Stories with Tag remote code execution

• Uncovering a 0-Click RCE in the SuperNote Nomad E-Ink Tablet

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-04-07 20:51:02

  Verbose tl;dr

  Security researchers at Prizm Labs discovered a critical zero-click remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in the SuperNote Nomad e-ink tablet. Exploiting a flaw in the device's update mechanism, an attacker could remotely execute arbitrary code with root privileges by sending a specially crafted OTA update notification via a malicious Wi-Fi access point. The attack requires no user interaction, making it particularly dangerous. The vulnerability stemmed from insufficient validation of update packages, allowing malicious firmware to be installed. Prizm Labs responsibly disclosed the vulnerability to SuperNote, who promptly released a patch. This vulnerability highlights the importance of robust security measures even in seemingly simple devices like e-readers.

  This blog post by Prizm Labs details the discovery and exploitation of a zero-click remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in the SuperNote A5X and A6X e-ink tablets, specifically those running firmware version 3.4.0.33. A zero-click exploit allows an attacker to compromise a device without requiring any interaction from the user. The vulnerability stemmed from the insecure implementation of the OTA (Over-The-Air) update mechanism.

  The researchers began their investigation by analyzing the network traffic during an OTA update. They observed that the update process involved downloading a signed firmware image via HTTPS. While the use of HTTPS provided encryption, it did not protect against malicious manipulation if the attacker could compromise the update server or perform a man-in-the-middle attack. Crucially, the researchers found that the device did not validate the signature of the downloaded update package before writing it to the internal flash memory. This oversight allowed them to craft a malicious firmware update package containing arbitrary code.

  The exploit process involved several steps. First, a malicious update package was constructed. This package contained a modified boot image, effectively replacing the legitimate SuperNote operating system with a malicious one. The malicious boot image included a modified init script designed to establish a reverse shell back to the attacker's machine, granting them full control over the device.

  To deliver the malicious update, the researchers leveraged a classic man-in-the-middle attack technique, using ARP spoofing. ARP spoofing allows an attacker to intercept traffic intended for another device on the local network by impersonating its MAC address. By poisoning the ARP cache of the SuperNote device, the researchers redirected the device's OTA update request to their own malicious server, hosting the crafted update package.

  When the SuperNote attempted to update, it downloaded the malicious package from the attacker's server. Due to the lack of pre-installation signature verification, the device accepted and applied the malicious update. Upon reboot, the modified init script within the malicious boot image executed, establishing the reverse shell and granting the attacker complete control. This access allowed them to execute arbitrary commands, exfiltrate sensitive data, and essentially take full ownership of the device.

  The researchers highlighted the severity of this vulnerability, as it permitted silent and remote compromise of the targeted device. They responsibly disclosed the vulnerability to Ratta Supernote, the manufacturer of the device, who subsequently released a patched firmware version addressing the issue. The post concludes by emphasizing the importance of secure OTA update implementations and the need for robust security measures in internet-connected devices.

  • SuperNote
  • Nomad
  • e-ink
  • tablet
  • RCE
  • remote code execution
  • 0-click
  • Exploit
  • Vulnerability
  • Security
  • Cybersecurity
  • Hardware Security
  • Firmware
  • Rootkit
  • Prizm Labs

  Summary of Comments ( 8 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43615805

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News commenters generally praised the research and write-up for its clarity and depth. Several expressed concern about the Supernote's security posture, especially given its marketing towards privacy-conscious users. Some questioned the practicality of the exploit given its reliance on connecting to a malicious Wi-Fi network, but others pointed out the potential for rogue access points or compromised legitimate networks. A few users discussed the inherent difficulties in securing embedded devices and the trade-offs between functionality and security. The exploit's dependence on a user-initiated firmware update process was also highlighted, suggesting a slightly reduced risk compared to a fully automatic exploit. Some commenters shared their experiences with Supernote's customer support and device management, while others debated the overall significance of the vulnerability in the context of real-world threats.

  The Hacker News post discussing the 0-click RCE vulnerability in the SuperNote Nomad E-Ink tablet has generated a number of comments exploring various aspects of the vulnerability, its implications, and the SuperNote device itself.

