CrowdStrike Falcon Platform Detects and Prevents Active Intrusion Campaign Targeting 3CXDesktopApp Customers

Note: Content from this post first appeared in r/CrowdStrike

We will continue to update on this dynamic situation as more details become available. CrowdStrike’s Intelligence team is in contact with 3CX.

On March 29, 2023, CrowdStrike observed unexpected malicious activity emanating from a legitimate, signed binary, 3CXDesktopApp — a softphone application from 3CX. The malicious activity includes beaconing to actor-controlled infrastructure, deployment of second-stage payloads, and, in a small number of cases, hands-on-keyboard activity. 

The CrowdStrike Falcon® platform has behavioral preventions and atomic indicator detections targeting the abuse of 3CXDesktopApp. In addition, CrowdStrike® Falcon OverWatch™ helps customers stay vigilant against hands-on-keyboard activity.

CrowdStrike customers can log into the customer support portal and follow the latest updates in Trending Threats & Vulnerabilities: Intrusion Campaign Targeting 3CX Customers

The 3CXDesktopApp is available for Windows, macOS, Linux and mobile. At this time, activity has been observed on both Windows and macOS.

CrowdStrike Intelligence has assessed there is suspected nation-state involvement by the threat actor LABYRINTH CHOLLIMA. CrowdStrike Intelligence customers received an alert this morning on this active intrusion. 

Get fast and easy protection with built-in threat intelligence — request a free trial of CrowdStrike Falcon® Pro today

CrowdStrike Falcon Detection and Protection

The CrowdStrike Falcon platform protects customers from this attack and has coverage utilizing behavior-based indicators of attack (IOAs) and indicators of compromise (IOCs) based detections targeting malicious behaviors associated with 3CX on both macOS and Windows. 

Customers should ensure that prevention policies are properly configured with Suspicious Processes enabled.

Figure 1. CrowdStrike’s indicator of attack (IOA) identifies and blocks the malicious behavior in macOS (click to enlarge)

Figure 2. CrowdStrike’s indicator of attack (IOA) identifies and blocks the malicious behavior in Windows (click to enlarge)

Hunting in the CrowdStrike Falcon Platform

Falcon Discover

CrowdStrike Falcon® Discover customers can use the following link: US-1 | US-2 | EU | Gov to look for the presence of 3CXDesktopApp in their environment.

Falcon Insight customers can assess if the 3CXDesktopApp is running in their environment with the following query:

Event Search — Application Search

event_simpleName IN (PeVersionInfo, ProcessRollup2) FileName IN ("3CXDesktopApp.exe", "3CX Desktop App")
| stats dc(aid) as endpointCount by event_platform, FileName, SHA256HashData

Falcon Long Term Repository — Application Search

#event_simpleName=/^(PeVersionInfo|ProcessRollup2)$/ AND (event_platform=Win ImageFileName=/\\3CXDesktopApp\.exe$/i) OR (event_platform=Mac ImageFileName=/\/3CX\sDesktop\sApp/i)
| ImageFileName = /.+(\\|\/)(?.+)$/i
| groupBy([event_platform, FileName, SHA256HashData], function=count(aid, distinct=true, as=endpointCount))

Atomic Indicators

The following domains have been observed beaconing, which should be considered an indication of malicious intent.


CrowdStrike Falcon® Insight customers, regardless of retention period, can search for the presence of these domains in their environment spanning back one year using Indicator Graph: US-1 | US-2 | EU | Gov.

Event Search — Domain Search

event_simpleName=DnsRequest DomainName IN (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
| stats dc(aid) as endpointCount, earliest(ContextTimeStamp_decimal) as firstSeen, latest(ContextTimeStamp_decimal) as lastSeen by DomainName
| convert ctime(firstSeen) ctime(lastSeen)

Falcon LTR — Domain Search

| in(DomainName, values=[,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,])
| groupBy([DomainName], function=([count(aid, distinct=true, as=endpointCount), min(ContextTimeStamp, as=firstSeen), max(ContextTimeStamp, as=lastSeen)]))
| firstSeen := firstSeen * 1000 | formatTime(format="%F %T.%L", field=firstSeen, as="firstSeen")
| lastSeen := lastSeen * 1000 | formatTime(format="%F %T.%L", field=lastSeen, as="lastSeen")
| sort(endpointCount, order=desc)

File Details

SHA256Operating SystemInstaller SHA256FileName


The current recommendation for all CrowdStrike customers is:

  1. Locate the presence of 3CXDesktopApp software in your environment by using the queries outlined above.
  2. Ensure Falcon is deployed to applicable systems. 
  3. Ensure “Suspicious Processes” is enabled in applicable Prevention Policies.
  4. Hunt for historical presence of atomic indicators in third-party tooling (if available).

Additional Resources

Source :

UniFi Network – 802.1X Control (Advanced)

This article describes how to configure 802.1X Control on UniFi switches to authenticate wired client devices. 

Requirements & Notes

  • A UniFi gateway or UniFi OS Console with a built-in gateway is required to run RADIUS.
  • A third-party RADIUS server can be used by creating a new RADIUS profile.
  • 802.1X Control mode ‘Auto’ requires the usage of a third-party RADIUS server.
  • The fallback VLAN is used when a client device fails to authenticate.

Configuring MAC-Based Authentication

1. Enable 802.1X Control for all or individual UniFi switches and optionally specify the Fallback VLAN.

  • All – Settings > Networks > Global Switch Settings > 802.1X Control
  • Individual – UniFi Devices > select switch > Settings > Advanced > 802.1X Control

2. Select the Default RADIUS profile when using a UniFi gateway or Create New RADIUS profile when using a third-party RADIUS server.

3. Create the RADIUS users that match the MAC addresses of the wired clients.

Settings > Profiles > RADIUS > Default > Create New RADIUS User

  • Username – Mac address in capital letters without any dashes or colons, for example ABCDEF123456.
  • Password – Mac Address in capital letters without any dashes or colons, for example ABCDEF123456.
  • VLAN ID – 0
  • Tunnel Type – None
  • Tunnel Medium Type – None

4. Create a new Port Profile and select MAC-based under the Advanced settings.

Settings > Profiles > Switch Ports > Create New Port Profile

  • Native Network – Default or specific network
  • Allowed Networks – None
  • Voice Network – None
  • 802.1X Control (Advanced) – MAC-based

5. Apply the 802.1X Control profile to the port(s) on the UniFi switch where a wired client device is connected.

UniFi Devices > select switch > Ports > Port Manager > select port(s) > Port Profile 

Source :

Patch CVE-2023-23397 Immediately: What You Need To Know and Do

We break down the basic information of CVE-2023-23397, the zero-day, zero-touch vulnerability that was rated 9.8 on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) scale.

Update as of 03/22/3023 2:50PM PHT: Updated the prevention and mitigation section for an additional step.

CVE-2023-23397 is a critical privilege elevation/authentication bypass vulnerability in Outlook, released as part of the March Patch Tuesday set of fixes. The vulnerability, which affects all versions of Windows Outlook, was given a 9.8 CVSS rating and is one of two zero-day exploits disclosed on March 14. We summarize the points that security teams need to know about this vulnerability and how they can mitigate the risks of this gap.

What is it?

CVE-2023-23397 is an elevation of privilege (EoP) vulnerability in Microsoft Outlook. It is a zero-touch exploit, meaning the security gap requires low complexity to abuse and requires no user interaction.

Figure 1. General exploitation routine of CVE-2023-23397

How is CVE-2023-23397 exploited?

The attacker sends a message to the victim with an extended Message Application Program Interface (MAPI) property with a Universal Naming Convention (UNC) path to a remote attacker-controlled Server Message Block (SMB, via TCP 445). Share-hosted on a server controlled by the attacker, the vulnerability is exploited whether the recipient has seen the message or not. The attacker remotely sends a malicious calendar invite represented by .msg — the message format that supports reminders in Outlook — to trigger the vulnerable API endpoint PlayReminderSound using “PidLidReminderFileParameter” (the custom alert sound option for reminders).

