<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Mozilla Security Blog &#187; Security Updates</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/category/security-updates/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 21:13:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>DigiNotar Removal Follow Up</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/09/02/diginotar-removal-follow-up/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/09/02/diginotar-removal-follow-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:28:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Johnathan Nightingale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/?p=539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earlier this week we revoked our trust in the DigiNotar certificate authority from all Mozilla software. This is not a temporary suspension, it is a complete removal from our trusted root program. Complete revocation of trust is a decision we treat with careful consideration, and employ as a last resort. Three central issues informed our [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Earlier this week we <a href="/security/2011/08/29/fraudulent-google-com-certificate/">revoked our trust in the DigiNotar certificate authority</a> from all Mozilla software. This is not a temporary suspension, it is a complete removal from our trusted root program. Complete revocation of trust is a decision we treat with careful consideration, and employ as a last resort.</p>
<p>Three central issues informed our decision:</p>
<p>1) <strong>Failure to notify.</strong> DigiNotar detected and revoked some of the fraudulent certificates 6 weeks ago without notifying Mozilla. This is particularly troubling since some of the certificates were issued for our own addons.mozilla.org domain.</p>
<p>2) <strong>The scope of the breach remains unknown.</strong> While we were initially informed by Google that a fraudulent *.google.com certificate had been issued, DigiNotar eventually confirmed that more than 200 certificates had been issued against more than 20 different domains. We now know that the attackers also issued certificates from another of DigiNotar&#8217;s intermediate certificates without proper logging. It is therefore impossible for us to know how many fraudulent certificates exist, or which sites are targeted.</p>
<p>3) <strong>The attack is not theoretical.</strong> We have received multiple reports of these certificates being used in the wild.</p>
<p>Mozilla has a strong history of working with CAs to address shared technical challenges, as well as responding to and containing breaches when they do arise. In an incident earlier this year we worked with Comodo to <a href="https://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/03/25/comodo-certificate-issue-follow-up/">block a set of mis-issued certificates</a> that were detected, contained, and reported to us immediately. In DigiNotar&#8217;s case, by contrast, we have no confidence that the problem had been contained. Furthermore, their failure to notify leaves us deeply concerned about our ability to protect our users from future breaches.</p>
<h2>Staat der Nederlanden Certificates</h2>
<p>DigiNotar issues certificates as part of the Dutch government&#8217;s PKIoverheid (PKIgovernment) program. These certificates are issued from a different DigiNotar-controlled intermediate, and chain up to the Dutch government CA (Staat der Nederlanden). The Dutch government&#8217;s Computer Emergency Response Team (GovCERT) indicated that these certificates are issued independently of DigiNotar&#8217;s other processes and that, in their assessment, these had not been compromised. The Dutch government therefore requested that we exempt these certificates from the removal of trust, which we agreed to do in our initial security update early this week.</p>
<p>The Dutch government has since audited DigiNotar&#8217;s performance and rescinded this assessment. We are now removing the exemption for these certificates, meaning that all DigiNotar certificates will be untrusted by Mozilla products. We understand that other browser vendors are making similar changes. We&#8217;re also working with our Dutch localizers and the Bits of Freedom group in the Netherlands to contact individual site operators using affected certificates (based on the EFF&#8217;s SSL Observatory data).</p>
<p>The integrity of the SSL system cannot be maintained in secrecy. Incidents like this one demonstrate the need for active, immediate and comprehensive communication between CAs and software vendors to keep our collective users safe online.</p>
<p>Johnathan Nightingale<br />
Director of Firefox Engineering</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/09/02/diginotar-removal-follow-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>70</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fraudulent *.google.com Certificate</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/08/29/fraudulent-google-com-certificate/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/08/29/fraudulent-google-com-certificate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 21:59:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Johnathan Nightingale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/?p=527</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Update (Sept. 6, 2011 @10:37 a.m. PT): New security updates for Firefox are now available. Update (8.30.11 @ 11:25 p.m. PT) Mozilla just released an update to Firefox for Desktop, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey. Updates are now available for: •    Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux (final release) •    Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux (3.6.21 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2><strong>Update </strong>(Sept. 6, 2011 @10:37 a.m. PT):</h2>