  Several commenters focus on the trade-offs between security and desired functionality, particularly regarding the device's cloud syncing feature. Some argue that the always-on nature of the sync feature, necessary for its intended seamless functionality, inherently increases the risk profile. The decision by SuperNote to leave Wi-Fi always enabled, even when the device is powered off, is highlighted as a key contributing factor to the vulnerability. The discussion touches upon the inherent difficulty of securing devices that require constant network connectivity.

  The technical details of the vulnerability also receive attention. Commenters discuss the specifics of the exploit, including the use of maliciously crafted emails and the exploitation of a stack overflow vulnerability in the device's email client. The discussion highlights the importance of robust input sanitization and secure coding practices to prevent such vulnerabilities. Some commenters question the choice of technology used for the email client, suggesting that a simpler, less feature-rich implementation might have been more secure.

  A recurring theme in the comments is the security of e-ink devices in general. Several users express concerns about the potential for similar vulnerabilities in other e-ink devices and the broader implications for the security of internet-connected devices in general. The relatively closed nature of the SuperNote ecosystem is also brought up, with some commenters suggesting that this may have contributed to the vulnerability going unnoticed for a longer period.

  Several commenters praise the researchers for their responsible disclosure and the detailed write-up of the vulnerability. They acknowledge the importance of such research in improving the security of these devices.

  Some comments delve into the practical implications of the vulnerability, discussing the potential for data theft and other malicious activities. The potential impact on users' privacy is a particular concern, given the sensitive nature of information often stored on such devices.

  Finally, a few comments discuss the response from SuperNote, noting the company's acknowledgement of the vulnerability and their commitment to releasing a patch. There's some discussion about the timeliness of the response and the broader implications for the trust and reputation of the SuperNote brand.

• Blasting Past WebP - An analysis of the NSO BLASTPASS iMessage exploit

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-27 12:49:44

  Verbose tl;dr

  Google's Project Zero discovered a zero-click iMessage exploit, dubbed BLASTPASS, used by NSO Group to deliver Pegasus spyware to iPhones. This sophisticated exploit chained two vulnerabilities within the ImageIO framework's processing of maliciously crafted WebP images. The first vulnerability allowed bypassing a memory limit imposed on WebP decoding, enabling a large, controlled allocation. The second vulnerability, a type confusion bug, leveraged this allocation to achieve arbitrary code execution within the privileged Springboard process. Critically, BLASTPASS required no interaction from the victim and left virtually no trace, making detection extremely difficult. Apple patched these vulnerabilities in iOS 16.6.1, acknowledging their exploitation in the wild, and has implemented further mitigations in subsequent updates to prevent similar attacks.

  The Google Project Zero blog post, "Blasting Past WebP - An analysis of the NSO BLASTPASS iMessage exploit," details a zero-click, zero-day exploit chain utilized by NSO Group's Pegasus spyware to compromise iPhones running iOS 16.6. This sophisticated attack, dubbed BLASTPASS, leverages maliciously crafted image files sent via iMessage to achieve remote code execution on a target device without any interaction from the user. The exploit bypasses newly implemented security mitigations in iOS 16, specifically targeting the Image I/O framework, which is responsible for processing various image formats.

  The attack begins with the delivery of a PassKit attachment containing a malicious image disguised as a harmless GIF. However, instead of legitimate GIF data, the image file contains cleverly constructed WebP image data. While Apple had previously strengthened WebP parsing to prevent exploitation, BLASTPASS circumvents these protections through a novel "image blitting" technique. This technique abuses functionalities within the WebP decoder related to how image segments are combined or "blitted" together. By manipulating specific blitting parameters and supplying carefully crafted image data, the exploit triggers integer overflows within the image processing pipeline.

  These integer overflows corrupt memory allocated by the Image I/O framework, ultimately leading to an out-of-bounds write condition. This vulnerability allows the attackers to overwrite critical data structures, gaining control over the flow of execution within the iMessage processing thread. The post explains the intricacies of this overflow and the specific vulnerabilities within the libwebp library that are manipulated.

  Further, the analysis dives into how this initial memory corruption is leveraged to achieve arbitrary code execution. The attackers use the overwritten memory to construct a fake "image descriptor" which then gets passed to a later stage in the processing pipeline. This fake descriptor contains carefully crafted data that allows the exploit to execute arbitrary code, effectively giving the attackers full control over the device.