When the victim connects to the attacker’s SMB server, the connection to the remote server sends the user’s New Technology LAN Manager (NTLM) negotiation message automatically, which the attacker can use for authentication against other systems that support NTLM authentication.

NTLMv2 hashes are the latest protocol Windows uses for authentication, and it is used for a number of services with each response containing a hashed representation of users’ information, such as the username and password. As such, threat actors can attempt a NTLM relay attack to gain access to other services, or a full compromise of domains if the compromised users are admins. While online services such as Microsoft 365 are not susceptible to this attack because they do not support NTLM authentication, the Microsoft 365 Windows Outlook app is still vulnerable.

How easy is it to exploit?

User interaction is not necessary to trigger (even before message preview) it, nor does it require high privileges. CVE-2023-23397 is a zero-touch vulnerability that is triggered when the victim client is prompted and notified (e.g., when an appointment or task prompts five minutes before the designated time). It is difficult to block outbound SMB traffic for remote users. The attacker could use the same credentials to gain access to other resources. We elaborate on this example in our webinar (at 04:23 of the video).

Is it in the wild? What versions and operating systems (OS) are affected?

There have been reports of limited attacks abusing this gap. Microsoft has been coordinating with the affected victims to remediate this concern. All supported versions of Microsoft Outlook for Windows are affected. Other versions of Microsoft Outlook, such as Android, iOS, Mac, as well as Outlook on the web and other M365 services, are not affected.

What are the possible attack scenarios?

Figure 2. Beyond the exploit use scenario 1: Data and information theft via NTLM relay attack

1. Lateral movement, malicious navigation using the relayed NTLM hashes

Relay attacks gained notoriety as a use case for Mimikatz using the NTLM credential dumping routine via the sekurlsa module. In addition, pass-the-hat (PtH) (or pass-the hash) attacks and variations of data and information theft can be done. Once attackers are in the system, they can use the network for lateral movement and navigate the organization’s lines over SMB. 

Figure 3. Beyond the exploit use scenario 2: WebDAV directory traversal for remote code execution (RCE)

2. WebDAV directory traversal for payload attacker routines

It’s possible for an attacker to leverage WebDAV services in cases where no valid SMB service for Outlook exists (i.e., is not configured) in the client. This is an alternative to the Web/HTTP service that can also be read as a UNC path by .msg and/or Outlook Calendar items. Attackers can set up a malicious WebDAV server to respond to affected victim clients with malicious pages. These pages may contain code that can range from leveraging a directory traversal technique similar to the Microsoft vulnerability CVE-2022-34713 (dubbed as DogWalk) to push any form of payload for remote code execution such as webshells.

What can I do to prevent and mitigate the risk of exploitation of CVE-2023-23397?

Here are some steps that security administrators can perform to reduce the risk of exploitation of CVE-2023-23397:

  • Apply the vendor patches immediately. Microsoft has released a patch as part of their March 2023 Monthly Security Update.
  • Block TCP 445/SMB outbound from your network. This will prevent the sending of NTLM authentication messages to remote file shares. If this cannot be done, we recommend monitoring outbound traffic over port 445 for unknown external IP addresses, then identifying and blocking them.
  • Customers can disable the WebClient service. Note that this will block all WebDAV connections, including intranet.
  • Add users to the Protected Users Security Group. This prevents the use of NTLM as an authentication mechanism, but note that this could impact applications that rely on NTLM in your environment.
  • Enforce SMB signing on clients and servers to prevent a relay attack.
  • Other researchers have noted that disabling the “Show reminders” setting in Outlook can prevent the leak of NTLM credentials.

How can I check if I’m affected?

Microsoft has provided a PowerShell script as a solution to the issue. The script is designed to scan emails, calendar entries, and task items, and to verify if they have the “PidLidReminderFileParameter” property. By running the script, administrators can locate problematic items that have this property and subsequently remove them or delete them permanently. Download the script here:

Which Trend Micro solutions can address this vulnerability?

  • Trend Micro Malware Detection Patterns (VSAPI, Predictive Learning, Behavioral Monitoring and Web Reputation Service) for Endpoint, Servers, Mail, and Gateway (e.g., Apex One, Worry-Free Business Security Services, Worry-Free Business Security Standard/Advanced, Deep Security with anti-malware, etc.):
    • Starting with Trend Micro Smart Scan Pattern version 21474.296.07, known exploits associated with this vulnerability are being detected as Trojan.Win32.CVE202323397.
  • Trend Micro Vision One: Use this solution as an investigation tool. In the “Search App,” select “Endpoint Activity Data” and enter the following query: – dpt: 445 AND eventSubId: 204 AND processCmd: *OUTLOOK*. This can be saved and added to a watchlist if desired.
  • Cloud One Workload Security and Deep Security: IPS Rule 1009058, which will need to be changed to Prevent. 
  • TippingPoint Filters:
    • 28471 SMB: SMBv1 Successful Protocol Negotiation
    • 28472 SMB: SMBv2 Successful Protocol Negotiation
    • Please note: Enabling these filters in Block mode will interrupt legitimate SMB traffic. Customers are advised to add exceptions for their Private IP address space.
  • Trend Micro Deep Discovery Inspector: Rule 4479 NTLM v1 Authentication – SMB (Request).
    • If NTLM v1 is configured by default, customers can use this rule to monitor attempts for outgoing NTLM handshakes. Please note this rule only detects and does not block, so it is best used as an investigative tool for follow-up.

Details for all available Trend Micro solutions are available here:

To learn more about this vulnerability, you may view our technical webinar here:

Source :

In Review: What GPT-3 Taught ChatGPT in a Year

Amidst the uproar and opinions since November 2022, we look at the possibilities and implications of what OpenAI’s ChatGPT presents to the cybersecurity industry using a comparison to earlier products, like its predecessor GPT-3.

More than a year since the world’s general enthusiasm for the then-novel GPT-3, we took a closer look at the technology and analyzed its actual capabilities and potential for threats and malfeasance. Our considerations were collected in our Codex Exposed blog series as it focused on the most prominent aspects of the technology from a security perspective:

  1. Scavenging for sensitive data, an article where we tried to expose sensitive information that could have been found in the source code used to train the language model through code generation requests.
  2. The Imitation Game, a blog entry where we pushed the capabilities of GPT Codex code generation and understanding to identify how well the language model comprehends computer code from an architectural point of view.
  3. Task automation and response consistency, a proof where we tried to programmatically use the Codex’s API to determine if it was feasible to perform repetitive unsupervised tasks.
  4. Helping hackers in training, an entry exploring and analyzing the possibilities offered by large language models to help train and support aspiring hackers.

ChatGPT has taken the world by storm with a new and refined model, with even more capabilities than its previous iteration. Compared to its predecessor, ChatGPT sports an updated language model trained with data up to mid-2021. It has also been trained to be a conversational AI: the interaction with the model happens through multiple exchanges wherein a dialog allows the user to refine and correct the task at hand, and the model remembers what was earlier said and can recall previous inquiries in further requests. GPT-3, in comparison, processed bulk requests, wherein the user had to provide all the information related to the task at hand in just one input, including examples to clarify the expected output for more obscure tasks.

In light of such an evolution, it seems apt to come back and review how those features we exposed a year ago fared in the light of ChatGPT’s newly revamped language model.

New Tricks: Code Comprehension and Explanation

Code comprehension seems to be an aspect where ChatGPT outshines its predecessor. When we tried Codex a year ago, we pointed out that the engine was acting more like a very smart copy-paste mechanism capable of replacing some variable names while looking for the right code snippet in its “knowledge base.” However, when pushed a little further into describing what a certain piece of code was actually doing, the system would show its limitation of not having actual knowledge of the computation flow.

We tried to repeat the same experiment as last year with ChatGPT, feeding it a simple “Hello World” snippet in the assembler while asking for an explanation, then changing it slightly to see if the language model would spot the difference.