<p>New security updates for Firefox are <a href="https://developer.mozilla.org/devnews/index.php/2011/09/06/firefox-6-0-2-and-3-6-22-security-updates-now-available/">now available</a>.</p>
<h2><del><strong>Update </strong>(8.30.11 @ 11:25 p.m. PT)</del></h2>
<p><del>Mozilla just released an update to Firefox for Desktop, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey. Updates are now available for:<br />
•    Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux (final release)<br />
•    Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux (3.6.21 final release)<br />
•    Firefox Aurora for Windows, Mac and Linux<br />
•    Firefox Nightly for Windows, Mac and Linux<br />
•    SeaMonkey (2.3.2)<br />
•    Thunderbird (6.0.1)</del></p>
<p><del>We strongly recommend that all users upgrade to these releases.</del></p>
<p><del>If you already have Firefox, you will receive an automated update notification within 24 to 48 hours. Users can also <a href="http://support.mozilla.com/kb/Updating%20Firefox?s=manual+update&amp;amp;as=s#w_how-do-i-manually-check-for-updates">manually check for updates</a> if they do not want to wait for the automatic update.</del></p>
<p><del>New versions of Firefox for Mobile (final release and Beta), Firefox Beta for Desktop and Thunderbird will be released shortly.</del></p>
<h2>Issue</h2>
<p>Mozilla was informed today about the issuance of at least one fraudulent SSL certificate for public websites belonging to Google, Inc. This is not a Firefox-specific issue, and the certificate has now been revoked by its issuer, DigiNotar. This should protect most users.</p>
<h2>Impact to users</h2>
<p>Users on a compromised network could be directed to sites using a fraudulent certificate and mistake them for the legitimate sites. This could deceive them into revealing personal information such as usernames and passwords. It may also deceive users into downloading malware if they believe it’s coming from a trusted site. We have received reports of these certificates being used in the wild.</p>
<h2>Status</h2>
<p>Because the extent of the mis-issuance is not clear, we are releasing new versions of Firefox for desktop (3.6.21, 6.0.1, 7, 8, and 9) and mobile (6.0.1, 7, 8, and 9), Thunderbird (3.1.13, and 6.0.1) and SeaMonkey (2.3.2) shortly that will revoke trust in the DigiNotar root and protect users from this attack. We encourage all users to keep their software up-to-date by regularly applying security updates. Users can also <a href="http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/deleting-diginotar-ca-cert">manually disable the DigiNotar root through the Firefox preferences.</a></p>
<h2>Credit</h2>
<p>This issue was reported to us by Google, Inc.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Johnathan Nightingale<br />
Director of Firefox Development</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/08/29/fraudulent-google-com-certificate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>65</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firefox 3.6.2 Released</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2010/03/22/firefox-3-6-2-released/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2010/03/22/firefox-3-6-2-released/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 04:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lucas Adamski</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/?p=258</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mozilla has accelerated its timetable and released Firefox 3.6.2 ahead of schedule. This release contains a number of security fixes, including a fix to Secunia Advisory SA38608 which was previously discussed on this blog when we were first made aware of and were then able to confirm the issue. For additional information please see Mozilla [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mozilla has accelerated its timetable and released Firefox 3.6.2 ahead of schedule. This release contains a number of security fixes, including a fix to <a href="http://secunia.com/advisories/38608/">Secunia Advisory SA38608</a> which was previously discussed on this blog when we were <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2010/02/22/secunia-advisory-sa38608/">first made aware of</a> and were then <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2010/03/18/update-on-secunia-advisory-sa38608/">able to confirm</a> the issue.</p>
<p>For additional information please see <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/2010/mfsa2010-08.html">Mozilla Foundation&#8217;s Security Advisory MFSA-10-08</a> as well as the <a href="http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/3.6.2/releasenotes">Firefox 3.6.2 Release Notes</a>. We urge users to promptly update to this release by selecting &#8220;Check for Updates&#8230;&#8221; from the &#8220;Help&#8221; menu, or by visiting <a href="https://www.mozilla.com/">https://www.mozilla.com/</a> for a free download.