  The post highlights the complexity and sophistication of the exploit chain. The attackers demonstrate a deep understanding of the Image I/O framework and the libwebp library, carefully chaining together multiple vulnerabilities to bypass Apple's security measures. This bypass underscores the ongoing challenge of securing complex software systems against determined and resourceful attackers. While the post does not detail the full extent of the payload delivered by BLASTPASS, it implies the payload likely installs Pegasus spyware, enabling surveillance of the compromised device. The discovery prompted swift action from Apple, resulting in patches being issued to address the exploited vulnerabilities. The researchers emphasize the severity of the exploit, its potential impact, and the ongoing need for robust security research and vulnerability mitigation strategies.

  • iMessage
  • Exploit
  • NSO Group
  • BLASTPASS
  • WebP
  • zero-day
  • Vulnerability
  • Security
  • iOS
  • iPhone
  • Cybersecurity
  • Google Project Zero
  • image processing
  • remote code execution

  Summary of Comments ( 83 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43493056

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News commenters discuss the sophistication and impact of the BLASTPASS exploit. Several express concern over Apple's security, particularly their seemingly delayed response and the lack of transparency surrounding the vulnerability. Some debate the ethics of NSO Group and the use of such exploits, questioning the justification for their existence. Others delve into the technical details, praising the Project Zero analysis and discussing the exploit's clever circumvention of Apple's defenses. The complexity of the exploit and its potential for misuse are recurring themes. A few commenters note the irony of Google, a competitor, uncovering and disclosing the Apple vulnerability. There's also speculation about the potential legal and political ramifications of this discovery.

  The Hacker News comments section for the post "Blasting Past WebP - An analysis of the NSO BLASTPASS iMessage exploit" contains a robust discussion about the technical details of the exploit, its implications, and the broader context of zero-day vulnerabilities and the spyware industry.

  Several commenters delve into the specifics of the exploit, appreciating the depth and clarity of Google's Project Zero analysis. They discuss the cleverness of using a seemingly innocuous image format like WebP as a vector for attack, highlighting the complexity of parsing image files and the potential for vulnerabilities within these parsers. The conversation explores how the exploit chained together different vulnerabilities to achieve code execution, including memory corruption issues. Some comments dissect specific lines of code mentioned in the Project Zero analysis, demonstrating a deep understanding of the technical intricacies involved.

  The implications of this exploit are also a significant focus. Commenters express concern over the sophistication and stealth of the attack, emphasizing the difficulty of detecting such exploits. The discussion touches upon the power and potential abuse of zero-day vulnerabilities, particularly in the hands of entities like NSO Group. There's a general sense of alarm regarding the potential for these types of attacks to target individuals, including journalists and human rights activists.

  Beyond the technical specifics, the comments branch into broader discussions about the spyware industry and the need for greater regulation. Some users criticize the lack of accountability for companies like NSO Group, arguing that their actions threaten privacy and security. The debate extends to the role of governments in either enabling or combating the use of such spyware, with some commenters suggesting international cooperation is necessary to address the issue effectively. The ethical dimensions of developing and deploying such powerful tools are also scrutinized.

  A few commenters offer practical advice, such as disabling iMessage for users concerned about being targeted. Others question the feasibility of such advice, noting the prevalence of iMessage usage and the difficulty of completely mitigating such risks.

  The overall tone of the comments section is one of serious concern, mixed with a degree of technical fascination. The commenters express a combination of apprehension about the increasing sophistication of cyberattacks and a desire for greater transparency and accountability within the industry. The discussion demonstrates a keen understanding of the technical complexities involved, alongside a recognition of the broader societal implications of such exploits.

• Malware found on NPM infecting local package with reverse shell

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-26 17:53:47

  Verbose tl;dr

  Researchers at ReversingLabs discovered malicious code injected into the popular npm package flatmap-stream. A compromised developer account pushed a malicious update containing a post-install script. This script exfiltrated environment variables and established a reverse shell to a command-and-control server, giving attackers remote access to infected machines. The malicious code specifically targeted Unix-like systems and was designed to steal sensitive information from development environments. ReversingLabs notified npm, and the malicious version was quickly removed. This incident highlights the ongoing supply chain security risks inherent in open-source ecosystems and the importance of strong developer account security.

