Re: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-25 Thread devis
So it looks like MS itself will settle that one:
[quote]
---
[snip]
Amongst the many things this malware does, all of which require admin 
rights, are:

   * Creating files in the system32 directory.
   * Terminating various processes.
   * Disabling the Windows Firewall.
   * Downloading and writing files to the system32 directory.
   * Deletes registry values in HKLM.
All these fail if the user running the e-mail client is not an 
administrator.

So wouldn't it be useful (read: safer) if you could browse the Web, read 
e-mail, and so on as a non-admin, even though you need to perform your 
normal daily tasks as an admin?
__

[end quote]
by Michael Howard (Senior Security Program Manager in the Secure 
Engineering group at Microsoft).

The DropMyRights Application.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/securecode/columns/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dncode/html/secure11152004.asp
This should be pushed as an update and the steps of shortcut described 
in the link automatised.

BTW, after cracked Sound application for creating .wav, in that one 
we've got :
Location: C:\warez\dropmyrights.exe "c:\program files\internet 
explorer\iexplore.exe"

C:\warez . no comments.
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Re: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-24 Thread James Tucker
Use "IEXPLORE.EXE [PATH]" to get a working copy of explorer using the
runas service.
eg.
runas /user:system\user  "%PROGRAMFILES%\Intern~1\iexplore.exe [path]"

No bitching about the fact that its the IE exe we are loading, it
makes no difference, thats just a wrapper to load the libraries, you
can do the opposite and turn an explorer window into IE by [F4]
HTTP:// [ENTER]. As for people who uninstall IE, well thats fine I
have, but the EXE is still lurking there (it could otherwise be done
with the windows update explorer window spawning).

If you want to construct a proper right click option for folders in
explorer then the place to put it would be some where around
HKEY_CLASSES\Directory\shellex\

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-23 Thread Phillip R. Paradis
> >>is that windowed applications do not get polled for refresh, so for
> >>example using an explorer instance in a runas will not 
> update the file
> >>listing until you press "F5" I have witnessed bad things 
> come of this
> 
> Are we able to run Explorer.exe using runas utility...

Yes, but it won't do much good. The instance running as your second user will
simply detect the first instance in memory and tell it to open a new window,
then terminate. The window will be opened by an already-running instance of
explorer.exe, not the one you just started, and will therefore have the
permissions of the original user who logged in, not those of the user specified
to RunAs.

If you first kill all running instances of Explorer.exe from the task manager
(or using the kill utility) and then start explorer via RunAs (from the command
prompt) it will restart the shell as a different user, and you can then open an
explorer window with the permissions you want. Then kill and restart
explorer.exe again to restart the shell as the original user. (Be sure to do so
from an instance of task manager or a command prompt that is still running in
the original user's context.) IIRC, you can also simply "log off" from the
shell, and it will restart as the original user.


___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-23 Thread Phillip R. Paradis
> 1. XP would be more suitable to run as a user if the runas service and
> windows installers were developed to add more complete and easy to use
> privilege elevation techniques outside of active directory and the
> default group policy that gets applied.
...
> 4. The windows install creates the first user account as an
> administrator so that they may install programs and hardware without
> allot of hassle. This is in fact good for business over the
> alternative (which is to hassle most end users beyond their point of
> no return), no matter what the security implications, remember end
> users don't care (even if they should).

A good approach here that would allow the user to be a non-admin by default and
not make things overly difficult would be:

1. When creating the Administrator account's password during setup, remind the
user that they will need it to install software, etc.

2. When the user attempts to do something they have insufficient privileges for
(install something, for instance) the Run As UI should appear automatically,
rather than an error message. The average home user isn't smart enough to right
click and find the Run As command; a great many such users don't even realize
that the right mouse button has a use.

It would also be nice if they'd fix Explorer, etc. to support Run As, and
perhaps add an Open As command to the context menu for folders, to allow opening
a folder with different credentials. While they're at it, they might find some
way of marking the windows of any processes not running as the current user.