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2010/03/22/firefox-3-6-2-released/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Plugin Updating Project: Follow up</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/09/16/plugin-updating-project-follow-up/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/09/16/plugin-updating-project-follow-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:43:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Johnathan Nightingale</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/?p=170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wrote last week about a new project we&#8217;ve started, informing our users when they&#8217;re running out of date versions of popular plugins. We focused our initial efforts on the Adobe Flash Player and now, a week after launch, Mozilla&#8217;s Numerator, Ken Kovash, has a blog post up looking at the results. Those results have [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wrote <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/09/04/helping-users-keep-plugins-updated/">last week</a> about a new project we&#8217;ve started, informing our users when they&#8217;re running out of date versions of popular plugins. We focused our initial efforts on the <a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/">Adobe Flash Player</a> and now, a week after launch, Mozilla&#8217;s Numerator, Ken Kovash, has a <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2009/09/16/helping-people-upgrade-flash/">blog post</a> up looking at the results.</p>
<p>Those results have been nothing short of awesome. <em>In the first week that the project has been live, we&#8217;ve seen 10 million people click through from our page to Adobe&#8217;s update site.</em> As Ken points out, this is not just a huge number, it&#8217;s also about 5x higher click through than that page typically sees.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re continuing to look for ways to help our users stay safe and up to date. We&#8217;re working to roll other plugins into our web-based checking, and the Firefox team is also building an integrated check that will let you know whenever a site you visit is trying to use an outdated plugin (more on that soon). This is just the beginning.</p>
<p>Johnathan Nightingale<br />
Human Shield</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/09/16/plugin-updating-project-follow-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why some Firefox users choose not to update</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/08/25/why-some-firefox-users-choose-not-to-update/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/08/25/why-some-firefox-users-choose-not-to-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:29:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jesse Ruderman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/?p=160</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The best way for users to stay safe online is to use an updated browser. While most Firefox users get updated quickly, some fall behind for various reasons. We&#8217;re looking for ways to increase uptake while still preserving user choice. Ken Kovash and Eric Hergenrader surveyed users who have update-checking enabled but repeatedly chose not [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The best way for users to stay safe online is to use an updated browser.  While most Firefox users get updated quickly, some fall behind for various reasons.  We&#8217;re looking for ways to increase uptake while still preserving user choice.</p>
<p>Ken Kovash and Eric Hergenrader surveyed users who have update-checking enabled but repeatedly chose not to update from Firefox 2 to Firefox 3.  Read their posts: <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2009/08/21/why-people-dont-upgrade-their-browser-part-i/">Why People Don’t Upgrade Their Browser – Part I</a> and <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2009/08/24/why-people-dont-upgrade-their-browser-part-ii/">Part II</a>.  It&#8217;s great to understand why these people continue to use Firefox 2 even when it is no longer receiving security updates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2009/08/25/why-some-firefox-users-choose-not-to-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Status update for Chrome Protocol Directory Traversal issue</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2008/01/29/status-update-for-chrome-protocol-directory-traversal-issue/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2008/01/29/status-update-for-chrome-protocol-directory-traversal-issue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Window Snyder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2008/01/29/status-update-for-chrome-protocol-directory-traversal-issue/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Background on this issue is available here. Impact An attacker can use this vulnerability to collect session information, including session cookies and session history.  Firefox is not vulnerable by default.  Only users that have installed &#8220;flat&#8221; packed add-ons are at risk.  Discussion about &#8220;flat&#8221; packaged add-ons is here.  A partial list of &#8220;flat&#8221; packed add-ons [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Background on this issue is available <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2008/01/22/chrome-protocol-directory-traversal/">here</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Impact</strong></p>
<p>An attacker can use this vulnerability to collect session information, including session cookies and session history.  Firefox is not vulnerable by default.  Only users that have installed &#8220;flat&#8221; packed add-ons are at risk.  Discussion about &#8220;flat&#8221; packaged add-ons is <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=413549">here</a>.  A partial list of &#8220;flat&#8221; packed add-ons is available <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=300181">here</a>.  If you are an author of any of these add-ons, please release an update to your add-on that uses .jar packaging.</p>