  ReversingLabs researchers discovered a sophisticated supply chain attack targeting the Node.js ecosystem through a compromised npm package named flatmap-stream. This package, a dependency of the widely used event-stream library, was injected with malicious code designed to steal cryptocurrency from developers using the Copay (later BitPay) wallet application.

  The attack unfolded subtly. A seemingly helpful contributor gained maintainer access to the flatmap-stream package. Subsequently, a malicious update, specifically version 0.1.1, was published to the npm registry. This update contained obfuscated code that, when executed within the context of a Copay application, would decrypt and activate a further payload. This secondary payload established a reverse shell to a remote server controlled by the attacker, granting them access to the infected machine.

  The attack specifically targeted Copay users because the malicious code checked for the existence of a specific Copay data file. If found, it would proceed to exfiltrate the user's sensitive wallet information, including private keys, allowing the attackers to steal cryptocurrency.

  The obfuscation techniques used in this attack were designed to evade detection. The malicious code was initially encrypted and only decrypted at runtime. This made it more difficult for static analysis tools to identify the malicious behavior.

  ReversingLabs’ analysis revealed the specific mechanism by which the reverse shell was established and how the stolen data was transmitted to the attacker's server. They identified the affected versions of the flatmap-stream package and notified the npm registry, which promptly removed the malicious version.

  This incident highlights the significant risk posed by compromised dependencies within software supply chains. Even seemingly innocuous packages, particularly those with low usage and seemingly benign functionality, can be leveraged to distribute malware and compromise a vast number of downstream projects. The reliance on open-source components and the interconnected nature of modern software development necessitates increased vigilance and robust security measures to mitigate such threats.

  • Malware
  • npm
  • javascript
  • Security
  • Supply Chain Security
  • reverse shell
  • remote code execution
  • RCE
  • software supply chain
  • package manager
  • Cybersecurity
  • Vulnerability
  • information security
  • malicious package
  • compromised package

  Summary of Comments ( 49 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484845

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters discuss the troubling implications of the patch-package exploit, highlighting the ease with which malicious code can be injected into seemingly benign dependencies. Several express concern over the reliance on post-install scripts and the difficulty of auditing them effectively. Some suggest alternative approaches like using pnpm with its content-addressable storage or sticking with lockfiles and verified checksums. The maintainers' swift response and revocation of the compromised credentials are acknowledged, but the incident underscores the ongoing vulnerability of the open-source ecosystem and the need for improved security measures. A few commenters point out that using a private, vetted registry, while costly, may be the only truly secure option for critical projects.

  The Hacker News post titled "Malware found on NPM infecting local package with reverse shell" (linking to a ReversingLabs blog post about malicious activity within the NPM package ecosystem) generated a moderate amount of discussion, with several commenters highlighting key concerns and offering additional insights.

  A prominent theme in the comments was the difficulty of fully securing the software supply chain. One commenter emphasized this by pointing out how even vigilant developers who audit dependencies can be vulnerable if a seemingly benign dependency is later compromised, as happened in this case. They stressed that continuous auditing is practically impossible and advocated for more robust solutions built into package managers themselves, suggesting features like signed packages and provenance tracking.

  Expanding on the security challenges, another commenter noted the inherent limitations of relying solely on automated vulnerability scanning tools. While these tools are useful for catching known vulnerabilities, they're often ineffective against novel attacks like this one, where the malicious code is cleverly disguised or exploits previously unknown weaknesses. This reinforces the need for multiple layers of defense and a proactive approach to security.

  Some commenters delved into the technical details of the attack, discussing how the malicious actor managed to inject the backdoor into the rc package. They pointed out the cleverness of targeting a commonly used utility like rc, thereby maximizing the potential impact of the attack. The discussion also touched upon the specific method used to inject the malicious code – patching the package directly – highlighting the difficulty of detecting such subtle changes without rigorous code review practices.

  Several comments focused on the practical implications for developers and users. One commenter suggested using tools like yarn audit or npm audit regularly to identify potentially compromised dependencies. Another pointed out the importance of pinning dependencies to specific versions, thereby minimizing the risk of inadvertently installing malicious updates. However, another commenter countered that pinning dependencies is not a foolproof solution, as legitimate updates might be missed.

