Windows Kernel Hijacking Is Not an Option: Memoryranger Comes to the Rescue Again
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Win32 API 1.Pdf
Win32 Programming for Microsoft Windows NT Windows NT is designed to address the changing requirements of the computing world. It is written mainly in C and is crafted in such a way as to make its functionality extensible, and to ease the porting of the code from one hardware platform to another. This enables the ability to take advantage of multiprocessor and RISC computers, and to distribute tasks to other computers on the network, transparently. Whilst providing applications and users with the ability to use the power of local and remote machines, Windows NT must offer compatibility to applications and users. Users must feel comfortable with the interface, and be able to run existing high-volume applications. Existing applications have to port simply to the new environment to take advantage of its power. So, the user interface is compatible with existing Microsoft systems and existing programming APIs are supported and have been extended. To be considered a major player in the server arena, Windows NT has to offer reliable, robust support for ‘mission critical’ software. This means the system should be fault tolerant, protecting itself from malfunction and from external tampering. It should behave predictably and applications should not be able to adversely affect the system or each other. It should also have a security policy to protect the use of system resources, and implement resource quotas and auditing. Networking is built in, with high level programming and user interfaces available. Remote access to other machines on various networks is almost transparent. Because applications have to perform to an expected level, the system should be fast and responsive on each hardware platform. -
Installation and Configuration Guide
NetApp SANtricity® SMI-S Provider 11.53 Installation and Configuration Guide December 2019 | 215-13407_C0 [email protected] Table of Contents About This Guide ............................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of the NetApp SANtricity SMI-S Provider ...................................................................... 1 What’s New ................................................................................................................................1 Abbreviations, Acronyms, Terms, and Definitions ........................................................................ 1 Supported Profiles and Subprofiles ............................................................................................. 1 Supported Operating Systems for SMI-S .................................................................................... 2 Supported Firmware Versions ........................................................................................................ 3 System Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 3 Installing and Uninstalling SMI-S Provider ..................................................................................... 4 Windows operating system install and uninstall process ............................................................... 4 Installing SMI-S Provider (Windows operating system) ..................................................... -
Windows Kernel Hijacking Is Not an Option: Memoryranger Comes to The
WINDOWS KERNEL HIJACKING IS NOT AN OPTION: MEMORYRANGER COMES TO THE RESCUE AGAIN Igor Korkin, PhD Independent Researcher Moscow, Russian Federation [email protected] ABSTRACT The security of a computer system depends on OS kernel protection. It is crucial to reveal and inspect new attacks on kernel data, as these are used by hackers. The purpose of this paper is to continue research into attacks on dynamically allocated data in the Windows OS kernel and demonstrate the capacity of MemoryRanger to prevent these attacks. This paper discusses three new hijacking attacks on kernel data, which are based on bypassing OS security mechanisms. The first two hijacking attacks result in illegal access to files open in exclusive access. The third attack escalates process privileges, without applying token swapping. Although Windows security experts have issued new protection features, access attempts to the dynamically allocated data in the kernel are not fully controlled. MemoryRanger hypervisor is designed to fill this security gap. The updated MemoryRanger prevents these new attacks as well as supporting the Windows 10 1903 x64. Keywords: hypervisor-based protection, Windows kernel, hijacking attacks on memory, memory isolation, Kernel Data Protection. 1. INTRODUCTION the same high privilege level as the OS kernel, and they also include a variety The security of users’ data and of vulnerabilities. Researchers applications depends on the security of consider that “kernel modules (drivers) the OS kernel code and data. Modern introduce additional attack surface, as operating systems include millions of they have full access to the kernel’s lines of code, which makes it address space” (Yitbarek and Austin, impossible to reveal and remediate all 2019). -
Leveraging Forticlient with Microsoft Defender: 6 Use Cases