<p>This bug is tracking the additional information: <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=413451"></a></p>
<p><a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=413451">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=413451 </a></p>
<p><strong>Status</strong></p>
<p>Based on this new information Mozilla has changed the security severity rating to high.  A fix is included in Firefox 2.0.0.12 which be available shortly.<br />
<a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=413250"></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2008/01/29/status-update-for-chrome-protocol-directory-traversal-issue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firefox 2.0.0.7 now available</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/09/18/firefox-2.0.0.7-now-available/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/09/18/firefox-2.0.0.7-now-available/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Window Snyder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/09/18/firefox-2.0.0.7-now-available/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Firefox 2.0.0.7 was released this afternoon to patch the QuickTime issue described here. This will protect Firefox users from the public critical security vulnerability until a patch is available from Apple. I would like to personally thank the individuals at Apple who worked with us and the engineers at Mozilla that work so hard to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Firefox 2.0.0.7 was released this afternoon to patch the QuickTime issue described <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/09/12/quicktime-to-firefox-issue/">here</a>.  This will protect Firefox users from the public critical security vulnerability until a patch is available from Apple.  I would like to personally thank the individuals at Apple who worked with us and the engineers at Mozilla that work so hard to get security updates out so quickly.</p>
<p>This issue was patched in only six (or 6.25 according to John O&#8217;Duinn) days.  When a vendor ships security fixes quickly, it lowers the incentive for attackers to spend time developing and deploying an exploit for that issue.  The window of opportunity for attackers is reduced and so is the potential to compromise users.  So thanks you guys, for helping destroy the economics of malicious exploit development.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/2007/mfsa2007-28.html">http://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/2007/mfsa2007-28.html </a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/09/18/firefox-2.0.0.7-now-available/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firefox 2.0.0.6 now available</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/30/firefox-2.0.0.6-now-available/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/30/firefox-2.0.0.6-now-available/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 04:11:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Window Snyder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/30/firefox-2.0.0.6-now-available/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We&#8217;ve just released Firefox 2.0.0.6 which contains a security patch to mitigate the issue described here. The patch enables percent-encoding for spaces and double-quotes in URIs handed off to external programs. This reduces the risk of malicious data being passed through Firefox to another application that may then trigger unexpected and potentially dangerous behavior. Get [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;ve just released Firefox 2.0.0.6 which contains a security patch to mitigate the issue described <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/23/related-security-issue-in-url-protocol-handling-on-windows/">here</a>.  The patch enables percent-encoding for spaces and double-quotes in URIs handed off to external programs.  This reduces the risk of malicious data being passed through Firefox to another application that may then trigger unexpected and potentially dangerous behavior.</p>
<p>Get Firefox 2.0.0.6 <a href="http://www.getfirefox.com/">here</a>.</p>
<p>Read the release notes for Firefox 2.0.0.6 <a href="http://en-us.www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/2.0.0.6/releasenotes/">here</a>.</p>
<p>Congratulations and thank you to the dev, QA, and build teams, and all the community members that worked so hard to get this fix out quickly to our users.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/30/firefox-2.0.0.6-now-available/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fix for Windows URL Protocol Handling Problem in Firefox 2.0.0.5</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/18/fix-for-windows-url-protocol-handling-problem-in-firefox-2.0.0.5/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/18/fix-for-windows-url-protocol-handling-problem-in-firefox-2.0.0.5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:49:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Window Snyder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/18/fix-for-windows-url-protocol-handling-problem-in-firefox-2.0.0.5/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Firefox 2.0.0.5 is now available and there is a fix for the URL protocol handling issue described here. We warned that other Windows applications may be vulnerable to this Internet Explorer issue, and on Sunday Nate Mcfeters, Billy Rios, and Raghav Dube posted a proof of concept that demonstrates the same attack through Internet Explorer [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Firefox 2.0.0.5 is now <a href="http://www.getfirefox.com">available</a> and there is a fix for the URL protocol handling issue described <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/10/security-issue-in-url-protocol-handling-on-windows/">here</a>.  