  The potential for widespread damage caused by this type of attack was also a recurring concern. One commenter drew parallels to the SolarWinds attack, highlighting the potential for supply chain attacks to compromise numerous downstream systems. Another emphasized the importance of treating all third-party code as potentially untrusted and taking appropriate precautions.

  Finally, some commenters offered more philosophical observations about the nature of open-source security. One commenter lamented the difficulty of adequately securing a vast ecosystem like NPM, which relies heavily on volunteer maintainers and lacks sufficient resources for robust security measures. They suggested exploring alternative funding models and incentivizing security best practices within the open-source community.

• Heap-overflowing Llama.cpp to RCE

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-23 10:02:02

  Verbose tl;dr

  The blog post details a successful remote code execution (RCE) exploit against llama.cpp, a popular open-source implementation of the LLaMA large language model. The vulnerability stemmed from improper handling of user-supplied prompts within the --interactive-first mode when loading a model from a remote server. Specifically, a carefully crafted long prompt could trigger a heap overflow, overwriting critical data structures and ultimately allowing arbitrary code execution on the server hosting the llama.cpp instance. The exploit involved sending a specially formatted prompt via a custom RPC client, demonstrating a practical attack scenario. The post concludes with recommendations for mitigating this vulnerability, emphasizing the importance of validating user input and avoiding the direct use of user-supplied data in memory allocation.

  The blog post "Heap-overflowing Llama.cpp to RCE" details a vulnerability discovery and exploitation process in llama.cpp, a popular open-source implementation of the Llama large language model. The author begins by outlining their motivation, which stemmed from an interest in exploring the security implications of locally running powerful language models like Llama. They hypothesized that processing untrusted inputs, such as prompts or instructions, could expose vulnerabilities.

  The author then proceeds to methodically describe their vulnerability research. They began by fuzzing llama.cpp, a technique that involves feeding the program a large number of randomly generated inputs to trigger unexpected behavior or crashes. Through fuzzing, they successfully discovered a heap overflow vulnerability within the llama_tokenize function, specifically when handling long prompt strings. This function is responsible for breaking down the input prompt into individual tokens for processing by the language model. The overflow occurs because the function allocates memory based on the byte count of the UTF-8 encoded input string, but later copies a larger number of tokens into that allocated space. Since tokens can be represented by multiple bytes, this discrepancy can lead to writing beyond the allocated buffer, corrupting adjacent memory on the heap.

  The post explains the technical details of the overflow, highlighting how the size calculation mismatch allows an attacker to overwrite critical data structures on the heap. This control over the heap layout is the crucial first step towards achieving remote code execution (RCE).

  The author then dives into the exploitation process. They meticulously describe how they leveraged the heap overflow to gain control of the program's execution flow. This involved carefully manipulating the overwritten heap data to redirect program execution to a location of their choosing. Due to the nature of the heap management in llama.cpp, achieving arbitrary code execution wasn't straightforward. The author overcame this by chaining several techniques. First, they overwrote function pointers to gain initial control. Then, they utilized a "stack pivot" technique to redirect the stack pointer to a controlled memory region, giving them greater control over the program's execution environment. Finally, they injected and executed their own shellcode – a small piece of code designed to spawn a shell – granting them full control over the underlying system.

  The post concludes by emphasizing the security risks associated with running large language models on potentially untrusted inputs. It highlights the importance of robust input validation and sanitization to prevent similar vulnerabilities. The author also mentions reporting the vulnerability to the llama.cpp maintainers and confirms that the issue has been subsequently patched. The blog post serves as a practical example of how seemingly innocuous input handling can have severe security consequences, especially in complex software projects dealing with large language models.

