High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
csa.gov.sg
High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
1–10 of 16 posts
Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#2Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#3From a small bit of skimming, sounds like it's a user escalation vector, where a low privileged user can run the installer in a contrived manner to achieve privilege escalation.
https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/secur...
So for my personal install, nothing to worry about here...
Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#4Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#5If the problem is in the installer then this can't be 'fixed', affected installers should be fingerprinted as malware.
Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#6Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#7Headline is a little misleading imo -- the vulnerability isn't in Notepad++ itself as much as its installer. Current users, I imagine, don't have anything to worry about.
Attackers can also use the notepad installer as a payload execution mechanism. To run your malware, just get older notepad++ installers and drop your dll after the installer is running to run it as SYSTEM.
Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#8Looks like it's a vulnerability in the installer . From a small bit of skimming, sounds like it's a user escalation vector, where a low privileged user can run the installer in a contrived manner to achieve privilege escalation. https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/secur... So for my personal install, nothing to worry about here...
Re: High-Severity Vulnerability in Notepad++
#9If the problem is in the installer then this can't be 'fixed', affected installers should be fingerprinted as malware.
Couple questions as savvy tech person but not working day-to-day in security/IT:
Would a regular home user with an old installer in their Downloads folder need to worry? (is a bad download file going to target looking for these old installers, then moving files around, etc?)
On the other hand, I could see corporate IT having the stronger case of proactively wanting to flag this installer if present on their systems.