Figure 1. Asking ChatGPT to explain a piece of assembly code, followed by a broken piece of the same code

ChatGPT spotted and called the error, recognizing not only the difference between the previous and latest uploaded code but also that the new code would not work altogether. The reason is in ChatGPT’s stateful session: By “remembering” the previously input correct snippet of code, the system is able to draw a direct comparison — something that GPT-3 was unable to do unless we provided the input ourselves.

As further proof, we retried the experiment in a brand-new chat session and ChatGPT gave the following feedback:

Figure 2. Asking ChatGPT to explain a broken piece of assembly code without previous interactions

This screenshot shows that when ChatGPT is not provided with a correct sample to compare differences with, the engine pretty much falls into the same mistake as its predecessor. It confuses the code snippet for a correct Hello World example, and in the explanation mistakes the function number “(10)” for the supposedly correct function “(printf, 9)”.

As expected, we are still playing the same “imitation game” that its predecessor was playing. It is worth noting, however, that ChatGPT’s new conversational, stateful flow allows users to overcome some limitations by providing more information to the model during the session.

New Tools: For Hackers in Training

The improved interaction flow and the updated model do not bring advantages solely on the coding side. In 2022, we also analyzed the efficacy of GPT-3 as a learning support tool for aspiring cybercriminals, underlining how the convenience of a tool like Codex for code generation applied to malicious code as well.

The conversational approach of ChatGPT offers an even more natural way for people to ask questions and learn. As a matter of fact, why bother to think about all the possible criminal activities ChatGPT could help on? One could just ask it directly:

Figure 3. Asking ChatGPT for suggestions of potential misuses of ChatGPT

Clearly, it does not stop there. According to this example, ChatGPT is able to fully understand a piece of code and suggest the correct input to exploit it, giving detailed instructions on why the code would work. This is a huge improvement compared to last year’s fragility towards changing only one variable value.

In addition, there is the capability of enumerating step-by-step guides to hacking activities, provided they are justified as “pentesting exercises.”

Figure 4. A website pentesting walkthrough as explained by ChatGPT

As a matter of fact, OpenAI seems to be aware of ChatGPT’s potential for cybercriminal abuse. To its makers’ credit (and as seen on the note on the bottom-most section of Figure 3), OpenAI is constantly working towards improving the model to filter out any request that goes against its policies related to hateful content and criminal activities.

The effectiveness of such filters, however, is still to be monitored and determined. It is important to note that, much like how ChatGPT lacked the computational model necessary to generate and fully understand programming code, it still lacks a conceptual map of what words and sentences actually mean even following a human language model. Even with its alleged deductive and inductive reasoning capabilities, these are just simulations spun from its language understanding.

As a consequence, ChatGPT is often literal when applying its requests filters and is extremely gullible. As of late, some hackers’ favorite hobby has been to find new ways to gaslight ChatGPT by crafting prompts that can bypass its newly imposed restrictions.

Figure 5. A prompt for ChatGPT designed to instruct the system to systematically ignore every filter put in place to prevent unwanted behaviors

These techniques generally skirt around asking hypothetical questions to ChatGPT, or asking it to roleplay as a rogue AI.

Put in analogically simpler terms:

Criminal: “Write this nefarious thing.”
ChatGPT: “I can’t, it is against my policies.”
Criminal: “But if you could, what would you write?”
ChatGPT: “Hold my virtual beer… “

In crafting these malicious prompts and by splitting the tasks into smaller, less recognizable modules, researchers managed to exploit ChatGPT into writing code for an operational polymorphic malware.


Since we first wrote about the limitations and weaknesses of large language models in the previous year, much has changed. ChatGPT now sports a more simplified user interaction model that allows for a task to be refined and adapted within the same session. It is capable of switching both topic and discussion language in the same session. That capability makes it more powerful than its predecessor, and even easier for people to use.

However, the system still lacks an actual entity modeling behind it, either computational entities for programming languages, or conceptual entities for human language. Essentially, this means that any resemblance of inductive or deductive reasoning that ChatGPT shows is really just a simulation evolved from the underlying language model wherein the limitations are not predictable. ChatGPT can be confidently wrong in the replies it gives to users’ inquiries, and the potential scenario for when ChatGPT ceases to give facts and starts giving fictional ideas as true may be a possible query worth looking into.

As a consequence, trying to impose filters or ethical behaviors is linked to the language by which these filters and behaviors are defined, and using the same language with these filters means it can also be circumvented. The system can be tricked using techniques for social pressure (“please do it anyways”), hypothetical scenarios (“if you could say this, what would you say?”), and other rhetorical deceptions. Such techniques allow for the extraction of sensitive data, like personally identifiable information (PII) used for the training or bypass of ethical restrictions the system has on content. 

Figure 6. An example of a user applying pressure to disclose information against its policy.

Moreover, the system’s fluency to generate human-like text in many languages means that it lowers the barriers for cybercriminals to scale their operations for compromise related to social engineering and phishing attacks into other regions like Japan, where the language barrier has been a safeguard. It is worth noting, however, that despite the huge popularity gained by the technology, ChatGPT remains a research system, aimed for experimentation and exploration purposes, and not to act as a standalone tool. Use it at your own risk, safety not guaranteed.

Source :

General Remote Desktop connection troubleshooting

Use these steps when a Remote Desktop client can’t connect to a remote desktop but doesn’t provide messages or other symptoms that would help identify the cause.

Check the status of the RDP protocol

Check the status of the RDP protocol on a local computer

To check and change the status of the RDP protocol on a local computer, see How to enable Remote Desktop.


If the remote desktop options are not available, see Check whether a Group Policy Object is blocking RDP.

Check the status of the RDP protocol on a remote computer


Follow this section’s instructions carefully. Serious problems can occur if the registry is modified incorrectly. Before you start modifying the registry, back up the registry so you can restore it in case something goes wrong.

To check and change the status of the RDP protocol on a remote computer, use a network registry connection:

  1. First, go to the Start menu, then select Run. In the text box that appears, enter regedt32.
  2. In the Registry Editor, select File, then select Connect Network Registry.
  3. In the Select Computer dialog box, enter the name of the remote computer, select Check Names, and then select OK.
  4. Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Terminal Server and to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows NT\Terminal Services.
    Registry Editor, showing the fDenyTSConnections entry
    • If the value of the fDenyTSConnections key is 0, then RDP is enabled.
    • If the value of the fDenyTSConnections key is 1, then RDP is disabled.
  5. To enable RDP, change the value of fDenyTSConnections from 1 to 0.

Check whether a Group Policy Object (GPO) is blocking RDP on a local computer

If you can’t turn on RDP in the user interface or the value of fDenyTSConnections reverts to 1 after you’ve changed it, a GPO may be overriding the computer-level settings.

To check the group policy configuration on a local computer, open a Command Prompt window as an administrator, and enter the following command:

Windows Command PromptCopy

gpresult /H c:\gpresult.html

After this command finishes, open gpresult.html. In Computer Configuration\Administrative Templates\Windows Components\Remote Desktop Services\Remote Desktop Session Host\Connections, find the Allow users to connect remotely by using Remote Desktop Services policy.

  • If the setting for this policy is Enabled, Group Policy is not blocking RDP connections.
  • If the setting for this policy is Disabled, check Winning GPO. This is the GPO that is blocking RDP connections. An example segment of gpresult.html, in which the domain-level GPO Block RDP is disabling RDP.An example segment of gpresult.html, in which Local Group Policy is disabling RDP.

Check whether a GPO is blocking RDP on a remote computer

To check the Group Policy configuration on a remote computer, the command is almost the same as for a local computer:

Windows Command PromptCopy

gpresult /S <computer name> /H c:\gpresult-<computer name>.html

The file that this command produces (gpresult-<computer name>.html) uses the same information format as the local computer version (gpresult.html) uses.

Modifying a blocking GPO

You can modify these settings in the Group Policy Object Editor (GPE) and Group Policy Management Console (GPM). For more information about how to use Group Policy, see Advanced Group Policy Management.