We warned that other Windows applications may be vulnerable to this Internet Explorer issue, and on Sunday Nate Mcfeters, Billy Rios, and Raghav Dube posted a <a href="http://www.xs-sniper.com/nmcfeters/Cross-App-Scripting-2.html">proof of concept</a> that demonstrates the same attack through Internet Explorer to execute code in Trillian.  Additionally, <span class="artText"><a href="http://larholm.com/2007/07/18/firefox-fixes-internet-explorer-flaw/">Thor Larholm says </a>&#8220;</span>I can still automatically launch a wide range of external applications from Internet Explorer and provide them with arbitrary command line arguments. AcroRd32.exe (Adobe Acrobat PDF Reader), aim.exe (AOL Instant Messenger), Outlook.exe, msimn.exe (Outlook Express), netmeeting.exe, HelpCtr.exe (Windows Help Center), mirc.exe, Skype.exe, wab.exe (Windows Address Book) and wmplayer.exe (Windows Media Player) &#8211; just to name a few.&#8221;</p>
<p>This patch for Firefox prevents Firefox from accepting bad data from Internet Explorer.  <strong>It does not fix the critical vulnerability in Internet Explorer.</strong>  Microsoft needs to patch Internet Explorer, but at last check, they were not planning to.<span class="artText">  <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/07/11/blame-for-browser-bug_1.html">Mark Griesi is quoted in Infoworld</a> saying &#8220;We don&#8217;t feel that                      there&#8217;s an issue in IE, and therefore, there&#8217;s nothing to be fixed.&#8221;</span></p>
<p>Mozilla recommends using Firefox to browse the web to prevent attackers from taking advantage of this vulnerability in Internet Explorer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/18/fix-for-windows-url-protocol-handling-problem-in-firefox-2.0.0.5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Security Issue in URL Protocol Handling on Windows</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/10/security-issue-in-url-protocol-handling-on-windows/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/10/security-issue-in-url-protocol-handling-on-windows/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:04:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Window Snyder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/10/security-issue-in-url-protocol-handling-on-windows/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today security firm Secunia released an advisory on a security issue found (apparently) simultaneously and independently by Greg MacManus and Billy Rios based on a previously reported issue in Safari found by Thor Larholm. Any Windows application that calls a registered URL protocol without escaping quotes may be used to pass unexpected and potentially dangerous [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span>Today security firm Secunia released an advisory on a security issue found (apparently) simultaneously and independently by Greg MacManus and Billy Rios based on a previously reported issue in Safari found by Thor Larholm.</span></p>
<p><span>Any Windows application that calls a registered URL protocol without escaping quotes may be used to pass unexpected and potentially dangerous data to the application that registers that URL Protocol. This could result in a critical security vulnerability.</span></p>
<p><span>The vulnerability is exposed when a user browses to a malicious web page in Internet Explorer and clicks on a specially crafted link. That link causes Internet Explorer to invoke another Windows program via the command line and then pass that program the URL from the malicious webpage without escaping the quotes. This can cause data to be passed accidentally from the malicious web page to the second Windows program. In the specific attack described in the report, Internet Explorer sends URL data to Firefox.  If the data is crafted a certain way it will allow remote code execution in Firefox.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">A similar interaction between Safari and Firefox was reported earlier and fixed by Apple. <span class="apple-style-span"><span>According to Ryan Naraine at ZDNet, Microsoft is not planning to release a patch at this time.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mozilla believes in defense in depth and will be patching Firefox <span>i</span>n the upcoming 2.0.0.5 release<span> to mitigate the problem</span>. This will prevent IE from sending Firefox malicious data. Other Windows programs may also be vulnerable to bad data being passed from IE although we are not aware of any at this time.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is important to note that if you are using Firefox to browse the web you *<strong>are not</strong>* vulnerable to this attack.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>While we have seen no evidence of attackers exploiting this issue, there is proof of concept code available publicly.  So we recommend that people use Firefox and as always take care when browsing unknown websites.</p>
<p><span>We appreciate the work of the security researchers who identified this issue and the thousands of Mozilla community members who test patches and enable us to ship fixes so quickly. Mozilla is committed to identifying, prioritizing and fixing bugs to deliver the safest online experience for its users. We fix all bugs with any security risk as part of our commitment to security.</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2007/07/10/security-issue-in-url-protocol-handling-on-windows/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