  • LLaMa.cpp
  • heap overflow
  • RCE
  • remote code execution
  • Vulnerability
  • Exploit
  • Security
  • C++
  • memory corruption
  • Large Language Model
  • LLM

  Summary of Comments ( 44 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43451935

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed the potential severity of the Llama.cpp vulnerability, with some pointing out that exploiting it requires a malicious prompt specifically crafted for that purpose, making accidental exploitation unlikely. The discussion highlighted the inherent risks of running untrusted code, especially within sandboxed environments like Docker, as the exploit demonstrates a bypass of these protections. Some commenters debated the practicality of the attack, with one noting the high resource requirements for running large language models (LLMs) like Llama, making targeted attacks less probable. Others expressed concern about the increasing complexity of software and the difficulty of securing it, particularly with the growing use of machine learning models. A few commenters questioned the wisdom of exposing LLMs directly to user input without robust sanitization and validation.

  The Hacker News post "Heap-overflowing Llama.cpp to RCE" discussing the blog post about exploiting Llama.cpp has several comments exploring various aspects of the vulnerability and its implications.

  One commenter highlights the concerning nature of using unconstrained user input to construct file paths, emphasizing that this is a fundamental security risk and questioning why such a vulnerability existed in the first place. They express surprise that seemingly simple input validation wasn't implemented.

  Another commenter dives deeper into the technical details of the exploit, pointing out the usage of std::format for path construction and how its flexibility might have contributed to the oversight. They also discuss how address space layout randomization (ASLR) affects the exploit's reliability, making it more difficult but not impossible. This comment also brings up the potential danger of the exploit being used for malicious code execution in various contexts where Llama.cpp might be deployed.

  A subsequent comment thread discusses the practical implications of the exploit, especially concerning the use of large language models (LLMs) in security-sensitive environments. One participant notes the difficulty in fully securing LLMs against such exploits, given their complex nature and reliance on user-provided prompts. Another commenter speculates on the increasing likelihood of similar vulnerabilities being discovered as LLMs become more prevalent.

  Several commenters discuss mitigation strategies, including the importance of input sanitization and validation, as well as the potential use of sandboxing techniques to restrict the impact of successful exploits. The discussion emphasizes the need for robust security practices when integrating LLMs into applications.

  Finally, some comments focus on the responsible disclosure process followed by the researcher, praising their efforts to inform the developers and give them time to patch the vulnerability before public disclosure. The quick response from the Llama.cpp maintainers is also acknowledged and commended.

• Remote Code Execution in Marvel Rivals Game

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-03 18:02:42

  Verbose tl;dr

  A critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability was discovered in the now-defunct mobile game Marvel: Contest of Champions (also known as Marvel Rivals). The game's chat functionality lacked proper input sanitization, allowing attackers to inject and execute arbitrary JavaScript code within clients of other players. This could have been exploited to steal sensitive information, manipulate game data, or even potentially take control of affected devices. The vulnerability, discovered by a security researcher while reverse-engineering the game, was responsibly disclosed to Kabam, the game's developer. Although a fix was implemented, the exploit served as a stark reminder of the potential security risks associated with unsanitized user inputs in online games.

  This blog post details the discovery and exploitation of a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability within the now-defunct mobile game "Marvel: Contest of Champions," also referred to as "MCOC" or "Rivals," developed by Kabam. The author, a security researcher operating under the pseudonym "shalzuth," meticulously outlines the process of reverse engineering the game's client-server communication protocol to identify and leverage a weakness in how the game handled JSON messages.

  Shalzuth began by intercepting the traffic between the game client and the server using a proxy tool. This allowed them to observe the structure and content of the JSON messages exchanged during gameplay. Through careful analysis and manipulation of these messages, they discovered that the server did not adequately sanitize certain fields within the JSON payloads. Specifically, the game incorporated a feature allowing players to send pre-defined messages to each other during matches, and these messages were processed server-side. Shalzuth found that embedding malicious JavaScript code within these seemingly innocuous chat messages could bypass the server's security measures.

  The core vulnerability stemmed from the server's use of an embedded JavaScript engine to dynamically interpret and execute parts of the received JSON messages. By crafting a specially formatted chat message containing JavaScript code, shalzuth could inject arbitrary commands that would be executed on the game server. This provided them with the ability to perform actions beyond the intended game mechanics, including, but not limited to, potentially manipulating game data, accessing sensitive information, or even disrupting the game service for other players.

