Multiple Vulnerabilities in Mozilla Products Could Allow for Arbitrary Code Execution

Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Mozilla products, the most severe of which could allow for arbitrary code execution. Mozilla Firefox is a web browser used to access the Internet. Mozilla Firefox ESR is a version of the web browser intended to be deployed in large organizations. Successful exploitation of the most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow for arbitrary code execution in the context of the logged on user. Depending on the privileges associated with the user, an attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than those who operate with administrative user rights.

There are no reports that these vulnerabilities are being exploited in the wild

Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Mozilla products, the most severe of which could allow for arbitrary code execution. Details of the most critical vulnerabilities are as follows:

Tactic: Initial Access (TA0001):
Technique: Drive-by Compromise (T1189):

• Memory safety bugs present in Firefox 127, Firefox ESR 115.12, and Thunderbird 115.12 which could be exploited to run arbitrary code. (CVE-2024-6604)
• Memory safety bugs present in Firefox 127 which could be exploited to run arbitrary code. (CVE-2024-6615)

Additional lower severity vulnerabilities include:

• Due to large allocation checks in Angle for GLSL shaders being too lenient an out-of-bounds access could occur when allocating more than 8192 ints in private shader memory on mac OS. (CVE-2024-6600)
• A race condition could lead to a cross-origin container obtaining permissions of the top-level origin. (CVE-2024-6601)
• A mismatch between allocator and deallocator could have lead to memory corruption. (CVE-2024-6602)
• In an out-of-memory scenario an allocation could fail but free would have been called on the pointer afterwards leading to memory corruption. (CVE-2024-6603)
• Clipboard code failed to check the index on an array access. This could have lead to an out-of-bounds read. (CVE-2024-6606)
• It was possible to prevent a user from exiting pointerlock when pressing escape and to overlay customValidity notifications from a < select > element over certain permission prompts. This could be used to confuse a user into giving a site unintended permissions. (CVE-2024-6607)
• It was possible to move the cursor using pointerlock from an iframe. This allowed moving the cursor outside of the viewport and the Firefox window. (CVE-2024-6608)
• When almost out-of-memory an elliptic curve key which was never allocated could have been freed again. (CVE-2024-6609)
• Form validation popups could capture escape key presses. Therefore, spamming form validation messages could be used to prevent users from exiting full-screen mode. (CVE-2024-6610)
• A nested iframe, triggering a cross-site navigation, could send SameSite=Strict or Lax cookies. (CVE-2024-6611)
• CSP violations generated links in the console tab of the developer tools, pointing to the violating resource. This caused a DNS prefetch which leaked that a CSP violation happened. (CVE-2024-6612)
• The frame iterator could get stuck in a loop when encountering certain wasm frames leading to incorrect stack traces. (CVE-2024-6613)
• The frame iterator could get stuck in a loop when encountering certain wasm frames leading to incorrect stack traces. (CVE-2024-6614)
• Memory safety bugs present in Firefox 127. Some of these bugs showed evidence of memory corruption and we presume that with enough effort some of these could have been exploited to run arbitrary code. (CVE-2024-6615)

Successful exploitation of the most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow for arbitrary code execution in the context of the logged on user. Depending on the privileges associated with the user, an attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than those who operate with administrative user rights.

We recommend the following actions be taken:

• Apply the stable channel update provided by Mozilla to vulnerable systems immediately after appropriate testing. (M1051: Update Software)
  • Safeguard 7.1: Establish and Maintain a Vulnerability Management Process: Establish and maintain a documented vulnerability management process for enterprise assets. Review and update documentation annually, or when significant enterprise changes occur that could impact this Safeguard.
  • Safeguard 7.4: Perform Automated Application Patch Management: Perform application updates on enterprise assets through automated patch management on a monthly, or more frequent, basis.
  • Safeguard 7.5: Perform Automated Vulnerability Scans of Internal Enterprise Assets: Perform automated vulnerability scans of internal enterprise assets on a quarterly, or more frequent, basis. Conduct both authenticated and unauthenticated scans, using a SCAP-compliant vulnerability scanning tool.
• Apply the Principle of Least Privilege to all systems and services. Run all software as a non-privileged user (one without administrative privileges) to diminish the effects of a successful attack. (M1026: Privileged Account Management)
  • Safeguard 4.7: Manage Default Accounts on Enterprise Assets and Software: Manage default accounts on enterprise assets and software, such as root, administrator, and other pre-configured vendor accounts. Example implementations can include: disabling default accounts or making them unusable.
  • Safeguard 5.4: Restrict Administrator Privileges to Dedicated Administrator Accounts: Restrict administrator privileges to dedicated administrator accounts on enterprise assets. Conduct general computing activities, such as internet browsing, email, and productivity suite use, from the user’s primary, non-privileged account.
• Use capabilities to detect and block conditions that may lead to or be indicative of a software exploit occurring. (M1050: Exploit Protection)
  • Safeguard 10.5: Enable Anti-Exploitation Features: Enable anti-exploitation features on enterprise assets and software, where possible, such as Microsoft® Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Windows® Defender Exploit Guard (WDEG), or Apple® System Integrity Protection (SIP) and Gatekeeper™.
• Restrict use of certain websites, block downloads/attachments, block JavaScript, restrict browser extensions, etc. (M1021: Restrict Web-Based Content)
  • Safeguard 9.2: Use DNS Filtering Services: Use DNS filtering services on all enterprise assets to block access to known malicious domains.
  • Safeguard 9.3: Maintain and Enforce Network-Based URL Filters: Enforce and update network-based URL filters to limit an enterprise asset from connecting to potentially malicious or unapproved websites. Example implementations include category-based filtering, reputation-based filtering, or through the use of block lists. Enforce filters for all enterprise assets.
  • Safeguard 9.6: Block Unnecessary File Types: Block unnecessary file types attempting to enter the enterprise’s email gateway.
• Block execution of code on a system through application control, and/or script blocking. (M1038: Execution Prevention)
  • Safeguard 2.5: Allowlist Authorized Software: Use technical controls, such as application allowlisting, to ensure that only authorized software can execute or be accessed. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
  • Safeguard 2.6: Allowlist Authorized Libraries: Use technical controls to ensure that only authorized software libraries, such as specific .dll, .ocx, .so, etc., files, are allowed to load into a system process. Block unauthorized libraries from loading into a system process. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
  • Safeguard 2.7: Allowlist Authorized Scripts: Use technical controls, such as digital signatures and version control, to ensure that only authorized scripts, such as specific .ps1, .py, etc., files, are allowed to execute. Block unauthorized scripts from executing. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
• Use capabilities to prevent suspicious behavior patterns from occurring on endpoint systems. This could include suspicious process, file, API call, etc. behavior. (M1040: Behavior Prevention on Endpoint)
  • Safeguard 13.2: Deploy a Host-Based Intrusion Detection Solution: Deploy a host-based intrusion detection solution on enterprise assets, where appropriate and/or supported.
  • Safeguard 13.7: Deploy a Host-Based Intrusion Prevention Solution: Deploy a host-based intrusion prevention solution on enterprise assets, where appropriate and/or supported. Example implementations include use of an Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) client or host-based IPS agent.
• Inform and educate users regarding the threats posed by hypertext links contained in emails or attachments especially from un-trusted sources. Remind users not to visit un-trusted websites or follow links provided by unknown or un-trusted sources. (M1017: User Training)
  • Safeguard 14.1: Establish and Maintain a Security Awareness Program: Establish and maintain a security awareness program. The purpose of a security awareness program is to educate the enterprise’s workforce on how to interact with enterprise assets and data in a secure manner. Conduct training at hire and, at a minimum, annually. Review and update content annually, or when significant enterprise changes occur that could impact this Safeguard.
  • Safeguard 14.2: Train Workforce Members to Recognize Social Engineering Attacks: Train workforce members to recognize social engineering attacks, such as phishing, pre-texting, and tailgating.