Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
1–10 of 66 posts
Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#2Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#3Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#4This was an interesting excercise because there were NO logs of this happening on the Cisco ASA, not even when ramping every loglevel to debug. Well only on the console port. Exception in readline() or something like it. Doing stuff for security monitoring in daily life this ehm was alarming, but not unexpected. Fixing “No logs” is often a challenge for blue teams.
Anyway it was alarming enough to find and read through the Common Criteria EAL4+ certification docs for the Cisco ASA only to find that SNMP was excluded from certification scope. I still have the idea in the back of my head to explore scope exclusions in other certification docs for other unfortunate exclusions.
Also the lack of mitigations like stack canaries, ASLR or others was quite surprising for a certified black box security device on the network perimeter.
Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#5Know thy stack!
Yes, you still have a .text section!
Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#6Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#7Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#8In 2017 I got a second hand Cisco ASA just to play with the shadowbrokers tools. EXTRABACON was the codename for the SNMP exploit using a buffer overflow. This was an interesting excercise because there were NO logs of this happening on the Cisco ASA, not even when ramping every loglevel to debug. Well only on the console port. Exception in readline() or something like it. Doing stuff for security monitoring in daily…
It isn't like the CC folks aren't aware of the problem. The idea was that the Security Target (definition of the system) could declare conformance to a standardized Protection Profile which consumers could use as a shortcut to understanding what was promised.
However, nobody looks at STs nor PPs except the vendor and the certifier, so all that work is for naught. You could absolutely get a CC cert with the environment that it is unplugged from a network.
Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#9This has been required reading for all the pentesters at my org for the past 20 years.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_overflow (See buffer overflow protection)
Re: Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit (1996)
#10Here's a few I'm aware of: