SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 12 4.8-5.8.1/15 3.5.21-26.17.1 Squid Binary /usr/sbin/pinger default permission
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.2 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability identified as critical has been detected in SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 12 4.8-5.8.1/15 3.5.21-26.17.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /usr/sbin/pinger of the component Squid Binary Handler. Performing a manipulation results in default permission. This vulnerability is identified as CVE-2019-3688. The attack is only possible with local access. There is not any exploit available.
Details
A vulnerability was found in SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 12 4.8-5.8.1/15 3.5.21-26.17.1 (Operating System). It has been classified as critical. This affects some unknown functionality of the file /usr/sbin/pinger of the component Squid Binary Handler. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a default permission vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-276. During installation, installed file permissions are set to allow anyone to modify those files. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
The /usr/sbin/pinger binary packaged with squid in SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15 before and including version 4.8-5.8.1 and in SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 before and including 3.5.21-26.17.1 had squid:root, 0750 permissions. This allowed an attacker that compromissed the squid user to gain persistence by changing the binary
The weakness was released 10/07/2019 as Bug 1093414 as not defined bug report (Bugzilla). The advisory is shared at bugzilla.suse.com. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2019-3688 since 01/03/2019. The exploitability is told to be easy. An attack has to be approached locally. No form of authentication is needed for exploitation. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 09/27/2020). MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1222 for this issue.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.suse.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.2VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.2
VulDB Base Score: 5.3
VulDB Temp Score: 5.3
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 7.1
NVD Vector: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Default permissionCWE: CWE-276 / CWE-266
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: No
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
01/03/2019 🔍10/07/2019 🔍
10/09/2019 🔍
09/27/2020 🔍
Sources
Vendor: suse.comAdvisory: Bug 1093414
Status: Not defined
Confirmation: 🔍
CVE: CVE-2019-3688 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2019-3688
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-143061
Entry
Created: 10/09/2019 13:03Updated: 09/27/2020 20:37
Changes: 10/09/2019 13:03 (59), 09/27/2020 20:37 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.