Red Hat Ansible up to 2.1.x Fact Variable command injection

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
7.7$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability was found in Red Hat Ansible up to 2.1.x. It has been rated as critical. This affects an unknown function of the component Fact Variable Handler. The manipulation leads to command injection. This vulnerability is traded as CVE-2016-8628. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. There is no exploit available. Upgrading the affected component is advised.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Red Hat Ansible up to 2.1.x. This issue affects an unknown function of the component Fact Variable Handler. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a command injection vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-77. The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:

Ansible before version 2.2.0 fails to properly sanitize fact variables sent from the Ansible controller. An attacker with the ability to create special variables on the controller could execute arbitrary commands on Ansible clients as the user Ansible runs as.

The bug was discovered 11/15/2016. The weakness was shared 07/31/2018 by Michael Scherer with Red Hat as not defined bug report (Bugzilla). It is possible to read the advisory at bugzilla.redhat.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2016-8628 since 10/12/2016. The attack may be initiated remotely. The successful exploitation requires a simple authentication. The technical details are unknown and an exploit is not publicly available. The attack technique deployed by this issue is T1202 according to MITRE ATT&CK.

The vulnerability was handled as a non-public zero-day exploit for at least 4 days. During that time the estimated underground price was around $5k-$25k. The vulnerability scanner Nessus provides a plugin with the ID 94999 (Fedora 25 : ansible (2016-3ccb098630)), which helps to determine the existence of the flaw in a target environment. It is assigned to the family Fedora Local Security Checks and running in the context l. The commercial vulnerability scanner Qualys is able to test this issue with plugin 276246 (Fedora Security Update for ansible (FEDORA-2016-3113e71193)).

Upgrading to version 2.2.0 eliminates this vulnerability. A possible mitigation has been published before and not just after the disclosure of the vulnerability.

The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at Tenable (94999) and SecurityFocus (BID 94109†). The entry VDB-122337 is related to this item. Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.

Productinfo

Vendor

Name

Version

License

Website

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.8
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 7.7

VulDB Base Score: 6.6
VulDB Temp Score: 6.3
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

NVD Base Score: 9.1
NVD Vector: 🔍

CNA Base Score: 7.6
CNA Vector (Red Hat, Inc.): 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

NVD Base Score: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Command injection
CWE: CWE-77 / CWE-74 / CWE-707
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍

Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes

Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined

EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍

Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍

0-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Nessus ID: 94999
Nessus Name: Fedora 25 : ansible (2016-3ccb098630)
Nessus File: 🔍
Nessus Risk: 🔍
Nessus Family: 🔍
Nessus Context: 🔍

OpenVAS ID: 867773
OpenVAS Name: Fedora Update for ansible FEDORA-2016-3ccb098630
OpenVAS File: 🔍
OpenVAS Family: 🔍

Qualys ID: 🔍
Qualys Name: 🔍

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: Upgrade
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔍

Upgrade: Ansible 2.2.0

Timelineinfo

10/12/2016 🔍
11/01/2016 +20 days 🔍
11/15/2016 +14 days 🔍
11/18/2016 +3 days 🔍
11/21/2016 +2 days 🔍
07/31/2018 +616 days 🔍
07/31/2018 +0 days 🔍
08/01/2018 +1 days 🔍
04/27/2023 +1730 days 🔍

Sourcesinfo

Vendor: redhat.com

Advisory: FEDORA-2016-3ccb098630
Researcher: Michael Scherer
Organization: Red Hat
Status: Not defined
Confirmation: 🔍

CVE: CVE-2016-8628 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2016-8628
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-122339
SecurityFocus: 94109 - Ansible CVE-2016-8628 Remote Command Injection Vulnerability

See also: 🔍

Entryinfo

Created: 08/01/2018 07:54
Updated: 04/27/2023 19:58
Changes: 08/01/2018 07:54 (75), 03/11/2020 11:45 (6), 08/22/2022 09:37 (4), 04/27/2023 19:44 (2), 04/27/2023 19:51 (10), 04/27/2023 19:58 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

◂ PreviousOverviewNext ▸

Want to know what is going to be exploited?

We predict KEV entries!