Archive for the ‘CVE-2008-5353’ Category

SIRv11: Putting Vulnerability Exploitation into Context

October 14th, 2011 No comments

As Vinny Gullotto, our GM blogged earlier in the week, the 11th edition of the Security Intelligence Report (SIRv11) has been released. One of the new areas of research in this release is a study of the most prevalent kinds of vulnerability exploitation and how much of that exploitation is 0-day (short for zero-day, an attack or exploitation of a vulnerability without an available update). We took two paths to find this answer. The first was an analysis of how the top families found by the Microsoft Malicious Software Removal Tool (MSRT) were known to infect systems. We found that none of the top 27 families were known to use 0-day vulnerabilities in 1H11.

The second way we approached this answer was to measure all of the exploit activity tracked by the MMPC through our real-time protection products (such as Microsoft Security Essentials and Forefront Endpoint Protection) and compare the number of attacks that were 0-day at the time (no update available) versus attacks that occurred after the update was made available. We actually gave a month buffer zone (so any exploits that happened during the month in which the update was made available was still counted as 0-day). We expected the percentage to be low, and it was– 0.12 percent to be exact for 1H11. Here’s what it looks like in chart form:

Chart illustrating percentage of exploits that were 0-day in 1H11
Chart 1 – Chart illustrating percentage of exploits that were 0-day in 1H11

One question that we discussed a lot while working on this report was: How do we measure what we don’t know and therefore can’t see? (In other words, 0-day by definition means you may not know about it.) Great question! Answer: We can’t measure what we can’t see. However, what we have seen tells us that “secret 0-days” don’t stay a secret for very long. Take, for example, a few we tracked in 2010. These attacks nearly always started out as targeted – sometimes reported as affecting only one entity when they were discovered. The trend they have in common is that they broaden to more generalized use (eventually) and we find out about them sooner or later.

  • CVE-2010-0806 was a 0-day affecting Internet Explorer 6 and 7 on older operating systems (like Vista and XP) that was reported as being used in targeted attacks. A few days later, after the release of public exploit code, we saw those attacks escalate and they have remained a sizable part of exploit activity throughout 2011.
  • CVE-2010-3962, which we dubbed the Weekend Warrior for its peaks of activity in Korea on the weekends, was discovered in Nov. 2010 when it was used in targeted attacks. Attackers broadened the targets of their attacks near the end of the month.
  • Another example is CVE-2010-3962, the vulnerability that used malicious .lnk files that was found with Stuxnet. It took a matter of weeks before this one technique used in this very targeted, singular attack got picked up by many other families of malware like Sality, broadening the impact considerably.

The point here is that although it’s true that “you don’t know what you don’t know,” our experience tells us that when it comes to 0-day activity, we find out, and often, we find out quite quickly. Things start to unravel rapidly the moment the 0-day affects either a target that’s really paying attention or when the attacks start to affect a broader, less targeted audience.

So, even if our estimates for 0-day activity were off by 5 fold, the estimated activity for 1H11 would remain under 1 percent. That’s still pretty small.

Most Frequent Exploits

So, now that the question of 0-day is out of the way, let’s talk about the broader volumes of exploit activity that were revealed in SIRv11. Although there are many interesting trends in the chart below, I want to focus on a few of them in this blog: Java (and the age of vulnerabilities in general) and Operating System vulnerabilities. If you want details about the other categories in this chart, see the full Security Intelligence Report.


Exploit activity over a one year period

Chart 2 – Exploit activity over a one year period

Java Exploits

As we blogged a year ago, in 3Q10, the exploitation of Java vulnerabilities skyrocketed to new levels that we had never seen before. The analysis in SIRv11 shows that Java exploitation remains high and that the targeted vulnerabilities are quite old. The top four Java exploits are CVE-2010-0840, CVE-2008-5353, CVE-2010-0094, and CVE-2009-3867. These CVEs affect the Oracle Sun Java JRE or JDK, and all of them have updates available to fix them now. The most recent, CVE-2010-0094 and CVE-2010-0840, received updates in April 2010 after following a coordinated disclosure process with an external vendor.

Operating System Exploits

The jump in operating system exploits is primarily due to one technique: CVE-2010-2568 (the vulnerability mentioned earlier that was found with Stuxnet). This exploit was picked up by a number of families that were known to abuse Autorun. And, although CVE-2010-2568 has nothing to do with Autorun itself, the behavior is quite similar: the user connects to a USB device and browses the drive, the malware automatically executes (if the user hasn’t applied the update to fix the issue, that is). Malware authors must have found this exploit technique alluring. At least, the data certainly seems to indicate that they did. It’s also possible that attackers, after Microsoft released updates to harden the Autorun feature on older systems (which did appear to put a dent in their ability to infect users), were searching for ways to broaden their infection rate.