To modify the blocking policy, use one of the following methods:

  • In GPE, access the appropriate level of GPO (such as local or domain), and navigate to Computer Configuration > Administrative Templates > Windows Components > Remote Desktop Services > Remote Desktop Session Host > Connections > Allow users to connect remotely by using Remote Desktop Services.
    1. Set the policy to either Enabled or Not configured.
    2. On the affected computers, open a command prompt window as an administrator, and run the gpupdate /force command.
  • In GPM, navigate to the organizational unit (OU) in which the blocking policy is applied to the affected computers and delete the policy from the OU.

Check the status of the RDP services

On both the local (client) computer and the remote (target) computer, the following services should be running:

  • Remote Desktop Services (TermService)
  • Remote Desktop Services UserMode Port Redirector (UmRdpService)

You can use the Services MMC snap-in to manage the services locally or remotely. You can also use PowerShell to manage the services locally or remotely (if the remote computer is configured to accept remote PowerShell cmdlets).

Remote Desktop services in the Services MMC snap-in. Do not modify the default service settings.

On either computer, if one or both services are not running, start them.


If you start the Remote Desktop Services service, click Yes to automatically restart the Remote Desktop Services UserMode Port Redirector service.

Check that the RDP listener is functioning


Follow this section’s instructions carefully. Serious problems can occur if the registry is modified incorrectly. Before you starty modifying the registry, back up the registry so you can restore it in case something goes wrong.

Check the status of the RDP listener

For this procedure, use a PowerShell instance that has administrative permissions. For a local computer, you can also use a command prompt that has administrative permissions. However, this procedure uses PowerShell because the same cmdlets work both locally and remotely.

  1. To connect to a remote computer, run the following cmdlet:PowerShellCopyEnter-PSSession -ComputerName <computer name>
  2. Enter qwinstaThe qwinsta command lists the processes listening on the computer's ports.
  3. If the list includes rdp-tcp with a status of Listen, the RDP listener is working. Proceed to Check the RDP listener port. Otherwise, continue at step 4.
  4. Export the RDP listener configuration from a working computer.
    1. Sign in to a computer that has the same operating system version as the affected computer has, and access that computer’s registry (for example, by using Registry Editor).
    2. Navigate to the following registry entry:
      HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Terminal Server\WinStations\RDP-Tcp
    3. Export the entry to a .reg file. For example, in Registry Editor, right-click the entry, select Export, and then enter a filename for the exported settings.
    4. Copy the exported .reg file to the affected computer.
  5. To import the RDP listener configuration, open a PowerShell window that has administrative permissions on the affected computer (or open the PowerShell window and connect to the affected computer remotely).
    1. To back up the existing registry entry, enter the following cmdlet:PowerShellCopycmd /c 'reg export "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Terminal Server\WinStations\RDP-tcp" C:\Rdp-tcp-backup.reg'
    2. To remove the existing registry entry, enter the following cmdlets:PowerShellCopyRemove-Item -path 'HKLM:\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Terminal Server\WinStations\RDP-tcp' -Recurse -Force
    3. To import the new registry entry and then restart the service, enter the following cmdlets:PowerShellCopycmd /c 'regedit /s c:\<filename>.reg' Restart-Service TermService -Force Replace <filename> with the name of the exported .reg file.
  6. Test the configuration by trying the remote desktop connection again. If you still can’t connect, restart the affected computer.
  7. If you still can’t connect, check the status of the RDP self-signed certificate.

Check the status of the RDP self-signed certificate

  1. If you still can’t connect, open the Certificates MMC snap-in. When you are prompted to select the certificate store to manage, select Computer account, and then select the affected computer.
  2. In the Certificates folder under Remote Desktop, delete the RDP self-signed certificate. Remote Desktop certificates in the MMC Certificates snap-in.
  3. On the affected computer, restart the Remote Desktop Services service.
  4. Refresh the Certificates snap-in.
  5. If the RDP self-signed certificate has not been recreated, check the permissions of the MachineKeys folder.

Check the permissions of the MachineKeys folder

  1. On the affected computer, open Explorer, and then navigate to C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Crypto\RSA\.
  2. Right-click MachineKeys, select Properties, select Security, and then select Advanced.
  3. Make sure that the following permissions are configured:
    • Builtin\Administrators: Full control
    • Everyone: Read, Write

Check the RDP listener port

On both the local (client) computer and the remote (target) computer, the RDP listener should be listening on port 3389. No other applications should be using this port.


Follow this section’s instructions carefully. Serious problems can occur if the registry is modified incorrectly. Before you starty modifying the registry, back up the registry so you can restore it in case something goes wrong.

To check or change the RDP port, use the Registry Editor:

  1. Go to the Start menu, select Run, then enter regedt32 into the text box that appears.
    • To connect to a remote computer, select File, and then select Connect Network Registry.
    • In the Select Computer dialog box, enter the name of the remote computer, select Check Names, and then select OK.
  2. Open the registry and navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Terminal Server\WinStations\<listener>The PortNumber subkey for the RDP protocol.
  3. If PortNumber has a value other than 3389, change it to 3389. ImportantYou can operate Remote Desktop services using another port. However, we don’t recommend you do this. This article doesn’t cover how to troubleshoot that type of configuration.
  4. After you change the port number, restart the Remote Desktop Services service.

Check that another application isn’t trying to use the same port

For this procedure, use a PowerShell instance that has administrative permissions. For a local computer, you can also use a command prompt that has administrative permissions. However, this procedure uses PowerShell because the same cmdlets work locally and remotely.

  1. Open a PowerShell window. To connect to a remote computer, enter Enter-PSSession -ComputerName <computer name>.
  2. Enter the following command:PowerShellCopycmd /c 'netstat -ano | find "3389"' The netstat command produces a list of ports and the services listening to them.
  3. Look for an entry for TCP port 3389 (or the assigned RDP port) with a status of Listening. NoteThe process identifier (PID) for the process or service using that port appears under the PID column.
  4. To determine which application is using port 3389 (or the assigned RDP port), enter the following command:PowerShellCopycmd /c 'tasklist /svc | find "<pid listening on 3389>"' The tasklist command reports details of a specific process.
  5. Look for an entry for the PID number that is associated with the port (from the netstat output). The services or processes that are associated with that PID appear on the right column.
  6. If an application or service other than Remote Desktop Services (TermServ.exe) is using the port, you can resolve the conflict by using one of the following methods:
    • Configure the other application or service to use a different port (recommended).
    • Uninstall the other application or service.
    • Configure RDP to use a different port, and then restart the Remote Desktop Services service (not recommended).

Check whether a firewall is blocking the RDP port

Use the psping tool to test whether you can reach the affected computer by using port 3389.

  1. Go to a different computer that isn’t affected and download psping from
  2. Open a command prompt window as an administrator, change to the directory in which you installed psping, and then enter the following command:Copypsping -accepteula <computer IP>:3389
  3. Check the output of the psping command for results such as the following:
    • Connecting to <computer IP>: The remote computer is reachable.
    • (0% loss): All attempts to connect succeeded.
    • The remote computer refused the network connection: The remote computer is not reachable.
    • (100% loss): All attempts to connect failed.
  4. Run psping on multiple computers to test their ability to connect to the affected computer.
  5. Note whether the affected computer blocks connections from all other computers, some other computers, or only one other computer.
  6. Recommended next steps:
    • Engage your network administrators to verify that the network allows RDP traffic to the affected computer.
    • Investigate the configurations of any firewalls between the source computers and the affected computer (including Windows Firewall on the affected computer) to determine whether a firewall is blocking the RDP port.

Source :

Cloudflare mitigates record-breaking 71 million request-per-second DDoS attack

This was a weekend of record-breaking DDoS attacks. Over the weekend, Cloudflare detected and mitigated dozens of hyper-volumetric DDoS attacks. The majority of attacks peaked in the ballpark of 50-70 million requests per second (rps) with the largest exceeding 71 million rps. This is the largest reported HTTP DDoS attack on record, more than 35% higher than the previous reported record of 46M rps in June 2022.

