Close
  • Latest News
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Video
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
Read Down
Sign in
Close
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Read Down
Password recovery
Recover your password
Close
Search
Logo
Logo
  • Latest News
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Video
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
More
    Home Cybersecurity
    • Cybersecurity

    Microsofts Security Disclosures Come Under Fire

    Written by

    Ryan Naraine
    Published April 13, 2006
    Share
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Linkedin

      eWEEK content and product recommendations are editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links to our partners. Learn More.

      Is Microsoft silently fixing security vulnerabilities and deliberately obfuscating details about patches in its monthly security bulletins?

      Matthew Murphy, a security researcher who has worked closely with the MSRC (Microsoft Security Response Center) in the past, is accusing the software maker of “misleading” customers by not clearly spelling out exactly what is being patched in the MS06-015 bulletin released on April 11.

      That bulletin, rated “critical,” contained patches for a remote code execution hole in Windows Explorer, the embedded file manager that lets Windows users view and manage drives, folders and files.

      However, as Murphy found out when scouring through the fine print in the bulletin, the update also addressed what Microsoft described as a “publicly disclosed variation” of a flaw that was reported in May 2004 (CVE-2004-2289.)

      In an entry posted to the SecuriTeam blog, Murphy noted that the vulnerability that is documented was privately reported, but the “variation” that was also patched has been publicly known for 700+ days.

      “In that case, the issue that is truly the variation is the issue that was discovered and reported privately after the public disclosure,” he said.

      “[The] information as published is extremely misleading and Microsofts choice not to document a publicly reported vulnerability is not one that will be for the benefit of its customers security,” Murphy said.

      In an interview with eWEEK, Murphy said another “throwaway line” in the bulletin also raised questions about whether a flaw he reported in August 2005 was silently fixed.

      The bulletin refers to a “Defense in Depth change” that ensures that consistent prompting occurs in “Internet zone drag and drop scenarios.”

      That wording, Murphy said, “sounds suspiciously like an attempt to plug the vulnerability I reported publicly in February, which is CVE-2005-3240.“

      Murphy originally reported that vulnerability to the MSRC in August 2005, but held off on publishing the details for six months. During that time, Murphy and MSRC officials haggled over the severity of the bug and Microsoft made it clear it had no plans to issue a security update to provide a fix, Murphy said.

      The company said the fixes would be included in Service Pack 2 of Windows Server 2003 and Service Pack 3 of Windows XP. “Microsofts internal risk assessment concluded that this issue was not sufficiently serious to be fixed in a security bulletin. This conclusion appears fundamentally inconsistent with the way related issues were handled by Microsoft,” Murphy said.

      “I disagree with the technical conclusion behind Microsofts decision and I further find the time frame of delivery and deployment for maintenance releases to be largely unsuitable for security fixes of any significant magnitude,” he said.

      Murphy has not yet tested the patch to determine whether the drag-and-drop issue was actually fixed, but, even without testing, he argues that the way the information was released leaves everyone guessing.

      /zimages/3/28571.gifRead more here about Microsofts April batch of security bulletins.

      “Microsoft needs to be much more transparent about the real nature of the threats customers are facing. Microsoft doesnt patch phantom vulnerabilities that dont exist or unrealistic science-fiction attack scenarios. Microsofts under-documentation of these vulnerabilities leaves those charged with deploying patches in a tough spot,” he said.

      “You simply dont know what the patches are for. Its virtually impossible to make a determination about a deployment time frame if not deploying a patch has the potential to place you at an additional, unknown risk. As a result, administrators may deploy patches unnecessarily, erring on the side of caution (and risking compatibility problems in the process), or they may choose not to deploy based on incomplete information. Individuals making these kinds of decisions deserve better information,” Murphy said.

      Murphy said the MS06-015 bulletin “should be revised or completely rewritten, with the objective of providing sensible, coherent and complete information to customers.”

      Microsoft, based in Redmond, Wash., declined requests for an interview to discuss the issue. Instead, the company sent a statement to eWEEK to stress that all the publicly disclosed vulnerabilities fixed by MS06-015 are addressed in the bulletin documentation, listed under the “Vulnerability Details” section and denoted by their individual CVE numbers.