Another interesting aspect in our exploit data on CVE-2010-2568 is the location of the targets. I recently did a talk at Virus Bulletin on the top exploits of 2011, and in that talk, I looked at geographical differences for regions that face the most exposure to exploitation attempts. Several regions that were at the top, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Vietnam, were there because of exploitation attempts for CVE-2010-2568. If you combine those three locations with two more, India and Mexico, those five together represent 52% of all the computers that have reported CVE-2010-2568 attack attempts in the first three quarters of this year. Although I don’t have update statistics for these regions, this data might indicate that there are large numbers of systems there that have not yet applied this very important update (MS10-046).

Net Net

I’ve talked about a lot of data in this post, and sometimes it’s hard to synthesize it. The key point of the exploit analysis in SIRv11 is that older vulnerabilities are what the vast majority of exploitation attempts target (90 percent are more than a year old). The special 0-day section of the report takes this concept even further – we look at how much of the malware infections are actually attributed to the exploit of vulnerabilities in general. (The answer: Less than 6 percent in 1H11.) To find out what the other 94 percent of infections are attributed to, download the report and keep your eye on this blog for more analysis to come.

– Holly Stewart, MMPC

Microsoft Safety Scanner detects exploits du jour

May 25th, 2011 No comments

We recently updated the Microsoft Safety Scanner – a just-in-time, free cleanup tool.  The new version adds support for 64-bit Windows systems and also allows for the download of the tool to run in non-networked systems such as those behind an air-gap network, those within an ISPs walled garden, and those where the infection has impaired internet connectivity.  You can download the Microsoft Safety Scanner (MSS) at

Early results have been very positive with this tool and we are actively reviewing telemetry from our customers who use it in order to better understand aspects of threat impact from specific malware families. In addition, we urge our customers to install security updates provided by Microsoft for our operating systems and applications, as well as from other third-party applications and any security updates that may be provided by Internet service providers. Early telemetry gathered from the release of the Microsoft Safety Scanner echoes this continuous messaging.

During the first seven days of the MSS release, there were close to 420,000 downloads, or 60,000 downloads per day, of the product. It cleaned 20,097 infected computers in total, for users that suspected their computers were infected and downloaded MSS to scan their machines. Kudos to these users for having security awareness.

Among the detections, 7 of the top 10 threats are files containing exploits for Java vulnerabilities such as CVE-2008-5353, CVE-2010-0094, CVE-2010-0840 and CVE-2009-3867. (For more information related to these exploits, see the blog post “Have you checked the Java?” by our colleague Holly Stewart.)

Below is a table detailing Microsoft Safety Scanner detections in the first seven days since its release:



Threat Count

Machine Count





Java Exploit




Java Exploit




Java Exploit




Java Exploit








Java Exploit




Malicious Win Media File




Key Generator Hacking Tool




Java Exploit




Java Exploit


Of course many of these detections by MSS are the debris or aftermath after the exploit has already executed. By the time a user downloads and runs MSS to detect malware, the machine may have already been infected, if it was vulnerable to the exploit at the time.  For example, aside from additional malicious Java code detections, the following active threats were also reported on machines found to be infected by Exploit:Java/CVE-2008-5353 on April 15 2011:



Percentage of machines
where MSS also detected




Rootkit Data Stealing Trojan



Browser Modifier















Rogue Downloader






Encrypted Threat





On average, MSS detected 3.5 threats on each of the infected computers.


Threat Count

Infected Machine Count

Threats Per Infected Machine





This won’t surprise you if you have read our newly published Security Intelligence Report (SIR).  For example in the exploit section, the data shows Java exploits uptake in 2010:

Exploits detected by Microsoft desktop antimalware products in 2010, by targeted platform or technology


If you are one of these users, we encourage you to apply security updates from Microsoft (and from the ISVs where applicable). In addition, take care and protect your Internet activities.  Install antimalware security software such as Microsoft Security Essentials (or other AVs) to protect your computers proactively using real-time scanning technology.

We want to give a special thanks to Holly Stewart for her assistance in this post.


— Scott Wu & Joe Faulhaber, MMPC