, which is categorized under the software fault pattern that allows attackers to inject and execute operating system commands through vulnerable input parameters. The security implications are severe as the device operates in a network environment where it may have access to sensitive corporate communications and potentially serve as a foothold for further network infiltration.
The technical exploitation of this vulnerability follows a predictable pattern where an authenticated attacker crafts a malicious hostname parameter containing shell metacharacters such as semicolons, ampersands, or backticks that will be executed when the device boots. During the boot process, the stored hostname value is incorporated into shell commands without proper escaping or sanitization, allowing the attacker to inject additional commands that execute with root privileges. This type of vulnerability aligns with ATT&CK technique T1059.001 Command and Scripting Interpreter, specifically targeting the execution of shell commands through legitimate system utilities. The device's boot process serves as the execution environment where the malicious commands are interpreted and executed, making this a particularly dangerous vulnerability as it can persist across reboots and potentially remain undetected for extended periods. The lack of input validation at the point of storage means that even if the device is rebooted, the malicious commands will continue to execute as part of the boot sequence until the hostname parameter is properly sanitized or the device is manually configured to remove the malicious input.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends beyond simple device compromise to potentially enable broader network attacks and data exfiltration. An attacker with root access can modify network configurations, intercept communications, install persistent backdoors, or use the device as a pivot point to attack other systems within the network. The vulnerability affects devices that are commonly deployed in enterprise environments where they may have access to internal networks, making the potential attack surface much larger than the individual device itself. Organizations using these devices should consider the possibility of lateral movement attacks where compromised phones serve as entry points for accessing more sensitive network segments. The persistent nature of the vulnerability means that even if administrators discover and patch the issue, the device will continue to execute malicious commands until the compromised hostname value is manually corrected. This vulnerability also demonstrates the importance of secure input handling in embedded systems and the critical need for proper sanitization of user-supplied data before it is stored and later executed. Network monitoring tools should be configured to detect unusual command execution patterns that might indicate exploitation attempts, particularly around device boot cycles where such malicious commands would be executed. The vulnerability highlights the need for robust firmware update mechanisms and the importance of keeping embedded devices patched against known security flaws.
Mitigation strategies for this vulnerability should include immediate firmware updates from Mitel addressing the command injection flaw in the provis.html endpoint. Organizations should also implement network segmentation to limit the potential impact of compromised devices and establish monitoring procedures for detecting unauthorized changes to device configurations. Access controls should be enforced to limit who can modify device parameters, particularly those that are later executed during system boot processes. Regular security audits should verify that no malicious hostname values have been persisted on affected devices, and network administrators should consider implementing device integrity checks that can detect unauthorized modifications to critical system parameters. The vulnerability serves as a reminder of the critical importance of input validation in all system components, particularly those that handle user-supplied data and may be executed in privileged contexts. Organizations should also consider implementing network access controls that restrict the ability of devices to execute arbitrary shell commands, even when they are running with elevated privileges. Regular security training for network administrators should emphasize the importance of proper input sanitization and the potential consequences of failing to validate user-supplied data in system components that may later be executed as commands.