Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - News & Analysis - GHOST New Research: Proof-of-Concept Exploit Code
News & Analysis

GHOST New Research: Proof-of-Concept Exploit Code

ISBuzz TeamBy ISBuzz TeamFebruary 3, 2015Updated:January 5, 20264 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
ghost
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

A heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in glibc (CVE-2015-0235) was announced this week.

It seems as though all new vulnerabilities need to have catchy marketing names, so this one was dubbed “GHOST,” which was derived from the vulnerable glibc function name – “GetHOSTbyname()”.

Vulnerability Notes

Here are the key points thus far:

– The vulnerability affects all versions of glibc from glibc-2.17 and lower.
– The bug was patched in glibc-2.18 in May 2013 but was not marked as a security bug, so the fix did not make it into many common Linux distributions like RedHat and Ubuntu.
– To our knowledge, this is not currently being exploited in the wild.
– Qualys has not released any PoC code, but they plan to release a Metasploit module in the near future.
– Qualys was able to remotely exploit a mail server running Exim mail software, but it’s unclear what other software might be vulnerable. (They are working on a metapsloit module specifically for the Exim exploit.)

Free eBook: Modern Retail Security Risk – Get your copy now.

Regarding other Linux server software Qualys wrote:

“to the best of our knowledge, the buffer overflow cannot be triggered in any of [these]:

apache, cups, dovecot, gnupg, isc-dhcp, lighttpd, mariadb/mysql,

nfs-utils, nginx, nodejs, openldap, openssh, postfix, proftpd,

pure-ftpd, rsyslog, samba, sendmail, sysklogd, syslog-ng, tcp_wrappers,

vsftpd, xinetd.”

WordPress XML-RPC Pingback Vector 

It has been speculated that the XML-RPC pingback functionality in WordPress installs may be vulnerable to remote exploitation. We decided to run some tests to see if it is in fact vulnerable. We previously did a blog post outlining how the WordPress XML-RPC “pingback” functionality could be abused by attackers to force unsuspecting websites into participating in DDoS attacks. To summarize, in that attack, the attacker sends an XML request to the “/xmlrpc.php” script:

The YELLOW highlighted data is a WordPress “Patsy Proxy” site while the ORANGE highlighted data is the DDoS target/victim website. In this scenario, the XML-RPC “pingback” code in PHP is using the gethostbyname() function call on the ORANGE highlighted data so that it can resolve it to an IP address for the remote request it will send. This is the exploit vector we chose to focus on for GHOST testing.

Modifying Input for GHOST Vulnerability Testing

Instead of sending a normal sized URL in the XML pingback.ping method body, we need to send a large one. Here is a Ruby PoC script:

The script takes command line arguments for the size of payload that you want to send. During our testing in SpiderLabs Research, we identified different size ranges that worked on different platform/versions of glibc, php and wordpress. After sending the attack payload, we have seen the HTTP process responds with the following:

– 500 HTTP Response Status code with php-cgi
– No HTTP Response with mod_php

There are errors in the Apache error_log file when the process crashes:

This PoC allows users to remotely verify if a target web server is vulnerable to the CVE; however, it does not demonstrate exploitability. Here is the glibc and php version information for the two systems we used during this test:

Recommendations

Install glibc Patches

Example for Ubuntu Linux Distributions:

sudo apt-get clean
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get upgrade

And don’t forget to reboot! 

Disable XML-RPC

It is possible to disable the XML-RPC process altogether if you do not want to use it.  There are even plugins that will disable it.

Disable Pingback Requests

You may also disable the pingback feature by adding the following to your functions.php file:

WAF Protections

By using a WAF, you can identify initial pingback XML requests on your WordPress site and look for attacks. The Trustwave WAF has a profiling and learning engine called “Adaption” that is able to identify these types of anomalies vs. normal user traffic. We have also added rules to our commercial SpiderLabs ModSecurity rules package to identify this specific PoC attack vector.

Monitor Your Logs

When attackers are attempting to exploit this vulnerability against your web servers, there will most likely be error messages (segmentation faults, etc…) that will indicate a problem. Organizations should be vigilant in monitoring their logs and following up on an anomalous errors.

About Trustwave

trustwaveTrustwave helps businesses fight cybercrime, protect data and reduce security risk. With cloud and managed security services, integrated technologies and a team of security experts, ethical hackers and researchers, Trustwave enables businesses to transform the way they manage their information security and compliance programs. More than 2.7 million businesses are enrolled in the Trustwave TrustKeeper® cloud platform, through which Trustwave delivers automated, efficient and cost-effective data protection, risk management and threat intelligence. Trustwave is a privately held company, headquartered in Chicago, with customers in 96 countries. For more information about Trustwave, visit www.trustwave.com.

ISBuzz Team
  • ISBuzz Team
    Air Canada Data Breach: BianLian Extortion Group Claims A Massive Heist Contrary To Airline’s Earlier Statement
  • ISBuzz Team
    Unprecedented DDoS Attack Rocks The Web: Tech Giants Reveal A Digital Tsunami
  • ISBuzz Team
    CISA Flags High-Severity Adobe Acrobat Reader Flaw Amid Active Exploits
  • ISBuzz Team
    Curl Security Alert: Patching A Critical Bug Averting Potential Cyber Catastrophe

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

Exploited Faster, Patched Slower: Verizon DBIR 2026 Shows Security Teams Losing Ground

May 20, 20265 Mins Read

Security’s Blind Spot: The Threats Hiding in “Low-Severity” Alerts

May 6, 20265 Mins Read

Visual data is the blind spot in enterprise security: that’s about to change

May 4, 20267 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}