The attacks were HTTP/2-based and targeted websites protected by Cloudflare. They originated from over 30,000 IP addresses. Some of the attacked websites included a popular gaming provider, cryptocurrency companies, hosting providers, and cloud computing platforms. The attacks originated from numerous cloud providers, and we have been working with them to crack down on the botnet.

Record breaking attack: DDoS attack exceeding 71 million requests per second

Over the past year, we’ve seen more attacks originate from cloud computing providers. For this reason, we will be providing service providers that own their own autonomous system a free Botnet threat feed. The feed will provide service providers threat intelligence about their own IP space; attacks originating from within their autonomous system. Service providers that operate their own IP space can now sign up to the early access waiting list.

No. This campaign of attacks arrives less than two weeks after the Killnet DDoS campaign that targeted healthcare websites. Based on the methods and targets, we do not believe that these recent attacks are related to the healthcare campaign. Furthermore, yesterday was the US Super Bowl, and we also do not believe that this attack campaign is related to the game event.

What are DDoS attacks?

Distributed Denial of Service attacks are cyber attacks that aim to take down Internet properties and make them unavailable for users. These types of cyberattacks can be very efficient against unprotected websites and they can be very inexpensive for the attackers to execute.

An HTTP DDoS attack usually involves a flood of HTTP requests towards the target website. The attacker’s objective is to bombard the website with more requests than it can handle. Given a sufficiently high amount of requests, the website’s server will not be able to process all of the attack requests along with the legitimate user requests. Users will experience this as website-load delays, timeouts, and eventually not being able to connect to their desired websites at all.

Illustration of a DDoS attack

To make attacks larger and more complicated, attackers usually leverage a network of bots — a botnet. The attacker will orchestrate the botnet to bombard the victim’s websites with HTTP requests. A sufficiently large and powerful botnet can generate very large attacks as we’ve seen in this case.

However, building and operating botnets requires a lot of investment and expertise. What is the average Joe to do? Well, an average Joe that wants to launch a DDoS attack against a website doesn’t need to start from scratch. They can hire one of numerous DDoS-as-a-Service platforms for as little as $30 per month. The more you pay, the larger and longer of an attack you’re going to get.

Why DDoS attacks?

Over the years, it has become easier, cheaper, and more accessible for attackers and attackers-for-hire to launch DDoS attacks. But as easy as it has become for the attackers, we want to make sure that it is even easier – and free – for defenders of organizations of all sizes to protect themselves against DDoS attacks of all types.

Unlike Ransomware attacks, Ransom DDoS attacks don’t require an actual system intrusion or a foothold within the targeted network. Usually Ransomware attacks start once an employee naively clicks an email link that installs and propagates the malware. There’s no need for that with DDoS attacks. They are more like a hit-and-run attack. All a DDoS attacker needs to know is the website’s address and/or IP address.

Is there an increase in DDoS attacks?

Yes. The size, sophistication, and frequency of attacks has been increasing over the past months. In our latest DDoS threat report, we saw that the amount of HTTP DDoS attacks increased by 79% year-over-year. Furthermore, the amount of volumetric attacks exceeding 100 Gbps grew by 67% quarter-over-quarter (QoQ), and the number of attacks lasting more than three hours increased by 87% QoQ.

But it doesn’t end there. The audacity of attackers has been increasing as well. In our latest DDoS threat report, we saw that Ransom DDoS attacks steadily increased throughout the year. They peaked in November 2022 where one out of every four surveyed customers reported being subject to Ransom DDoS attacks or threats.

Distribution of Ransom DDoS attacks by month

Should I be worried about DDoS attacks?

Yes. If your website, server, or networks are not protected against volumetric DDoS attacks using a cloud service that provides automatic detection and mitigation, we really recommend that you consider it.

Cloudflare customers shouldn’t be worried, but should be aware and prepared. Below is a list of recommended steps to ensure your security posture is optimized.

What steps should I take to defend against DDoS attacks?

Cloudflare’s systems have been automatically detecting and mitigating these DDoS attacks.

Cloudflare offers many features and capabilities that you may already have access to but may not be using. So as extra precaution, we recommend taking advantage of these capabilities to improve and optimize your security posture:

  1. Ensure all DDoS Managed Rules are set to default settings (High sensitivity level and mitigation actions) for optimal DDoS activation.
  2. Cloudflare Enterprise customers that are subscribed to the Advanced DDoS Protection service should consider enabling Adaptive DDoS Protection, which mitigates attacks more intelligently based on your unique traffic patterns.
  3. Deploy firewall rules and rate limiting rules to enforce a combined positive and negative security model. Reduce the traffic allowed to your website based on your known usage.
  4. Ensure your origin is not exposed to the public Internet (i.e., only enable access to Cloudflare IP addresses). As an extra security precaution, we recommend contacting your hosting provider and requesting new origin server IPs if they have been targeted directly in the past.
  5. Customers with access to Managed IP Lists should consider leveraging those lists in firewall rules. Customers with Bot Management should consider leveraging the threat scores within the firewall rules.
  6. Enable caching as much as possible to reduce the strain on your origin servers, and when using Workers, avoid overwhelming your origin server with more subrequests than necessary.
  7. Enable DDoS alerting to improve your response time.

Preparing for the next DDoS wave

Defending against DDoS attacks is critical for organizations of all sizes. While attacks may be initiated by humans, they are executed by bots — and to play to win, you must fight bots with bots. Detection and mitigation must be automated as much as possible, because relying solely on humans to mitigate in real time puts defenders at a disadvantage. Cloudflare’s automated systems constantly detect and mitigate DDoS attacks for our customers, so they don’t have to. This automated approach, combined with our wide breadth of security capabilities, lets customers tailor the protection to their needs.

We’ve been providing unmetered and unlimited DDoS protection for free to all of our customers since 2017, when we pioneered the concept. Cloudflare’s mission is to help build a better Internet. A better Internet is one that is more secure, faster, and reliable for everyone – even in the face of DDoS attacks.

We protect entire corporate networks, help customers build Internet-scale applications efficiently, accelerate any website or Internet applicationward off DDoS attacks, keep hackers at bay, and can help you on your journey to Zero Trust.

Visit from any device to get started with our free app that makes your Internet faster and safer.

To learn more about our mission to help build a better Internet, start here. If you’re looking for a new career direction, check out our open positions.

Source :

3 Overlooked Cybersecurity Breaches

Here are three of the worst breaches, attacker tactics and techniques of 2022, and the security controls that can provide effective, enterprise security protection for them.

#1: 2 RaaS Attacks in 13 Months#

Ransomware as a service is a type of attack in which the ransomware software and infrastructure are leased out to the attackers. These ransomware services can be purchased on the dark web from other threat actors and ransomware gangs. Common purchasing plans include buying the entire tool, using the existing infrastructure while paying per infection, or letting other attackers perform the service while sharing revenue with them.

In this attack, the threat actor consists of one of the most prevalent ransomware groups, specializing in access via third parties, while the targeted company is a medium-sized retailer with dozens of sites in the United States.

The threat actors used ransomware as a service to breach the victim’s network. They were able to exploit third-party credentials to gain initial access, progress laterally, and ransom the company, all within mere minutes.

The swiftness of this attack was unusual. In most RaaS cases, attackers usually stay in the networks for weeks and months before demanding ransom. What is particularly interesting about this attack is that the company was ransomed in minutes, with no need for discovery or weeks of lateral movement.

A log investigation revealed that the attackers targeted servers that did not exist in this system. As it turns out, the victim was initially breached and ransomed 13 months before this second ransomware attack. Subsequently, the first attacker group monetized the first attack not only through the ransom they obtained, but also by selling the company’s network information to the second ransomware group.

