Re: Need to purge vulnerable gdiplus.dll?

From: Francis Favorini (francis.favorini_at_DUKE.EDU)
Date: 09/29/04

  • Next message: Threlkeld, Richard: "Re: Need to purge vulnerable gdiplus.dll?"
    Date:         Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:18:50 -0400
    To: NTBUGTRAQ@LISTSERV.NTBUGTRAQ.COM
    
    

    Jack Kohn <"jackbox LLAMA"@MYWAYCAMEL.COM> wrote...
    > On several machines, I'm still seeing a vulnerable version of
    > gdiplus.dll in the C:\Winnt\system32 directory, even after I
    > applied all of MS's MS04-028 patches applicable to the
    > machines. (Tom Liston's GDI Scan
    > (http://isc.sans.org/gdiscan.php) actually reveals a few
    > vulnerable files left, but it's the ones in SYSTEM32 that really worry
    > me.)

    I'm running XP SP2 with Office 2003 SP1 and I also see gdiplus.dll in C:\WINDOWS\system32. There is something very strange about this file. Depending on how you look at it, it changes. I have two different versions of the Res Kit utility filever.exe (details below). They each report a different version for this file.

    U:\>filever C:\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll
    --a-- W32i DLL ENU 5.1.3102.2180 shp 1,700,352 09-05-2001 gdiplus.dll

    U:\>filever2 C:\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll
    --a-- W32i DLL ENU 5.1.3097.0 shp 1,700,352 09-05-2001 gdiplus.dll

    Even stranger, if you check the very same file using a UNC path, the versions come out the same. (Rush is the machine in question.)

    U:\>filever \\rush\C$\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll
    --a-- W32i DLL ENU 5.1.3097.0 shp 1,700,352 09-05-2001 gdiplus.dll

    U:\>filever2 \\rush\C$\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll
    --a-- W32i DLL ENU 5.1.3097.0 shp 1,700,352 09-05-2001 gdiplus.dll

    Explorer properties through C:\ reports: 5.1.3102.2180
    Explorer properties through UNC reports: 5.1.3097.0

    Also, a byte comparison with gdiplus.dll from an unpatched system--which every tool I tried says is vulnerable--shows the one on the patched system is the same (i.e., vulnerable).

    U:\>fc /b C:\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll \\UNPATCHED\C$\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll
    Comparing files C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\gdiplus.dll and \\UNPATCHED\C$\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\GDIPLUS.DLL
    FC: no differences encountered

    I am guessing this has something to do with the side-by-side dll thing, but I don't really know how it works. Anyone know? Makes it hard to know if you are really patched.

    Versions of filever.exe:
    U:\>filever L:\Windows\Tools\FILEVER.EXE
    ----- W32i APP ENU 5.0.1472.1 shp 40,208 01-07-1997 filever.exe
    May have come from NT Res Kit.

    U:\>filever "C:\Program Files\Support Tools\filever2.exe"
    --a-- W32i APP ENU 5.1.2600.0 shp 12,800 08-17-2001 filever2.exe
    This one came from XP SP2 support tools.

    GDIScan reports:
    Scanning Drive C:...
    C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\OFFICE11\MSO.DLL
       Version: 11.0.6360.0
    C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\VGX\vgx.dll
       Version: 6.0.2900.2180
    C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\OFFICE11\GDIPLUS.DLL
       Version: 6.0.3264.0
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\gdiplus.dll
       Version: 5.1.3102.2180
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\sxs.dll
       Version: 5.1.2600.2180
    C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.Windows.GdiPlus_6595b64144ccf1df_1.0.0.0_x-ww_8d353f13\GdiPlus.dll
       Version: 5.1.3097.0 <-- Possibly vulnerable (Windows Side-By-Side DLL)
    C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.Windows.GdiPlus_6595b64144ccf1df_1.0.10.0_x-ww_712befd8\GdiPlus.dll
       Version: 5.1.3101.0 <-- Possibly vulnerable (Windows Side-By-Side DLL)
    C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.Windows.GdiPlus_6595b64144ccf1df_1.0.2600.2180_x-ww_522f9f82\GdiPlus.dll
       Version: 5.1.3102.2180
    Scan Complete.

    > A regedit search shows that C:\Winnt\System32\gdiplus.dll is
    > part of the
    > HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\SharedDLLs key.
    > The Value is the path/file name and the Data is "1."

    Same here.

    -Francis

    --
    NTBugtraq Editor's Note:
    Want to reply to the person who sent this message? This list is configured such that just hitting reply is going to result in the message coming to the list, not to the individual who sent the message. This was done to help reduce the number of Out of Office messages posters received. So if you want to send a reply just to the poster, you'll have to copy their email address out of the message and place it in your TO: field.
    --
    

  • Next message: Threlkeld, Richard: "Re: Need to purge vulnerable gdiplus.dll?"