PDA

View Full Version : Beware of Internet Explorer


Slacker13
12-18-2004, 01:12 PM
I tried doing a search to see if this was posted recently but the search function is not working so if I am duplicating a post I apologize.

They have found another major flaw in IE. Anyone who uses Neteller or any other site that you will input sensitive information needs to be aware. Since they announced this downloads of Mozilla/firefox have soared. I would suggest everyone switches to Firefox.

Original Article (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1743407,00.asp)
New IE Exploit Spoofs Web Sites
By Matthew Broersma
December 17, 2004

Updated: Security researchers have uncovered a spoofing flaw in Internet Explorer that could allow a scammer to display a fake Web site with all of the attributes of a genuine, secure site.

Security researchers have uncovered a spoofing flaw in Internet Explorer that could turn out to be the perfect holiday gift for scammers.
The bug, which has been confirmed on a fully patched Windows XP system with IE 6.0 and Service Pack 2, could allow a scammer to display a fake Web site with all the attributes of a genuine, secure site, including the URL and the icon indicating SSL security, according to researchers.

Because the vulnerability is found in one of Internet Explorer's default ActiveX controls, scammers could use it to spoof the content of any site, researchers said. Users could be lured to the fake site via a link in an e-mail message, a tactic that continues to prove effective despite efforts to educate users.

"Ordinarily, to spoof a site you have to have some issue on the Web site that you want to manipulate, which restricts what you can do," said Thomas Kristensen, chief technology officer at independent security firm Secunia, in a telephone interview. "Because this is embedded in IE by default, it's possible to inject content into any Web site. There's no way for a Web site to protect itself against this."

There is currently no patch for the bug. Users can protect themselves by turning off ActiveX or switching the security level for the "Internet" zone to "high," researchers said.



The vulnerability is caused by an error in the way the DHTML Edit ActiveX control handles certain inputs. The result is that a malicious site can execute script code in a user's browser session in the context of any other site, according to Secunia.

Microsoft has issued a "critical" update to fix a flaw in SP2's Windows Firewall. Click here for the full story.

Secunia has issued an advisory describing the issue and is offering an online demonstration to test browser vulnerability. The test displays a page with the URL "https://www.paypal.com/" and a padlock indicating a site with SSL security, but the content is supplied by Secunia.

The bug was discovered by a researcher from Greyhats Security Group. Secunia's demonstration is based on a proof of concept from Greyhats.

"Once it is displaying the site, if you follow best practices and look for the padlock, et cetera, you still won't have a clue [that the site is spoofed]," Kristensen said. "It isn't really even spoofing—you are really visiting the site, it's just that another site is controlling what you see."

He said that SP2 targets more traditional vulnerabilities, such as buffer overflows, but it isn't as effective against flaws such as spoofing that can be used by scammers. Under a system with SP1 but without SP2, the flaw could be additionally used to disclose the content of local files, Secunia said.

A spokeswoman for Microsoft confirmed that the company is investigating the flaw warning. "At this time, we have not been made aware of any attacks attempting to use the reported vulnerabilities or of customer impact," she said.

"Microsoft will take the appropriate action to protect our customers, which may include providing a fix through our monthly release process or an out-of-cycle security update, depending on customer needs," the spokeswoman added.

Because the vulnerability alert was released ahead of a Microsoft patch, the company said it is "concerned" that the warning was not disclosed responsibly.

"We continue to encourage responsible disclosure of vulnerabilities," the spokeswoman said. "We believe the commonly accepted practice of reporting vulnerabilities directly to a vendor serves everyone's best interests."

GrannyMae
12-18-2004, 01:31 PM
http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/i/birthday.gif

Slacker13
12-18-2004, 01:36 PM
Thank you very much Granny. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Wouldn't you know I am buried in work and get to spend part of the day in the office. But I will make up for it tonight. Party!

GrannyMae
12-18-2004, 01:40 PM
But I will make up for it tonight. Party!

bring ground beef and condoms.

we will have a blast

http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/i/ura.gif

Slacker13
12-18-2004, 01:54 PM
[ QUOTE ]
bring ground beef and condoms. we will have a blast

[/ QUOTE ] /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Granny, you sure know how to throw a BBQ.

BradleyT
12-18-2004, 02:00 PM
Well FireFox/Mozilla is still susceptible to this -

http://secunia.com/multiple_browsers_window_injection_vulnerability_t est/

Seems the "uber" browser isn't quite as secure as everyone thinks.

itsmarty
12-18-2004, 08:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Seems the "uber" browser isn't quite as secure as everyone thinks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both IE and Mozilla/Firefox are vulnerable to the exploit you mention, making a bad example for a case against Mozilla/Firefox.

Martin

IggyWH
12-18-2004, 08:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seems the "uber" browser isn't quite as secure as everyone thinks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both IE and Mozilla/Firefox are vulnerable to the exploit you mention, making a bad example for a case against Mozilla/Firefox.

Martin

[/ QUOTE ]

I have IE and passed with flying colors /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

phixxx
12-18-2004, 08:43 PM
Is it possible that neteller.com is different than www.neteller.com (http://www.neteller.com)? Whenever I visit neteller.com without the www, a security prompt shows up.

IggyWH
12-18-2004, 08:45 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible that neteller.com is different than www.neteller.com (http://www.neteller.com)? Whenever I visit neteller.com without the www, a security prompt shows up.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they are the same site. I'm not sure why you don't get the security warning for the 2nd when you do the first, but they both do the same thing... go to https:// which the s = secure

csuf_gambler
12-18-2004, 08:51 PM
"Because the vulnerability is found in one of Internet Explorer's default ActiveX controls, scammers could use it to spoof the content of any site, researchers said. Users could be lured to the fake site via a link in an e-mail message, a tactic that continues to prove effective despite efforts to educate users."

all you have to do is disable active X(something that should have been done in the first place).

this isn't a big deal at all, chillax guys

rusty JEDI
12-18-2004, 09:24 PM
How do i disable activex?
Dont i need activex for some things?
Will i be able to choose activex that i think i need, and how will i know it is the good kind?

Thanks

rJ

MrDannimal
12-18-2004, 09:24 PM
Geez.

I know IE isn't the greatest browser in the world, and it has some (many) security problems, but this is pretty irresponsible reporting.

Before you can be "attacked" with this exploit, you first need to visit a site that has a web page built to use the exploit. If you go directly to www.neteller.com (http://www.neteller.com) from your bookmarks, you will NEVER have a problem with this hole, regardless of what you do to IE.

The only way to be exploited by this is to visit a site that is trying to screw you. The bigger security problem here is people who mindlessly click on links sent to them in e-mail.

Of course, the reporter ignores the similar security hole which affects basically ALL browsers. No meat on a story saying "FireFox security hole!" because not many people use it (proportionally).

itsmarty
12-19-2004, 12:08 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Is it possible that neteller.com is different than www.neteller.com (http://www.neteller.com)? Whenever I visit neteller.com without the www, a security prompt shows up.

[/ QUOTE ]

They only paid for a certificate for www.neteller.com (http://www.neteller.com), but are using it for both sites. The prompt is telling you that neteller.com is using a certificate that doesn't match it's name.

They should have just made one an alias for the other so they weren't sepaerate sites. It should never have any affect on you, but it's bad practice. If someone set up a spoof site (say neteler.com), they're more likely to fool people who are used to clicking "ok" at the security popup.

Martin