SOLUTION BRIEF Leveraging FortiClient with Microsoft Defender: 6 Use Cases Executive Overview A compromised endpoint can quickly infect an entire enterprise network—which FortiClient Features Include: is why endpoint devices are now a favorite target for cyber criminals. More than an endpoint protection platform that provides automated, next-generation threat nnSecurity Fabric Connector. protection, FortiClient connects endpoints with the Security Fabric. It enables Enables endpoint visibility and endpoint visibility and compliance throughout the Security Fabric architecture. compliance throughout the Combining FortiClient with OS-embedded protection, such as Microsoft Security Fabric architecture. Defender or Microsoft Defender ATP, enhances these capabilities, providing nnVulnerability scanning. an integrated endpoint and network security solution that reinforces enterprise Detects and patches endpoint defenses, reduces complexity, and enhances the end-user experience. vulnerabilities. nn Improving Protection of Endpoint Devices Anti-malware protection. Employs machine learning (ML), FortiClient provides automated threat protection and endpoint vulnerability scanning to help artificial intelligence (AI), and maintain endpoint security hygiene and deliver risk-based visibility across the Fortinet Security cloud-based threat detection Fabric architecture. As a result, organizations can identify and remediate vulnerabilities or in addition to pattern-based compromised hosts across the entire attack surface. malware detection. In some cases, customers may wish to take advantage of certain FortiClient features while nnAnti-exploit engine. Uses leaving existing third-party protections in place. For example, in instances where there are signatureless, behavior-based policies in an organization that require two different antivirus (AV) vendors on an endpoint protection against memory and for governance or compliance reasons, the need for FortiClient alongside a third-party AV fileless attacks; detects exploit solution such as Microsoft Defender is necessitated. -
Guide to Hardening Windows 10 Technical Guide
NOVEMBER 2020 Guide to Hardening Windows 10 For Administrators, Developers and Office Workers TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 4 Prerequisites ............................................................................................................................ 4 User roles ................................................................................................................................. 4 EFI (BIOS) Configuration ...................................................................................................... 5 To be enabled: ......................................................................................................................... 5 To be disabled: ......................................................................................................................... 5 Windows Defender Firewall .................................................................................................. 6 Enable logging of dropped packets ............................................................................................. 6 Disable enforcement of local rules and disable notifications .......................................................... 7 Block outbound connections by default ....................................................................................... 8 Secure potentially vulnerable protocols ...................................................................................... -
Microsoft Expands Capabilities and Platforms for Microsoft Defender ATP
REPORT REPRINT Microsoft expands capabilities and platforms for Microsoft Defender ATP JULY 31 2020 By Fernando Montenegro The company has been pouring significant resources into growing its capabilities as a provider of security functionality. It appears to be making significant inroads into the endpoint security space, given its role behind the Windows OS and on account of its Defender ATP offering, which was recently updated. THIS REPORT, LICENSED TO MICROSOFT, DEVELOPED AND AS PROVIDED BY 451 RESEARCH, LLC, WAS PUBLISHED AS PART OF OUR SYNDICATED MARKET INSIGHT SUBSCRIPTION SER- VICE. IT SHALL BE OWNED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY 451 RESEARCH, LLC. THIS REPORT IS SOLELY INTENDED FOR USE BY THE RECIPIENT AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR RE-POSTED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, BY THE RECIPIENT WITHOUT EXPRESS PERMISSION FROM 451 RESEARCH. ©2020 451 Research, LLC | WWW.451RESEARCH.COM REPORT REPRINT Introduction Endpoint security had been growing in importance as a key component of security architecture even before the COVID-19 health crisis. Back then, key trends such as user mobility, BYOD and increased use of encryption already meant that properly securing and capturing telemetry from endpoints was crucial for protection, detection and incident response. The COVID-19 crisis merely accelerated this as network connectivity patterns changed and corporate offices sat empty. In recent years the endpoint security market has seen significant change, including the rise in popularity of Microsoft’s offerings, particularly its Microsoft Defender Advanced Threat Protection (MDATP) component. The company has been expanding the capabilities of the product as it adds support for new environments and partners. -