      “[We] have a working relationship with Matt and, based on our ongoing discussions with him, view his blog posting as welcome feedback for how we can continue to improve our security bulletins,” the statement read.

      The statement said “all publicly disclosed vulnerabilities” excludes Murphys report, but even that claim is “false,” Murphy said.

      “The bulletin patches a CVE that doesnt have its own individual denotation. The bottom line is, Microsofts claim that every publicly disclosed vulnerability is denoted specifically is bizarre, because theyve yet to answer one of the criticisms in the blog post, which is that they dont provide meaningful information about this variation thats allegedly patched,” he said.

      Regarding Microsofts statement, Murphy added, “That still doesnt answer the question of where this other Defense in Depth change was originated. Theres no specific threat that its identified as correcting, so it seems almost random.”

      Ironically, these questions about transparency and disclosure come less than a month after an MSRC official criticized Apple for the way it handles security guidance to customers.

      “Look, the only way you can tackle security issues is by getting out ahead of them and clearly communicating to your users the threat, and the clear guidance on how to be safe,” MSRC program manager Stephen Toulouse said in response to what he described as the “recent trials and tribulations of Apple in the security space.”

      Now, Murphy said, the shoe is on the other foot and Microsoft is just as guilty as Apple. “Every time Microsoft seems to be getting the security pitch right, one gets thrown in the dirt. Microsoft needs a new ball,” he said.

      /zimages/3/28571.gifCheck out eWEEK.coms for the latest security news, reviews and analysis. And for insights on security coverage around the Web, take a look at eWEEK.com Security Center Editor Larry Seltzers Weblog.

      Ryan Naraine
      Ryan Naraine

      Get the Free Newsletter!

      Subscribe to Daily Tech Insider for top news, trends & analysis

      Get the Free Newsletter!

      Subscribe to Daily Tech Insider for top news, trends & analysis

      MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

      Artificial Intelligence

      9 Best AI 3D Generators You Need...

      Sam Rinko - June 25, 2024 0
      AI 3D Generators are powerful tools for many different industries. Discover the best AI 3D Generators, and learn which is best for your specific use case.
      Read more
      Cloud

      RingCentral Expands Its Collaboration Platform

      Zeus Kerravala - November 22, 2023 0
      RingCentral adds AI-enabled contact center and hybrid event products to its suite of collaboration services.
      Read more
      Artificial Intelligence

      8 Best AI Data Analytics Software &...

      Aminu Abdullahi - January 18, 2024 0
      Learn the top AI data analytics software to use. Compare AI data analytics solutions & features to make the best choice for your business.
      Read more
      Latest News

      Zeus Kerravala on Networking: Multicloud, 5G, and...

      James Maguire - December 16, 2022 0
      I spoke with Zeus Kerravala, industry analyst at ZK Research, about the rapid changes in enterprise networking, as tech advances and digital transformation prompt...
      Read more
      Video

      Datadog President Amit Agarwal on Trends in...

      James Maguire - November 11, 2022 0
      I spoke with Amit Agarwal, President of Datadog, about infrastructure observability, from current trends to key challenges to the future of this rapidly growing...
      Read more
      Logo

      eWeek has the latest technology news and analysis, buying guides, and product reviews for IT professionals and technology buyers. The site’s focus is on innovative solutions and covering in-depth technical content. eWeek stays on the cutting edge of technology news and IT trends through interviews and expert analysis. Gain insight from top innovators and thought leaders in the fields of IT, business, enterprise software, startups, and more.

      Facebook
      Linkedin
      RSS
      Twitter
      Youtube

      Advertisers

      Advertise with TechnologyAdvice on eWeek and our other IT-focused platforms.

      Advertise with Us

      Menu

      • About eWeek
      • Subscribe to our Newsletter
      • Latest News

      Our Brands

      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms
      • About
      • Contact
      • Advertise
      • Sitemap
      • California – Do Not Sell My Information

      Property of TechnologyAdvice.
      © 2024 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

      Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.

      ×