February 2, 2023 CISA KEV Breakdown | Oracle E-Business, SugarCRM RCE

February 2 – 2 New Vulns | CVE-2022-21587, CVE-2023-22952

In this CISA KEV Breakdown, a remote code execution vulnerability in Oracle’s E-Business Suite, as well as SugarCRM were added. Both have had subsequent security advisories in addition to patches released. Organizations are encouraged to utilize the available workarounds should patching not be an immediate option.

[wpdatatable id=27]

Notable Vulnerability Additions

CVE-2022-21587 | Oracle E-Business Suite Remote Code Execution

A vulnerability exists in E-Business Suite versions 12.2.3-12.2.9, as well as Web Applications Desktop Integrator versions 12.2.3-12.2.11 in which an improper whitelisting during server call functions allows for an attacker to overwrite a file to create a webshell. More information can be found in a writeup discussing the discovery and PoC here. Exploitation attempts were observed shortly after this was posted online. The writeup also emphasizes to ensure that requests to the following URLs are blocked at the firewall to prevent exploitation attempts. It is advised to ensure that these URLs are not utilized by existing business functionality before closing off the URLs from unknown access:

• /OA_HTML/BneUploaderService
• /OA_HTML/BneViewerXMLService
• /OA_HTML/BneDownloadService
• /OA_HTML/BneOfflineLOVService

Security Advisory:

https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2022.html

CVE-2023-22952 | SugarCRM Multiple Products Remote Code Execution

A vulnerability exists in SugarCRM versions 12.0 and earlier where an improper input validation in EmailTemplates allows for an attacker to inject exploitable PHP code. Censys has tracked exposed SugarCRM instances which have been compromised over time since a release of exploitation code has been observed in the wild. In their report, they indicate that users can verify if a SugarCRM instance has been compromised with the following command, where $INSTALLDIR is the root directory of the SugarCRM install.

~$ strings $INSTALLDIR/cache/images/* | grep -i PHP

Due to the fact that existing exploit code utilizes the creation of a PHP webshell, any indication of PHP code existing in this directory is an indicator of compromise. Furthermore, Censys encourages analysis of HTTP request log ins/cache/images for responses other than 404 and 403. Both of these response status codes indicate either the malicious code was not executed, or the service has been patched and the vulnerability no longer affects the service.

Security Advisory:

https://support.sugarcrm.com/Resources/Security/sugarcrm-sa-2023-001/

Be sure to check out Nucleus Security’s KEV Enrichment Dashboard where we overlay vulnerabilities that are added to the catalog with intelligence from GreyNoise, exploit-prediction scoring from EPSS and lastly CVSS. You can use the data yourself and use further metrics to influence decision-making when determining risk of vulnerabilities added to the KEV.

← January 23, 2023 CISA Kev Breakdown

Click here to expand our CISA KEV Breakdown Frequently Asked Questions

• What makes for a notable addition?
  • A notable addition can arise from many different characteristics. If a particular vulnerability is notable to the security community or a subset of the security community or if the EPSS score reveals notable information about the vulnerability, this can constitute further analysis. It may also be the case that a particular vulnerability shines a light on everyday users and we will highlight important information and key takeaways to ensure users and readers have easy access to actionable information.
• When is the Breakdown released?
  • We aim to have our analysis of each KEV update posted within 24 hours of the time in which the Catalog is updated. See CISA’s full catalog here
• I am not bound by BOD 22-01 or federal regulations, why should the KEV concern me?
  • CISA encourages all organizations to utilize the Catalog as an attribute in your vulnerability prioritization framework. Organizations looking to lessen the scope on known dangerous vulnerabilities and make a goal to remediate them can understand where they currently stand against what CISA has confirmed as exploited vulnerabilities in the wild. See CISA’s section on “How should organizations use the KEV catalog?” here.
• What is EPSS?
  • EPSS is the Exploit Prediction Scoring System. It is an open, data-driven effort for estimating the likelihood (probability) that a software vulnerability will be exploited in the wild. See the EPSS home page on FIRST for more information here.
• What is the difference between EPSS probability and EPSS percent?
  • EPSS probability is the risk calculated by the model when determining the perceived threat of the vulnerability itself. Percentage is a relative comparison of the rest of the CVEs within the given sample. While the probability only changes upon refreshing the results from the model, the percentage can change purely based on the CVE sample given. In the case of the Breakdown, we use the percentage given by the pool of all CVEs with given EPSS data. Scores may vary post-release of the post given new information about the vulnerabilities and their perceived threat. For more information on applying and understanding EPSS data, see this article on the FIRST website, as well as their FAQ page.
• What is GreyNoise?
  • GreyNoise is a platform that collects, analyzes, and labels data on IPs that scan the internet and saturate security tools with noise. Through their sensor network, GreyNoise observes vulnerability exploitation attempts for vulnerabilities that are exploited in the wild over the Internet. These are arguably vulnerabilities that should be at the very top of your priority list to remediate.
• Why are GreyNoise exploitation attempts only observed on ~20% of KEV vulnerabilities?
  • Exploitation of many vulnerabilities in the CISA KEV will not be observed for many reasons that GreyNoise does a good job of explaining in this post. For example:
    • The vulnerability may not be remotely exploitable
    • Vulnerability exploitation may require authentication (and result in privilege escalation)
    • The impacted software may not be exposed to the internet
    • Mass scanning/exploitation is not occurring yet