The Flask Security Architecture: System Support for Diverse Security Policies
The Flask Security Architecture: System Support for Diverse Security Policies Ray Spencer Secure Computing Corporation Stephen Smalley, Peter Loscocco National Security Agency Mike Hibler, David Andersen, Jay Lepreau University of Utah http://www.cs.utah.edu/flux/flask/ Abstract and even many types of policies [1, 43, 48]. To be gen- erally acceptable, any computer security solution must Operating systems must be flexible in their support be flexible enough to support this wide range of security for security policies, providing sufficient mechanisms for policies. Even in the distributed environments of today, supporting the wide variety of real-world security poli- this policy flexibility must be supported by the security cies. Such flexibility requires controlling the propaga- mechanisms of the operating system [32]. tion of access rights, enforcing fine-grained access rights and supporting the revocation of previously granted ac- Supporting policy flexibility in the operating system is cess rights. Previous systems are lacking in at least one a hard problem that goes beyond just supporting multi- of these areas. In this paper we present an operating ple policies. The system must be capable of supporting system security architecture that solves these problems. fine-grained access controls on low-level objects used to Control over propagation is provided by ensuring that perform higher-level functions controlled by the secu- the security policy is consulted for every security deci- rity policy. Additionally, the system must ensure that sion. This control is achieved without significant perfor- the propagation of access rights is in accordance with mance degradation through the use of a security decision the security policy. -
DAC Vs. MAC Bell-La Padula Model [BL]
DAC vs. MAC Bell-La Padula model [BL] Most people familiar with discretionary access View the system as subjects accessing objects • • control (DAC) - The system input is requests, the output is decisions - Unix permission bits are an example - Objects can be organized in one or more hierarchies, H - Might set a file private so only group friends can read it (a tree enforcing the type of decendents) Discretionary means anyone with access can Four modes of access are possible: • • propagate information: - execute – no observation or alteration - Mail [email protected] < private - read – observation Mandatory access control - append – alteration • - Security administrator can restrict propagation - write – both observation and modification - Abbreviated MAC (NOT to be confused w. Message The current access set, b, is (subj, obj, attr) tripples Authentication Code or Medium Access Control) • An access matrix M encodes permissible access types • (as before, subjects are rows, objects columns) 1/39 2/39 Security levels Security properties A security level is a (c, s) pair: The simple security or ss-property: • • - c = classification – E.g., unclassified, secret, top secret - For any (S, O, A) b, if A includes observation, then level(S) ∈ - s = category-set – E.g., Nuclear, Crypto must dominate level(O) (c , s ) dominates (c , s ) iff c c and s s - E.g., an unclassified user cannot read a top-secret document • 1 1 2 2 1 ≥ 2 1 ⊇ 2 - L dominates L sometimes written L L or L L The star security or ⋆-property: 1 2 1 ⊒ 2 2 ⊑ 1 • - levels then form a lattice (partial order w. -
What Is Active Directory
What is Active Directory Originally created in the year 1996, Active Directory, also referred as an AD, was first used with Windows 2000 Server as a directory service for Windows domain networks. Active Directory is a special purpose database, which serves as a central location for authenticating and authorizing all the users and computers within a network. Active Directory uses the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP), an application protocol used for accessing and maintaining directory information services distributed over an IP network. What is Active Directory? The basic internal structure of the Active Directory consists of a hierarchical arrangement of Objects which can be categorized broadly into resources and security principles. Some of the examples of Active Directory objects are users, computers, groups, sites, services, printers, etc. Every Object is considered as a single entity with some specific set of attributes. The attributes of Objects along with the kind of objects that can be stored in the AD are defined by a Schema. The intrinsic framework of Active Directory is divided into a number of levels on the basis of visibility of objects. An AD network can be organized in four types of container structure namely, Forest, Domains, Organizational Units and Sites. y Forests: It is a collection of AD objects, their attributes and set of attribute syntax. y Domain: Domain is a collection of computers objects in the AD which share a common set of policies, a name and a database of their members. y Organizational Units: OUs are containers in which domains are grouped. They are used to create a hierarchy for the domain to resemble the structure of the Active Directory's company in organizational terms. -
