log4shell测试工具的比较研究

D. Everson, Ashish Bastola, Rajat Mittal, Siddheshwar Munde, Long Cheng
{"title":"log4shell测试工具的比较研究","authors":"D. Everson, Ashish Bastola, Rajat Mittal, Siddheshwar Munde, Long Cheng","doi":"10.1109/SecDev53368.2022.00016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Log4Shell was a critical Remote Code Execution vulnerability publicly disclosed on December 10th, 2021. Given its potential to be found in any Java application, organizations around the globe were scrambling to determine their exposure as well as identify methods to eliminate their exposure where possible and mitigate the risk elsewhere. This led to security teams needing tools to check for the vulnerability, assess fixes and mitigations, and demonstrate the vulnerability's impact in their environment. Both open-source and vendor communities were quick to deliver a wide variety of tools. In this paper we present a taxonomy and an analysis of 18 Log4Shell test tools spanning dynamic analysis, static analysis, honeypot, etc. As expected, dynamic tools could demonstrate exploitability while static tools provided more certainty. Most importantly, our analysis showed that understanding how each tool interprets the attack surface of the test item has a profound effect on the results and how they should be interpreted.","PeriodicalId":407946,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE Secure Development Conference (SecDev)","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Study of Log4Sheil Test Tools\",\"authors\":\"D. Everson, Ashish Bastola, Rajat Mittal, Siddheshwar Munde, Long Cheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SecDev53368.2022.00016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Log4Shell was a critical Remote Code Execution vulnerability publicly disclosed on December 10th, 2021. Given its potential to be found in any Java application, organizations around the globe were scrambling to determine their exposure as well as identify methods to eliminate their exposure where possible and mitigate the risk elsewhere. This led to security teams needing tools to check for the vulnerability, assess fixes and mitigations, and demonstrate the vulnerability's impact in their environment. Both open-source and vendor communities were quick to deliver a wide variety of tools. In this paper we present a taxonomy and an analysis of 18 Log4Shell test tools spanning dynamic analysis, static analysis, honeypot, etc. As expected, dynamic tools could demonstrate exploitability while static tools provided more certainty. Most importantly, our analysis showed that understanding how each tool interprets the attack surface of the test item has a profound effect on the results and how they should be interpreted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":407946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE Secure Development Conference (SecDev)\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE Secure Development Conference (SecDev)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SecDev53368.2022.00016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE Secure Development Conference (SecDev)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SecDev53368.2022.00016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Log4Shell是一个严重的远程代码执行漏洞,于2021年12月10日公开披露。考虑到在任何Java应用程序中都有可能发现它,全球的组织都在争先恐后地确定它们的暴露,并确定在可能的地方消除暴露的方法,并在其他地方降低风险。这导致安全团队需要工具来检查漏洞,评估修复和缓解,并演示漏洞在其环境中的影响。开源社区和供应商社区都迅速提供了各种各样的工具。本文对18种Log4Shell测试工具进行了分类和分析,包括动态分析、静态分析、蜜罐分析等。正如预期的那样,动态工具可以展示可利用性,而静态工具提供了更多的确定性。最重要的是,我们的分析表明,理解每个工具如何解释测试项目的攻击面对结果以及它们应该如何解释具有深远的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Study of Log4Sheil Test Tools
Log4Shell was a critical Remote Code Execution vulnerability publicly disclosed on December 10th, 2021. Given its potential to be found in any Java application, organizations around the globe were scrambling to determine their exposure as well as identify methods to eliminate their exposure where possible and mitigate the risk elsewhere. This led to security teams needing tools to check for the vulnerability, assess fixes and mitigations, and demonstrate the vulnerability's impact in their environment. Both open-source and vendor communities were quick to deliver a wide variety of tools. In this paper we present a taxonomy and an analysis of 18 Log4Shell test tools spanning dynamic analysis, static analysis, honeypot, etc. As expected, dynamic tools could demonstrate exploitability while static tools provided more certainty. Most importantly, our analysis showed that understanding how each tool interprets the attack surface of the test item has a profound effect on the results and how they should be interpreted.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信