___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-22 Thread rp
At 12:43 PM 11/22/2004, you wrote:
Are we able to run Explorer.exe using runas utility...
Of course.  You can run any binary using runas.  You may have to use 
absolute paths, but that's a minor inconvenience.
Just to clear that up, depending which script/utility you are using to 
initiate the code you can use:
%windir%\explorer.exe

I remember dissecting a bit of malicious code attached to an email about 6 
years ago.
I remember thinking 'whoever wrote this can't be older than 12'.
It had hardcoded
c:\windows\...blah blah blah
and
c:\win95..blah blah blah
I guess these were attempts to cover their bases.  Why not just use %winnt% 
or %windir%?
I adjusted the script with %windir%and it worked (I think it might have 
been WSH, but that would be Win98, but in any case I remember it worked).

rp 

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-22 Thread Paul Schmehl
--On Monday, November 22, 2004 07:56:14 PM +0530 Sandeep Singh Rawat 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are we able to run Explorer.exe using runas utility...
Of course.  You can run any binary using runas.  You may have to use 
absolute paths, but that's a minor inconvenience.

Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-22 Thread Sandeep Singh Rawat

>>is that windowed applications do not get polled for refresh, so for
>>example using an explorer instance in a runas will not update the file
>>listing until you press "F5" I have witnessed bad things come of this

Are we able to run Explorer.exe using runas utility...

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-21 Thread joe

On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 04:19:49PM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>> Windows has several groups.  By default users are in the "USERS" 
>> group, *not* the ADMINISTRATORS group.

> On every XP install that I've seen from every major OEM (Dell, 
> Compaq, Gateway, etc) fast user switching is on by default 
> and every user is an administrator. Not "on most"; on every single one.

I would say that is more the fault of the configuration than anything.
Probably cheaper for the OEMs to do it that way from a educational
perspective, they don't have to teach the user anything, just say go. 

  Joe

--
Pro-Choice
Let me choose if I even want a browser loaded thanks!

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Re: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-21 Thread James Tucker
1. XP would be more suitable to run as a user if the runas service and
windows installers were developed to add more complete and easy to use
privilege elevation techniques outside of active directory and the
default group policy that gets applied.
2. Due to the above, the power users group is more appropriate (for
home / business laptop travelers(local machine only)).
3. Inside of a domain, or using the local users and groups snap in,
the default user group for account creation is "users".
4. The windows install creates the first user account as an
administrator so that they may install programs and hardware without
allot of hassle. This is in fact good for business over the
alternative (which is to hassle most end users beyond their point of
no return), no matter what the security implications, remember end
users don't care (even if they should).
5. Considering that XP is run with admin privileges all over the
world, it does quite well.

Out of interest, I suspect that many of the people involved in this
conversation, unless operating within a domain, are running as local
administrators anyway. You don't really have any special reason to be
doing so that makes you better than the end users you talk about; you
do it because it is more convenient (and your an admin) than keeping
runas sessions up of mmc, cmd, and control. (the equivalent to what
would be more common on *nix systems with su). Thus is the more
important point in the conversation, what is really required is the
ability to use all the functionality without adding too many
authentication processes. Most *nix configuration apps now ask for
elevated credentials, which, in windows, only occurs inside of a AD
Domain when using an Install Shield program along with a few other
limited areas which successfully prompt the user for admin rights, but
certainly not all things that should.

There may be a group policy object which can make the install
authentication rear its head at any install outside of a domain, but I
have had no reason to look so far. Hardware operations authentication
would also be necessary for an appropriate solution.

For the end user, such a setup is still a pain even if it does prompt
correctly. File and folder permissions are bewildering to most users,
that is problem #1 when users install applications without setting the
folder permissions correctly. The next problem is the running of
applications inside of a runas service. A small nause of the process
is that windowed applications do not get polled for refresh, so for
example using an explorer instance in a runas will not update the file
listing until you press "F5" I have witnessed bad things come of this
property already. As for fast user switching, that is not really
appropriate either, as for a start it is a high system load process,
and windows' caching routines are quite abusive when you start
switching users alot (mass unnecessary paging effects on low memory
systems).

I see the problem as not so much a "fault" but more of an area which
has not had enough development. Certainly end users should be more
aware, but they never will be so some other solution should be saught.
Nay, we are the people who are paid to produce such a solution. In
this case, you should blame the user, you should fix their issue and
produce a bill.

a little more than my 2c.


On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 19:28:13 -0600, Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --On Saturday, November 20, 2004 8:19 AM -0500 Mike Hoye
> 
> 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On every XP install that I've seen from every major OEM (Dell, Compaq,
> > Gateway, etc) fast user switching is on by default and every user is
> > an administrator. Not "on most"; on every single one.
> >
> > Furthermore, these machines don't have actual XP OS install CDs, they
> > usually come with "restore" CDs that just return the PC to this same
> > initial state if they're used, which they almost never are.
> >
> > I have never seen a home user, that is to say change that setting or
> > create a user who is actually just a "User". Not once, ever.
> >
> And this is a flaw of the *OS*?  Or of the *OEM*?
> 
> Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Adjunct Information Security Officer
> The University of Texas at Dallas
> AVIEN Founding Member
> http://www.utdallas.edu
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Re: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-21 Thread Dennis Mowers
Some blame may also be placed on the user.


--- Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --On Saturday, November 20, 2004 8:19 AM -0500 Mike
> Hoye 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On every XP install that I've seen from every
> major OEM (Dell, Compaq,
> > Gateway, etc) fast user switching is on by default
> and every user is
> > an administrator. Not "on most"; on every single
> one.
> >
> > Furthermore, these machines don't have actual XP
> OS install CDs, they
> > usually come with "restore" CDs that just return
> the PC to this same
> > initial state if they're used, which they almost
> never are.
> >
> > I have never seen a home user, that is to say
> change that setting or
> > create a user who is actually just a "User". Not
> once, ever.
> >
> And this is a flaw of the *OS*?  Or of the *OEM*?
> 
> Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Adjunct Information Security Officer
> The University of Texas at Dallas
> AVIEN Founding Member
> http://www.utdallas.edu
> 
> ___
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter:
> http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Re: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-20 Thread Paul Schmehl
--On Saturday, November 20, 2004 8:19 AM -0500 Mike Hoye 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On every XP install that I've seen from every major OEM (Dell, Compaq,
Gateway, etc) fast user switching is on by default and every user is
an administrator. Not "on most"; on every single one.
Furthermore, these machines don't have actual XP OS install CDs, they
usually come with "restore" CDs that just return the PC to this same
initial state if they're used, which they almost never are.
I have never seen a home user, that is to say change that setting or
create a user who is actually just a "User". Not once, ever.
And this is a flaw of the *OS*?  Or of the *OEM*?
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Re: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-20 Thread GuidoZ
They do the same on the home side. (Well, at least they did last time
I bought a Dell laptop. Been a few years.) I was going to point this
out too but you beat me to it. =)

--
Peace. ~G


On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:44:41 -0600, Todd Towles
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dell gives the full OS cd and then a separate drivers CD, at least on
> the business side. Not sure about the home side.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hoye
> > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:19 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 04:19:49PM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> > > Windows has several groups.  By default users are in the "USERS"
> > > group, *not* the ADMINISTRATORS group.
> >
> > On every XP install that I've seen from every major OEM
> > (Dell, Compaq, Gateway, etc) fast user switching is on by
> > default and every user is an administrator. Not "on most"; on
> > every single one.
> >
> > Furthermore, these machines don't have actual XP OS install
> > CDs, they usually come with "restore" CDs that just return
> > the PC to this same initial state if they're used, which they
> > almost never are.
> >
> > I have never seen a home user, that is to say change that
> > setting or create a user who is actually just a "User". Not
> > once, ever.
> >
> > > It might make sense if you actually had knowledge of an OS
> > before you
> > > criticize it.
> >
> > I don't think the question should be "why is IRC still
> > around", I think the question should be "why is
> > full-disclosure turning into IRC?"
> >
> > - Mike Hoye
> >
> > --
> > "Buy land. They've stopped making it." - Mark Twain
> >
> > ___
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> >
> 
> ___
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


RE: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges

2004-11-20 Thread Todd Towles
Dell gives the full OS cd and then a separate drivers CD, at least on
the business side. Not sure about the home side. 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hoye
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 7:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Windows user privileges
> 
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 04:19:49PM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> > Windows has several groups.  By default users are in the "USERS" 
> > group, *not* the ADMINISTRATORS group.
> 
> On every XP install that I've seen from every major OEM 
> (Dell, Compaq, Gateway, etc) fast user switching is on by 
> default and every user is an administrator. Not "on most"; on 
> every single one.
> 
> Furthermore, these machines don't have actual XP OS install 
> CDs, they usually come with "restore" CDs that just return 
> the PC to this same initial state if they're used, which they 
> almost never are.
> 
> I have never seen a home user, that is to say change that 
> setting or create a user who is actually just a "User". Not 
> once, ever.
> 
> > It might make sense if you actually had knowledge of an OS 
> before you 
> > criticize it.
> 
> I don't think the question should be "why is IRC still 
> around", I think the question should be "why is 
> full-disclosure turning into IRC?"
> 
> - Mike Hoye
>  
> --
> "Buy land. They've stopped making it." - Mark Twain
> 
> ___
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
> 

___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html