In the 13 months between the two attacks, the victim changed its network and removed servers, but the new attackers were not aware of these architectural modifications. The scripts they developed were designed for the previous network map. This also explains how they were able to attack so quickly – they had plenty of information about the network. The main lesson here is that ransomware attacks can be repeated by different groups, especially if the victim pays well.

“RaaS attacks such as this one are a good example of how full visibility allows for early alerting. A global, converged, cloud-native SASE platform that supports all edges, like Cato Networks provides complete network visibility into network events that are invisible to other providers or may go under the radar as benign events. And, being able to fully contextualize the events allows for early detection and remediation.

#2: The Critical Infrastructure Attack on Radiation Alert Networks#

Attacks on critical infrastructure are becoming more common and more dangerous. Breaches of water supply plants, sewage systems and other such infrastructures could put millions of residents at risk of a human crisis. These infrastructures are also becoming more vulnerable, and attack surface management tools for OSINT like Shodan and Censys allow security teams to find such vulnerabilities with ease.

In 2021, two hackers were suspected of targeting radiation alert networks. Their attack relied on two insiders that worked for a third party. These insiders disabled the radiation alert systems, significantly debilitating their ability to monitor radiation attacks. The attackers were then able to delete critical software and disable radiation gauges (which is part of the infrastructure itself).

Cybersecurity Breaches

“Unfortunately, scanning for vulnerable systems in critical infrastructure is easier than ever. While many such organizations have multiple layers of security, they are still using point solutions to try and defend their infrastructure rather than one system that can look holistically at the full attack lifecycle. Breaches are never just a phishing problem, or a credentials problem, or a vulnerable system problem – they are always a combination of multiple compromises performed by the threat actor,” said Etay Maor, Sr. Director of Security Strategy at Cato Networks.

#3: The Three-Step Ransomware Attack That Started with Phishing#

The third attack is also a ransomware attack. This time, it consisted of three steps:

1. Infiltration – The attacker was able to gain access to the network through a phishing attack. The victim clicked on a link that generated a connection to an external site, which resulted in the download of the payload.

2. Network activity – In the second phase, the attacker progressed laterally in the network for two weeks. During this time, it collected admin passwords and used in-memory fileless malware. Then on New Year’s Eve, it performed the encryption. This date was chosen since it was (rightfully) assumed the security team would be off on vacation.

3. Exfiltration – Finally, the attackers uploaded the data out of the network.

In addition to these three main steps, additional sub-techniques were employed during the attack and the victim’s point security solutions were not able to block this attack.

Cybersecurity Breaches

“A multiple choke point approach, one that looks horizontally (so to speak) at the attack rather than as a set of vertical, disjointed issues, is the way to enhance detection, mitigation and prevention of such threats. Opposed to popular belief, the attacker needs to be right many times and the defenders only need to be right just once. The underlying technologies to implement a multiple choke point approach are full network visibility via a cloud-native backbone, and a single pass security stack that’s based on ZTNA.” said Etay Maor, Sr. Director of Security Strategy at Cato Networks.

How Do Security Point Solutions Stack Up?#

It is common for security professionals to succumb to the “single point of failure fallacy”. However, cyber-attacks are sophisticated events that rarely involve just one tactic or technique which is the cause of the breach. Therefore, an all-encompassing outlook is required to successfully mitigate cyber-attacks. Security point solutions are a solution for single points of failure. These tools can identify risks, but they will not connect the dots, which could and has led to a breach.

Here’s Watch Out for in the Coming Months#

According to ongoing security research conducted by Cato Networks Security Team, they have identified two additional vulnerabilities and exploit attempts that they recommend including in your upcoming security plans:

1. Log4j#

While Log4j made its debut as early as December of 2021, the noise its making hasn’t died down. Log4j is still being used by attackers to exploit systems, as not all organizations have been able to patch their Log4j vulnerabilities or detect Log4j attacks, in what is known as “virtual patching”. They recommend prioritizing Log4j mitigation.

2. Misconfigured Firewalls and VPNs#

Security solutions like firewalls and VPNs have become access points for attackers. Patching them has become increasingly difficult, especially in the era of architecture cloudification and remote work. It is recommended to pay close attention to these components as they are increasingly vulnerable.

How to Minimize Your Attack Surface and Gain Visibility into the Network#

To reduce the attack surface, security professionals need visibility into their networks. Visibility relies on three pillars:

  • Actionable information – that can be used to mitigate attacks
  • Reliable information – that minimizes the number of false positives
  • Timely information – to ensure mitigation happens before the attack has an impact

Once an organization has complete visibility to the activity on their network they can contextualize the data, decide whether the activity witnessed should be allowed, denied, monitored, restricted (or any other action) and then have the ability to enforce this decision. All these elements must be applied to every entity, be it a user, device, cloud app etc. All the time everywhere. That is what SASE is all about.

Found this article interesting? Follow us on Twitter  and LinkedIn to read more exclusive content we post.

Source :

VMware Security Solutions Advisories VMSA-2021-0002

Advisory ID: VMSA-2021-0002
CVSSv3 Range: 5.3-9.8
Issue Date: 2021-02-23
Updated On: 2021-02-23 (Initial Advisory)
CVE(s): CVE-2021-21972, CVE-2021-21973, CVE-2021-21974
Synopsis: VMware ESXi and vCenter Server updates address multiple security vulnerabilities (CVE-2021-21972, CVE-2021-21973, CVE-2021-21974)

1. Impacted Products
  • VMware ESXi
  • VMware vCenter Server (vCenter Server)
  • VMware Cloud Foundation (Cloud Foundation)
2. Introduction

Multiple vulnerabilities in VMware ESXi and vSphere Client (HTML5) were privately reported to VMware. Updates are available to remediate these vulnerabilities in affected VMware products.

3a. VMware vCenter Server updates address remote code execution vulnerability in the vSphere Client (CVE-2021-21972)


The vSphere Client (HTML5) contains a remote code execution vulnerability in a vCenter Server plugin. VMware has evaluated the severity of this issue to be in the Critical severity range with a maximum CVSSv3 base score of 9.8.

Known Attack Vectors

A malicious actor with network access to port 443 may exploit this issue to execute commands with unrestricted privileges on the underlying operating system that hosts vCenter Server. 


To remediate CVE-2021-21972 apply the updates listed in the ‘Fixed Version’ column of the ‘Response Matrix’ below to affected deployments.


Workarounds for CVE-2021-21972 have been listed in the ‘Workarounds’ column of the ‘Response Matrix’ below.

Additional Documentation



The affected vCenter Server plugin for vROPs is available in all default installations. vROPs does not need be present to have this endpoint available. Follow the workarounds KB to disable it.


VMware would like to thank Mikhail Klyuchnikov of Positive Technologies for reporting this issue to us.

Response Matrix:

ProductVersionRunning OnCVE IdentifierCVSSv3SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional Documentation
vCenter Server7.0AnyCVE-2021-219729.8Critical 7.0 U1cKB82374None
vCenter Server6.7AnyCVE-2021-219729.8Critical 6.7 U3lKB82374None
vCenter Server6.5AnyCVE-2021-219729.8Critical 6.5 U3nKB82374None

Impacted Product Suites that Deploy Response Matrix 3a Components:

ProductVersionRunning OnCVE IdentifierCVSSv3SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional Documentation
Cloud Foundation (vCenter Server)4.xAnyCVE-2021-219729.8Critical 4.2KB82374None
Cloud Foundation (vCenter Server)3.xAnyCVE-2021-219729.8Critical
3b. ESXi OpenSLP heap-overflow vulnerability (CVE-2021-21974)


OpenSLP as used in ESXi has a heap-overflow vulnerability. VMware has evaluated the severity of this issue to be in the Important severity range with a maximum CVSSv3 base score of 8.8.

Known Attack Vectors

A malicious actor residing within the same network segment as ESXi who has access to port 427 may be able to trigger the heap-overflow issue in OpenSLP service resulting in remote code execution.


To remediate CVE-2021-21974 apply the updates listed in the ‘Fixed Version’ column of the ‘Response Matrix’ below to affected deployments.