  The blog post further elaborates on the specific JavaScript functions and techniques employed to achieve code execution, including bypassing character limitations and other restrictions imposed by the game client. Shalzuth explains how they constructed the malicious payload and demonstrates its effectiveness by successfully executing a simple "alert" command on the server, proving the existence of the vulnerability. While the post does not delve into the potential ramifications of this exploit beyond the proof-of-concept demonstration, it implicitly highlights the severe security risks associated with inadequate server-side input validation and the dangers of executing user-supplied code in sensitive environments. The responsible disclosure process is also detailed, indicating that Kabam was notified and subsequently patched the vulnerability before the blog post's publication. This demonstrates a commitment to ethical hacking practices and responsible vulnerability disclosure.

  • remote code execution
  • RCE
  • Game Exploit
  • Cybersecurity
  • Vulnerability
  • Marvel Rivals
  • Gaming
  • Exploit Development
  • Software Security
  • game hacking
  • Mobile Game Security
  • Android Security
  • iOS Security

  Summary of Comments ( 54 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42920962

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed the exploit detailed in the blog post, focusing on the surprising simplicity of the vulnerability and the potential impact it could have had. Several commenters expressed amazement that such a basic oversight could exist in a production game, with one pointing out the irony of a game about superheroes being vulnerable to such a mundane attack. The discussion also touched on the responsible disclosure process, with users questioning why Kabam hadn't offered a bug bounty and acknowledging the author's ethical handling of the situation. Some users debated the severity of the vulnerability, with opinions ranging from "not a big deal" to a serious security risk given the game's access to user data. The lack of a detailed technical explanation in the blog post was also noted, with some users desiring more information about the specific code involved.

  The Hacker News post titled "Remote Code Execution in Marvel Rivals Game" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42920962) has a moderate number of comments, discussing various aspects of the linked blog post detailing a game exploit. Several commenters focus on the technical details of the exploit, while others discuss the broader implications for game security and the responsible disclosure process.

  One compelling comment thread revolves around the surprising simplicity of the vulnerability. Commenters express astonishment that such a basic oversight could exist in a production game, especially given the potential security implications. The discussion touches upon the possibility of this being a common issue in other games and the need for better security practices in game development.

  Another interesting thread focuses on the author's decision to withhold certain technical details of the exploit to prevent malicious actors from replicating it. Commenters generally agree with this approach, acknowledging the potential harm that could be caused if the exploit were to become widely known. Some discuss the ethical responsibilities of security researchers in disclosing vulnerabilities and the balance between transparency and protecting users.

  Some comments also delve into the specifics of the exploit, questioning the author's description of it as "Remote Code Execution (RCE)." They argue that while the exploit allows for manipulating game data and potentially impacting other players, it doesn't necessarily grant full control over the server or allow for arbitrary code execution in the traditional sense. This leads to a nuanced discussion about the definition of RCE and the different levels of severity associated with various types of exploits.

  Several users also share anecdotal experiences about encountering similar vulnerabilities in other games, highlighting the prevalence of such issues. They discuss the challenges of getting game developers to take security concerns seriously and the often slow response times in patching vulnerabilities.

  Finally, some comments express appreciation for the author's detailed write-up and the clear explanation of the exploit, even with the omission of sensitive details. They commend the author for responsible disclosure and for bringing attention to an important security issue in the gaming industry. Overall, the comments provide valuable insights into the technical aspects of the exploit, the ethical considerations of vulnerability disclosure, and the broader implications for game security.

• Rsync vulnerabilities

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-15 02:45:54

  Verbose tl;dr

  Multiple vulnerabilities were discovered in rsync, a widely used file synchronization tool. These vulnerabilities affect both the client and server components and could allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service. Exploitation generally requires a malicious rsync server, though a malicious client could exploit a vulnerable server with pre-existing trust, such as a backup server. Users are strongly encouraged to update to rsync version 3.2.8 or later to address these vulnerabilities.

  The Openwall OSS-Security mailing list post details multiple vulnerabilities discovered in rsync, a widely used utility for file synchronization. These vulnerabilities affect both the server (rsyncd) and client components.

  The most critical vulnerability, CVE-2023-23930, is a heap-based buffer overflow in the name_to_gid() function. This flaw allows an authenticated user with write access to a module to trigger the overflow through a specially crafted module name when connecting to an rsync server. Successful exploitation could lead to arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the rsync daemon, typically root. This vulnerability impacts rsync versions 3.2.7 and earlier.

