Microsoft June 2012 Black Tuesday Update - Overview

Overview of the June 2012 Microsoft patches and their status.

#	Affected	Contra Indications - KB	Known Exploits	Microsoft rating(**)	ISC rating(*)
#	Affected	Contra Indications - KB	Known Exploits	Microsoft rating(**)	clients	servers
MS12�??036	RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) allows random code execution due to input validation issues. Also affects Small Business Server 2003 (called "Remote Web Workplace"). Having exposure to the RDP port with a vulnerable version on e.g. your web server will put you at great risk.
MS12�??036	Remote Desktop CVE�??2012�??0173	KB 2685939	No publicly known exploits.	Severity:Critical Exploitability:1	Important	Critical
MS12�??037	The usual MSIE cumulative patch fixing a multitude of security vulenrabilities, you want this one! Note: this bulletin shares a CVE-2012-1858 with MS12-039 (both Internet Explorer and Lync suffer from the same) Replaces MS12-023.
MS12�??037	MSIE CVE�??2012�??1523 CVE�??2012�??1858 CVE�??2012�??1873 CVE�??2012�??1874 CVE�??2012�??1875 CVE�??2012�??1876 CVE�??2012�??1877 CVE�??2012�??1878 CVE�??2012�??1879 CVE�??2012�??1880 CVE�??2012�??1881	KB 2699988	CVE-2012-1875 has active exploits against it according to the bulletin.	Severity:Critical Exploitability:1	PATCH NOW	Important
MS12�??038	An vulnerability in .NET framework allows random code execution with the rights of the logged on user. This not only affects users browsing websites but also servers running .NET applications as they could bypass Code Access Security (CAS) restrictions.
MS12�??038	.NET CVE�??2012�??1855	KB 2706726	No publicly known exploits	Severity:Critical Exploitability:1	Critical	Critical
MS12�??039	Multiple vulnerabilities in Lync allow for random code execution and information leaks. CVE-2012-3402 is also affecting other Microsoft software (true-type font parsing). CVE-2012-1858 is also affecting MSIE (HTML sanitation issue). CVE-2012-1849 is related to the loading of libraries problems affecting many Microsoft products, first described in SA 2269637.
MS12�??039	Lync CVE�??2012�??3402 CVE�??2012�??0159 CVE�??2012�??1849 CVE�??2012�??1858	KB 2707956	No publicly known exploits, but most vulnerabilities are quite well known due to exposure in other Microsoft products	Severity:Important Exploitability:1	Critical	Important
MS12�??040	A XSS vulnerability in Microsoft Dynamics AX Enterprise Portal.
MS12�??040	Microsoft Dynamics AX Enterprise portal CVE�??2012�??1857	KB 2709100	No publicly known exploits	Severity:Important Exploitability:1	N/A	Important
MS12�??041	Multiple vulnerabilities in the windows kernel mode drivers allow escalation of privileges. Replaces MS12-018.
MS12�??041	Windows kernel mode drivers CVE�??2012�??1864 CVE�??2012�??1865 CVE�??2012�??1866 CVE�??2012�??1867 CVE�??2012�??1868	KB 2709162	No publicly known exploits	Severity:Important Exploitability:1	Important	Important
MS12�??042	Multiple vulnerabilities in the windows kernel allow escalation of privileges. Replaces MS11-098 and MS11-068.
MS12�??042	Windows kernel mode drivers CVE�??2012�??0217 CVE�??2012�??1515	KB 2711167	CVE-2012-1515 was publicly disclosed. No publicly known exploits	Severity:Important Exploitability:1	Important	Important

We will update issues on this page for about a week or so as they evolve.
We appreciate updates
US based customers can call Microsoft for free patch related support on 1-866-PCSAFETY

(*): ISC rating

We use 4 levels:
- PATCH NOW: Typically used where we see immediate danger of exploitation. Typical environments will want to deploy these patches ASAP. Workarounds are typically not accepted by users or are not possible. This rating is often used when typical deployments make it vulnerable and exploits are being used or easy to obtain or make.
- Critical: Anything that needs little to become "interesting" for the dark side. Best approach is to test and deploy ASAP. Workarounds can give more time to test.
- Important: Things where more testing and other measures can help.
- Less Urgent: Typically we expect the impact if left unpatched to be not that big a deal in the short term. Do not forget them however.
The difference between the client and server rating is based on how you use the affected machine. We take into account the typical client and server deployment in the usage of the machine and the common measures people typically have in place already. Measures we presume are simple best practices for servers such as not using outlook, MSIE, word etc. to do traditional office or leisure work.
The rating is not a risk analysis as such. It is a rating of importance of the vulnerability and the perceived or even predicted threat for affected systems. The rating does not account for the number of affected systems there are. It is for an affected system in a typical worst-case role.
Only the organization itself is in a position to do a full risk analysis involving the presence (or lack of) affected systems, the actually implemented measures, the impact on their operation and the value of the assets involved.
All patches released by a vendor are important enough to have a close look if you use the affected systems. There is little incentive for vendors to publicize patches that do not have some form of risk to them.

(**): The exploitability rating we show is the worst of them all due to the too large number of ratings Microsoft assigns to some of the patches.

--
Swa Frantzen -- Section 66

Swa

760 Posts

Jun 12th 2012

I'm intrigued by one of the vulnerabilities addressed in MS12-042, "BIOS ROM Corruption Vulnerability". I wonder if the possibility of BIOS malware (rare but not unknown) is perhaps a little larger on some radar screens with it. Most people I mention it to don't seem to take it very seriously.

Jarrod

5 Posts

Interestingly enough, CVE-2012-1515 maps to a VMware vulnerability, more on that here: http://www.vmware.com/security/advisories/VMSA-2012-0006.html According to the advisory, a ROM overwrite can result in privilege escalation on Windows based virtual machines. I guess both VMware and Microsoft are covering all bases here.

e.b.

17 Posts

The Dutch page http://www.security.nl/artikel/41855/1/Onderzoekers_ontdekken_nieuwe_BIOS-rootkit.html refers to a BIOS rootkit found by McAfee, described here (in English): http://blogs.mcafee.com/mcafee-labs/bioskits-join-ranks-of-stealth-malware

From e.b.'s comment we now know that not only _physical_ BIOS memory is at risk!

Erik van Straten

129 Posts

A Dutch site states that this is the same hole as patched in MS12-020, reopened by a SP. Is this correct?
http://translate.google.be/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwebwereld.nl%2Fnieuws%2F110820%2Fmicrosoft-heropent-kritiek-windows-gat.html

Erik van Straten
2 Posts

An automatic updater of revoked certificates is available for Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008, Windows 7, and Windows Server 2008 R2
- http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2677070
Last Review: June 13, 2012 - Revision: 2.0

> https://blogs.technet.com/b/pki/archive/2012/06/12/announcing-the-automated-updater-of-untrustworthy-certificates-and-keys.aspx?Redirected=true
.

Jack

160 Posts