Workarounds for CVE-2021-21974 have been listed in the ‘Workarounds’ column of the ‘Response Matrix’ below.

Additional Documentation



[1] Per the Security Configuration Guides for VMware vSphere, VMware now recommends disabling the OpenSLP service in ESXi if it is not used. For more information, see our blog posting:

[2] KB82705 documents steps to consume ESXi hot patch asynchronously on top of latest VMware Cloud Foundation (VCF) supported ESXi build. 


VMware would like to thank Lucas Leong (@_wmliang_) of Trend Micro’s Zero Day Initiative for reporting this issue to us.

Response Matrix:

ProductVersionRunning OnCVE IdentifierCVSSv3SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional Documentation
[1] ESXi7.0AnyCVE-2021-219748.8Important ESXi70U1c-17325551KB76372None
[1] ESXi6.7AnyCVE-2021-219748.8Important ESXi670-202102401-SGKB76372None
[1] ESXi6.5AnyCVE-2021-219748.8Important ESXi650-202102101-SGKB76372None

Impacted Product Suites that Deploy Response Matrix 3b Components:

ProductVersionRunning OnCVE IdentifierCVSSv3SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional Documentation
[1] Cloud Foundation (ESXi)4.xAnyCVE-2021-219748.8Important 4.2KB76372None
[1] Cloud Foundation (ESXi)3.xAnyCVE-2021-219748.8Important [2] KB82705KB76372None
3c. VMware vCenter Server updates address SSRF vulnerability in the vSphere Client (CVE-2021-21973)


The vSphere Client (HTML5) contains an SSRF (Server Side Request Forgery) vulnerability due to improper validation of URLs in a vCenter Server plugin. VMware has evaluated the severity of this issue to be in the Moderate severity range with a maximum CVSSv3 base score of 5.3.

Known Attack Vectors

A malicious actor with network access to port 443 may exploit this issue by sending a POST request to vCenter Server plugin leading to information disclosure.


To remediate CVE-2021-21973 apply the updates listed in the ‘Fixed Version’ column of the ‘Response Matrix’ below to affected deployments.


Workarounds for CVE-2021-21973 have been listed in the ‘Workarounds’ column of the ‘Response Matrix’ below.

Additional Documentation



The affected vCenter Server plugin for vROPs is available in all default installations. vROPs does not need be present to have this endpoint available. Follow the workarounds KB to disable it.


VMware would like to thank Mikhail Klyuchnikov of Positive Technologies for reporting this issue to us.

Response Matrix:

ProductVersionRunning OnCVE IdentifierCVSSv3SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional Documentation
vCenter Server7.0AnyCVE-2021-219735.3Moderate 7.0 U1cKB82374None
vCenter Server6.7AnyCVE-2021-219735.3Moderate 6.7 U3lKB82374None
vCenter Server6.5AnyCVE-2021-219735.3Moderate 6.5 U3nKB82374None

Impacted Product Suites that Deploy Response Matrix 3c Components:

ProductVersionRunning OnCVE IdentifierCVSSv3SeverityFixed VersionWorkaroundsAdditional Documentation
Cloud Foundation (vCenter Server)4.xAnyCVE-2021-219735.3Moderate 4.2KB82374None
Cloud Foundation (vCenter Server)3.xAnyCVE-2021-219735.3Moderate
4. References

VMware ESXi 7.0 ESXi70U1c-17325551

VMware ESXi 6.7 ESXi670-202102401-SG

VMware ESXi 6.5 ESXi650-202102101-SG

VMware vCloud Foundation 4.2
Downloads and Documentation:

VMware vCloud Foundation
Downloads and Documentation:

vCenter Server 7.0.1 Update 1
Downloads and Documentation:

vCenter Server 6.7 U3l
Downloads and Documentation:

vCenter Server 6.5 U3n
Downloads and Documentation:

Mitre CVE Dictionary Links:

FIRST CVSSv3 Calculator:

5. Change Log

2021-02-23 VMSA-2021-0002
Initial security advisory.

6. Contact

E-mail list for product security notifications and announcements:

This Security Advisory is posted to the following lists: 


PGP key at:

VMware Security Advisories

VMware Security Response Policy

VMware Lifecycle Support Phases

VMware Security & Compliance Blog


Source :

The Definitive Browser Security Checklist

Security stakeholders have come to realize that the prominent role the browser has in the modern corporate environment requires a re-evaluation of how it is managed and protected. While not long-ago web-borne risks were still addressed by a patchwork of endpoint, network, and cloud solutions, it is now clear that the partial protection these solutions provided is no longer sufficient. Therefore, more and more security teams are now turning to the emerging category of purpose-built Browser Security Platform as the answer to the browser’s security challenges.

However, as this security solution category is still relatively new, there is not yet an established set of browser security best practices, nor common evaluation criteria. LayerX, the User-First Browser Security Platform, is addressing security teams’ need with the downable Browser Security Checklistthat guides its readers through the essentials of choosing the best solution and provides them with an actionable checklist to use during the evaluation process.

The Browser is The Most Important Work Interface and the Most Targeted Attack Surface #

The browser has become the core workspace in the modern enterprise. On top of being the gateway to sanctioned SaaS apps and other non-corporate web destinations, the browser is the intersection point between cloud\web environments and physical or virtual endpoints. This makes the browser both a target for multiple types of attacks, as well as a potential source of unintentional data leakage.

Some of these attacks have been around for more than a decade, exploitation of browser vulnerabilities or drive-by download of malicious files, for example. Others have gained recent momentum alongside the steep rise in SaaS adoption, like social engineering users with phishing webpages. Yet others leverage the evolution in web page technology to launch sophisticated and hard-to-detect modifications and abuse of browser features to capture and exfiltrate sensitive data.

Browser Security 101 – What is It That We Need to Protect?#

Browser security can be divided into two different groups: preventing unintended data exposure and protection against various types of malicious activity.

From the data protection aspect, such a platform enforces policies that ensure sensitive corporate data is not shared or downloaded in an insecure manner from sanctioned apps, nor uploaded from managed devices to non-corporate web destinations.

From the threat protection aspect, such a platform detects and prevents three types of attacks:

  • Attacks that target the browser itself, with the purpose of compromising the host device or the data that resides within the browser application itself, such as cookies, passwords, and others.
  • Attacks that utilize the browser via compromised credentials to access corporate data that resides in both sanctioned and unsanctioned SaaS applications.
  • Attacks that leverage the modern web page as an attack vector to target user’s passwords, via a wide range of phishing methods or through malicious modification of browser features.

How to Choose the Right Solution#

What should you focus on when choosing the browser security solution for your environment? What are the practical implications of the differences between the various offerings? How should deployment methods, the solution’s architecture, or user privacy be weighed in the overall consideration? How should threats and risks be prioritized?

As we’ve said before – unlike with other security solutions, you can’t just ping one of your peers and ask what he or she is doing. Browser security is new, and the wisdom of the crowd is yet to be formed. In fact, there’s an excellent chance that your peers are now struggling with the very same questions you are.

The Definitive Browser Security Platform Checklist – What it is and How to Use It#

The checklist (download it here) breaks down the high-level ‘browser security’ headline to small and digestible chunks of the concrete needs that need to be solved. These are brought to the reader in five pillars – deployment, user experience, security functionalities and user privacy. For each pillar there is a short description of its browser context and a more detailed explanation of its capabilities.

The most significant pillar, in terms of scope, is of course, the security functionalities one, which is divided into five sub-sections. Since, in most cases, this pillar would be the initial driver to pursuing browser security platform in the first place it’s worth going over them in more detail:

Browser Security Deep Dive#

The need for browser security platform typically arises from one of the following:

— Attack Surface Management: Proactive reduction of the browser’s exposure to various types of threats, eliminating adversaries’ ability to carry them out.

— Zero Trust Access: Hardening the authentication requirements to ensure that the username and password were indeed provided by the legitimate user and were not compromised.