Hypervisor-Based Active Data Protection for Integrity And
The 13th Annual ADFSL Conference on Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 2018 HYPERVISOR-BASED ACTIVE DATA PROTECTION FOR INTEGRITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF DYNAMICALLY ALLOCATED MEMORY IN WINDOWS KERNEL Igor Korkin, PhD Security Researcher Moscow, Russia [email protected] ABSTRACT One of the main issues in the OS security is providing trusted code execution in an untrusted environment. During executing, kernel-mode drivers dynamically allocate memory to store and process their data: Windows core kernel structures, users’ private information, and sensitive data of third-party drivers. All this data can be tampered with by kernel-mode malware. Attacks on Windows-based computers can cause not just hiding a malware driver, process privilege escalation, and stealing private data but also failures of industrial CNC machines. Windows built-in security and existing approaches do not provide the integrity and confidentiality of the allocated memory of third-party drivers. The proposed hypervisor-based system (AllMemPro) protects allocated data from being modified or stolen. AllMemPro prevents access to even 1 byte of allocated data, adapts for newly allocated memory in real time, and protects the driver without its source code. AllMemPro works well on newest Windows 10 1709 x64. Keywords: hypervisor-based protection, Windows kernel, Intel, CNC security, rootkits, dynamic data protection. 1. INTRODUCTION The vulnerable VirtualBox driver (VBoxDrv.sys) Currently, protection of data in computer memory has been exploited by Turla rootkit and allows to is becoming essential. Growing integration of write arbitrary values to any kernel memory (Singh, ubiquitous Windows-based computers into 2015; Kirda, 2015). industrial automation makes this security issue critically important. -
The Windows Operating System, Such As the Logon Process and the Session Manager
TTHEHE WWINDOWSINDOWS OOPERATINGPERATING SSYSTEMYSTEM William Stallings This document is an extract from Operating Systems: Internals and Design Principles, Fifth Edition Prentice Hall, 2005, ISBN 0-13-147954-7 Copyright 2005 William Stallings TTABLEABLE OFOF CCONTENTSONTENTS 2.5 MICROSOFT WINDOWS OVERVIEW...........................................................................3 History............................................................................................................................3 Single-User Multitasking...............................................................................................5 Architecture....................................................................................................................7 Operating System Organization.........................................................................7 User-Mode Processes.......................................................................................10 Client/Server Model.....................................................................................................11 Threads and SMP.........................................................................................................13 Windows Objects.........................................................................................................13 4.4 WINDOWS THREAD AND SMP MANAGEMENT.....................................................17 Process and Thread Objects.........................................................................................18 -
Kernel Integrity Analysis
Project CS2 AAVR Kernel Integrity Analysis Major Qualifying Project Submitted to the Faculty of Worcester Polytechnic Institute in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree in Bachelor of Science in Computer Science By Caleb Stepanian [email protected] Submitted On: October 27, 2015 Project Advisor: Professor Craig Shue [email protected] This report represents work of WPI undergraduate students submitted to the faculty as evidence of a degree requirement. WPI routinely publishes these reports on its web site without editorial or peer review. For more information about the projects program at WPI, see http: // www. wpi. edu/ Academics/ Projects . Abstract Rootkits are dangerous and hard to detect. A rootkit is malware specifically de- signed to be stealthy and maintain control of a computer without alerting users or administrators. Existing detection mechanisms are insufficient to reliably detect rootkits, due to fundamental problems with the way they do detection. To gain control of an operating system kernel, a rootkit edits certain parts of the kernel data structures to route execution to its code or to hide files that it has placed on the file system. Each of the existing detector tools only monitors a subset of those data structures. This MQP has two major contributions. The first contribution is a Red Team analysis of WinKIM, a rootkit detection tool. The analysis shows my attempts to find flaws in WinKIM's ability to detect rootkits. WinKIM monitors a particular set of Windows data structures; I attempt to show that this set is insufficient to detect all possible rootkits. The second is the enumeration of data structures in the Windows kernel which can possibly be targeted by a rootkit.