Inexcusable insecurity in Windows | Hacker News Reader

Inexcusable insecurity in Windows

seberry.medium.com

54 pointssamberry16 comments

Relevant (though I don't know if this vulnerability exists for the non-strict UAC modes): https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20160816-00/?p=94...

More specifically, this quote from the article:

As Larry Osterman noted, UAC is not a security feature.

Unfortunately, the "UAC is not a security boundary" meme bears repeating here.

There are many similar such UAC bypasses, e.g. https://github.com/rootm0s/WinPwnage#uac-bypass-techniques and https://github.com/hfiref0x/UACME.

Interesting - this only applies if your user account is already running as an administrator, but the risk here is that administrative functions could be run without user interaction or UAC prompts.

I just tested this on my Windows 10 machine (running the latest 20H2 version of Win10), and I could successfully launch diskpart.exe and other executables without any UAC prompt. Although Windows Defender did block me from launching cmd.exe or regedit.exe.

I would agree with the author that this is a risk that should be fixed.

What's your UAC setting?

It's the default Windows 10 setting - "Notify me only when programs try to make changes to my computer"

Thanks! Seems I bumped it up to "always" at some point, though guess I should just make a separate admin user.

Wouldn't an attacker that is able to edit the registry (to "initialize" the exploit) already have the privileges that the exploit would give them?

It’s in HKEY_CURRENT_USER as per the dzone article, so no.

It references a 2017 DZone article. Is this vulnerability still present?

Nope. Windows 10 1909 18363.1082 just opens up the Optional Features section of Settings when running the exploit.

I just tried this on Windows 10 20H2 and it appeared to work. See here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25030076

The point the article is making is that this is a 2017 vulnerability and is still present on the lastest release of Windows 10

Who's surprised?

How can anyone assume Windows to be secure or have reasonable defaults? Have you looked at it?

IMHO it's not a problem as you should treat Windows as a single-user OS anyway, and UAC is just a nuisance that gets in the way.

A separation between root/Administrator and your normal user account is useful. On Windows, you often can't help but run semi-trusted proprietary software, so multi-user security technology (especially when combined with some type of mandatory access control) is very useful. I think that macOS Catalina does a better job of this: untrusted software running as your user account cannot read every file in your home directory by default.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com