Hello,

CVE-2019-11510: Pre-auth Arbitrary File Reading

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-11510

https://kb.pulsesecure.net/articles/Pulse_Security_Advisories/SA44101

https://devco.re/blog/2019/09/02/attacking-ssl-vpn-part-3-the-golden-Pulse-Secure-ssl-vpn-rce-chain-with-Twitter-as-case-study/


Em qui, 12 de set de 2019 às 13:07, Nick Couchman <[email protected]>
escreveu:

> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 11:40 AM Der PCFreak <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> by accident I found the following in my very reduced Apache SSL Error
>> logs:
>>
>> ```
>> [Thu Sep 05 02:35:53 2019] [error] [client xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] Invalid URI
>> in request GET
>> /dana-na/../dana/html5acc/guacamole/../../../../../../../etc/hosts?/dana/html5acc/guacamole/
>>
>> HTTP/1.1
>> ```
>>
>> The thing is, I do not host Guacamole to the public internet, neither on
>> this machine.
>>
>> I just wanted to inform the list, that it might be the case that someone
>> found a vulnerability in Guacamole and tries to find public vulnerable
>> servers.
>>
>>
> First, if you think you've found a vulnerability in Guacamole, please make
> sure to report it responsibly:
>
> https://www.apache.org/security/
>
> This involves reporting it *privately* to the project, not publicly on the
> lists.
>
> That said, in your case, if your Guacamole instance is not hosted
> publicly, then I would be concerned that whatever network it is hosted on
> has something bad on it - the kind of attack you're seeing there looks less
> like an attack specific to Guacamole and more like a generic case of
> someone finding a valid URL and then trying to exploit a poorly-configured
> system to get access to system-level files.  The good news, for you, is
> that it appears that your Apache server is seeing it as an invalid
> request.  The bad news is that something is trying to do it in the first
> place.  Whatever client is represented by the redacted "[client
> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]" should probably be investigated for malware and/or threat
> actors present on the system.
>
> -Nick
>

Reply via email to