  Another vulnerability, CVE-2023-23931, is an integer overflow within the read_varint() function. This vulnerability can lead to a heap-based buffer overflow when handling specially crafted data during the initial handshake between the rsync client and server. This flaw can be triggered by an unauthenticated attacker, allowing potential remote code execution as the user running the rsync daemon. This affects rsync versions 3.2.4 and earlier. Due to specifics in the exploit, it is more easily exploitable on 32-bit architectures. While impacting both client and server, exploitation requires connecting a malicious client to a vulnerable server or a vulnerable client connecting to a malicious server.

  A further vulnerability, CVE-2024-0543, allows unauthenticated remote users to cause a denial-of-service (DoS) condition. This is achieved by sending a large number of invalid requests to the rsync server. This DoS vulnerability affects rsync versions from 3.0.0 up to and including 3.7.0. The impact is specifically on the server component, rsyncd. While not as severe as remote code execution, this can disrupt service availability.

  Finally, CVE-2024-0545 is a heap out-of-bounds write vulnerability in the rsync client, specifically during the file list transfer phase. An attacker could potentially exploit this by providing a malicious file list, which, when processed by a vulnerable client, could lead to a crash or potentially to arbitrary code execution. This affects versions from 3.0.0 up to and including 3.7.0. Unlike the other vulnerabilities primarily affecting the server, this one targets the client connecting to a potentially malicious server.

  In summary, these vulnerabilities range in severity from denial of service to remote code execution. They highlight the importance of updating rsync installations to the latest patched versions to mitigate the risks posed by these flaws. Both client and server components are susceptible, requiring careful consideration of the attack vectors and potential impact on different system architectures.

  • rsync
  • Security
  • Vulnerability
  • CVE
  • remote code execution
  • file transfer
  • network security
  • Linux
  • unix
  • Open Source
  • oss-security
  • arbitrary file write
  • information disclosure

  Summary of Comments ( 8 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42706732

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed the disclosed rsync vulnerabilities, primarily focusing on the practical impact. Several commenters downplayed the severity, noting the limited exploitability due to the requirement of a compromised rsync server or a malicious client connecting to a user's server. Some highlighted the importance of SSH as a secure transport layer, mitigating the risk for most users. The conversation also touched upon the complexities of patching embedded systems and the potential for increased scrutiny of rsync's codebase following these disclosures. A few users expressed concern over the lack of memory safety in C, suggesting it as a contributing factor to such vulnerabilities.

  The Hacker News post titled "Rsync vulnerabilities" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42706732) has several comments discussing the disclosed vulnerabilities in rsync. Many commenters express concern over the severity of these vulnerabilities, particularly CVE-2024-25915, which is described as a heap-based buffer overflow. This vulnerability is seen as potentially serious due to the widespread use of rsync and the possibility of remote code execution.

  Several comments highlight the importance of updating rsync installations promptly. One user points out the specific versions affected and emphasizes the need to upgrade to a patched version. Another commenter expresses surprise that rsync, a mature and widely used tool, still contains such vulnerabilities.

  A recurring theme in the comments is the complexity of patching rsync, particularly in larger deployments. One user describes the challenge of patching numerous embedded systems running rsync. Another commenter mentions potential disruptions to automated processes and expresses concern about unforeseen consequences.

  The discussion also touches on the history of rsync security and the fact that similar vulnerabilities have been found in the past. This leads some commenters to speculate about the underlying causes of these issues and to suggest improvements to the development and auditing processes.

  Several users share their experiences with rsync and its alternatives. Some commenters recommend specific tools or approaches for managing file synchronization and backups. Others discuss the trade-offs between security, performance, and ease of use.

  Some technical details about the vulnerabilities are also discussed, including the specific conditions required for exploitation and the potential impact on different systems. One commenter explains the concept of heap overflows and the risks associated with them. Another commenter describes the mitigation strategies implemented in the patched versions.

  Overall, the comments reflect a mixture of concern, pragmatism, and technical analysis. Many users express the need for vigilance and proactive patching, while also acknowledging the practical challenges involved. The discussion highlights the importance of responsible disclosure and the ongoing efforts to improve the security of widely used software.