IBM BigFix Remote Control up to 9.1.2 HSTS information disclosure
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 4.2 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability was found in IBM BigFix Remote Control up to 9.1.2. It has been classified as problematic. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component HSTS. This manipulation causes information disclosure. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2016-2952. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. There is no exploit available. Upgrading the affected component is recommended.
Details
A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in IBM BigFix Remote Control up to 9.1.2 (Remote Access Software). Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown code block of the component HSTS. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a information disclosure vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-200. The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:
IBM BigFix Remote Control before 9.1.3 does not enable the HSTS protection mechanism, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain sensitive information by leveraging use of HTTP.
The weakness was shared 11/30/2016 (Website). The advisory is shared at www-01.ibm.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2016-2952. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploitation doesn't need any form of authentication. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1592 for this issue.
Upgrading to version 9.1.3 eliminates this vulnerability.
The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at SecurityFocus (BID 94598†). The entries VDB-93893, VDB-93888, VDB-93887 and VDB-93886 are related to this item. Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.ibm.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.2VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.2
VulDB Base Score: 5.3
VulDB Temp Score: 5.1
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Vendor Base Score (IBM): 3.7
Vendor Vector (IBM): 🔍
NVD Base Score: 3.7
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: Information disclosureCWE: CWE-200 / CWE-284 / CWE-266
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
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: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Upgrade: BigFix Remote Control 9.1.3
Timeline
03/09/2016 🔍11/30/2016 🔍
11/30/2016 🔍
11/30/2016 🔍
10/04/2022 🔍
Sources
Vendor: ibm.comAdvisory: www-01.ibm.com
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2016-2952 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2016-2952
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-93889
SecurityFocus: 94598
See also: 🔍
Entry
Created: 11/30/2016 20:59Updated: 10/04/2022 17:07
Changes: 11/30/2016 20:59 (50), 05/18/2018 22:46 (19), 10/04/2022 17:07 (3)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
I have a question regarding the CVSSv3 score. There you state that a missing HSTS header has an impact on the confidentiality but none on the integrity. Could you please shortly explain, why the integrity is in your opinion not affected? A successful ssl stripping attack (which becomes more likely without the presence of a HSTS header) definitely does affect integrity since the MitM attacker may change the content arbitrarily.
Thanks a lot in advance!