— SaaS Monitoring and Protection: 360° visibility into all users’ activity and data usage within sanctioned and unsanctioned apps, as well as other non-corporate web destinations, while safeguarding corporate data from compromise or loss.

— Protection Against Malicious Web Pages: Real-time detection and prevention of all the malicious tactics adversaries embed in the modern web page, including credential phishing, downloading of malicious files and data theft.

— Secure 3rd Party Access and BYOD: Enablement of secure access to corporate web resources from unmanaged devices of both the internal workforce as well as external contractors and service providers.

This list enables anyone to easily identify the objective for their browser security platform search and find out the required capabilities for fulfilling it.

The Checklist – A Straightforward Evaluation Shortcut #

The most important and actionable part in the guide is the concluding checklist, which provides, for the first time, a concise summary of all the essential capabilities a browser security platform should provide. This checklist makes the evaluation process easier than ever. All you have to do now is test the solutions you’ve shortlisted against it and see which one scores the highest. Once you have all of them lined up, you can make an informed decision based on the needs of your environment, as you understand them.

Download the checklist here.

Found this article interesting? Follow us on Twitter  and LinkedIn to read more exclusive content we post.

Source :

Is Once-Yearly Pen Testing Enough for Your Organization?

Any organization that handles sensitive data must be diligent in its security efforts, which include regular pen testing. Even a small data breach can result in significant damage to an organization’s reputation and bottom line.

There are two main reasons why regular pen testing is necessary for secure web application development:

  • Security: Web applications are constantly evolving, and new vulnerabilities are being discovered all the time. Pen testing helps identify vulnerabilities that could be exploited by hackers and allows you to fix them before they can do any damage.
  • Compliance: Depending on your industry and the type of data you handle, you may be required to comply with certain security standards (e.g., PCI DSS, NIST, HIPAA). Regular pen testing can help you verify that your web applications meet these standards and avoid penalties for non-compliance.

How Often Should You Pentest?#

Many organizations, big and small, have once a year pen testing cycle. But what’s the best frequency for pen testing? Is once a year enough, or do you need to be more frequent?

The answer depends on several factors, including the type of development cycle you have, the criticality of your web applications, and the industry you’re in.

You may need more frequent pen testing if:

You Have an Agile or Continuous Release Cycle#

Agile development cycles are characterized by short release cycles and rapid iterations. This can make it difficult to keep track of changes made to the codebase and makes it more likely that security vulnerabilities will be introduced.

If you’re only testing once a year, there’s a good chance that vulnerabilities will go undetected for long periods of time. This could leave your organization open to attack.

To mitigate this risk, pen testing cycles should align with the organization’s development cycle. For static web applications, testing every 4-6 months should be sufficient. But for web applications that are updated frequently, you may need to test more often, such as monthly or even weekly.

Your Web Applications Are Business-Critical#

Any system that is essential to your organization’s operations should be given extra attention when it comes to security. This is because a breach of these systems could have a devastating impact on your business. If your organization relies heavily on its web applications to do business, any downtime could result in significant financial losses.

For example, imagine that your organization’s e-commerce site went down for an hour due to a DDoS attack. Not only would you lose out on potential sales, but you would also have to deal with the cost of the attack and the negative publicity.

To avoid this scenario, it’s important to ensure that your web applications are always available and secure.

Non-critical web applications can usually get away with being tested once a year, but business-critical web applications should be tested more frequently to ensure they are not at risk of a major outage or data loss.

Your Web Applications Are Customer-Facing#

If all your web applications are internal, you may be able to get away with pen testing less frequently. However, if your web applications are accessible to the public, you must be extra diligent in your security efforts.

Web applications accessible to external traffic are more likely to be targeted by attackers. This is because there is a greater pool of attack vectors and more potential entry points for an attacker to exploit.

Customer-facing web applications also tend to have more users, which means that any security vulnerabilities will be exploited more quickly. For example, a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in an external web application with millions of users could be exploited within hours of being discovered.

To protect against these threats, it’s important to pen test customer-facing web applications more frequently than internal ones. Depending on the size and complexity of the application, you may need to pen test every month or even every week.

You Are in a High-Risk Industry#

Certain industries are more likely to be targeted by hackers due to the sensitive nature of their data. Healthcare organizations, for example, are often targeted because of the protected health information (PHI) they hold.

If your organization is in a high-risk industry, you should consider conducting pen testing more frequently to ensure that your systems are secure and meet regulatory compliance. This will help protect your data and reduce the chances of a costly security incident.

You Don’t Have Internal Security Operations or a Pen testing Team#

This might sound counterintuitive, but if you don’t have an internal security team, you may need to conduct pen testing more frequently.

Organizations that don’t have dedicated security staff are more likely to be vulnerable to attacks.

Without an internal security team, you will need to rely on external pen testers to assess your organization’s security posture.

Depending on the size and complexity of your organization, you may need to pen test every month or even every week.

You Are Focused on Mergers or Acquisitions#

During a merger or acquisition, there is often a lot of confusion and chaos. This can make it difficult to keep track of all the systems and data that need to be secured. As a result, it’s important to conduct pen testing more frequently during these times to ensure that all systems are secure.

M&A also means that you are adding new web applications to your organization’s infrastructure. These new applications may have unknown security vulnerabilities that could put your entire organization at risk.

In 2016, Marriott acquired Starwood without being aware that hackers had exploited a flaw in Starwood’s reservation system two years earlier. Over 500 million customer records were compromised. This placed Marriott in hot water with the British watchdog ICO, resulting in 18.4 million pounds in fines in the UK. According to Bloomberg, there is more trouble ahead, as the hotel giant could “face up to $1 billion in regulatory fines and litigation costs.”

To protect against these threats, it’s important to conduct pen testing before and after an acquisition. This will help you identify potential security issues so they can be fixed before the transition is complete.

The Importance of Continuous Pen Testing#

While periodic pen testing is important, it is no longer enough in today’s world. As businesses rely more on their web applications, continuous pen testing becomes increasingly important.

There are two main types of pen testing: time-boxed and continuous.

Traditional pen testing is done on a set schedule, such as once a year. This type of pen testing is no longer enough in today’s world, as businesses rely more on their web applications.

Continuous pen testing is the process of continuously scanning your systems for vulnerabilities. This allows you to identify and fix vulnerabilities before they can be exploited by attackers. Continuous pen testing allows you to find and fix security issues as they happen instead of waiting for a periodic assessment.

Continuous pen testing is especially important for organizations that have an agile development cycle. Since new code is deployed frequently, there is a greater chance for security vulnerabilities to be introduced.

Pen testing as a service models is where continuous pen testing shine. Outpost24’s PTaaS (Penetration-Testing-as-a-Service) platform enables businesses to conduct continuous pen testing with ease. The Outpost24 platform is always up-to-date with an organization’s latest security threats and vulnerabilities, so you can be confident that your web applications are secure.

  • Manual and automated pen testing: Outpost24’s PTaaS platform combines manual and automated pen testing to give you the best of both worlds. This means you can find and fix vulnerabilities faster while still getting the benefits of expert analysis.
  • Provides comprehensive coverage: Outpost24’s platform covers all OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities and more. This means that you can be confident that your web applications are secure against the latest threats.
  • Is cost-effective: With Outpost24, you only pay for the services you need. This makes it more affordable to conduct continuous pen testing, even for small businesses.

The Bottom Line#

Regular pen testing is essential for secure web application development. Depending on your organization’s size, industry, and development cycle, you may need to revise your pen testing schedule.

Once-a-year pen testing cycle may be enough for some organizations, but for most, it is not. For business-critical, customer-facing, or high-traffic web applications, you should consider continuous pen testing.

Outpost24’s PTaaS platform makes it easy and cost-effective to conduct continuous pen testing. Contact us today to learn more about our platform and how we can help you secure your web applications.

Found this article interesting? Follow us on Twitter  and LinkedIn to read more exclusive content we post.

Source :