Re: [Full-Disclosure] Possibly a stupid question RPC over HTTP

From: Kevin (KKadow_at_gmail.com)
Date: 10/14/04

  • Next message: Andrey Bayora: "[Full-Disclosure] Bypass of Antivirus software with GDI+ bug exploit Mutations" 
    To: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 01:05:04 -0500

    On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:33:13 -0700 (PDT), S G Masood <sgmasood@yahoo.com> wrote:
    > Yeah, it certainly is a security risk in several ways.
    > Decoding and inspecting HTTPS traffic at the perimeter
    > before it reaches the server becomes an absolute
    > necessity if RPC over HTTPS is implemented. Same with
    > RPC over HTTP.

    There was a Microsoft employee on-site for a few days this summer, and
    I noticed one day that he was reading MS email messages in Outlook
    2003 (not OWA) from his laptop while connected to *our* private LAN.

    Any smart enterprise blocks all POP/IMAP/MAPI protocols both inbound
    and outbound, so this made me more than a bit suspicious... When I
    checked the proxy traffic from the DHCP address assigned to his
    laptop, I saw normal-lookup HTTP requests followed by additional RPC
    headers. Turns out the employee he was working with helpfully gave
    him the information to use the outbound proxy, and after configuring
    proxy settings in the control panel, it "just worked".

    Our visitor went back to Redmond before I could get approval from
    management to modify the firewall configuration to explicitly block
    RPC-over-HTTP :(

    Kevin

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

  • Next message: Andrey Bayora: "[Full-Disclosure] Bypass of Antivirus software with GDI+ bug exploit Mutations"