So this "CVSS 9.9" "unauthenticated RCE vs all GNU/Linux systems (plus others)" thing...

- Does NOT affect all GNU/Linux systems.
- Is not CVSS 9.9. I put it at a 6.3

It also requires:
1) The victim system has no active firewall to block incoming connections.
2) A user on the victim system must print something to a printer that mysteriously appears on the system that has never been there before.

If these two things happen, then command execution can happen as the "lp" user.

<yawn>

We get it. You found a vulnerability.
Lying about it to try to stir up interest in it is not appreciated by anybody who takes themselves seriously in this industry.

CVE-2024-47176, CVE-2024-47076, CVE-2024-47175, and CVE-2024-47177 have been assigned.

https://www.evilsocket.net/2024/09/26/Attacking-UNIX-systems-via-CUPS-Part-I/

Attacking UNIX Systems via CUPS, Part I

Hello friends, this is the first of two, possibly three (if and when I have time to finish the Windows research) writeups. We will start with targeting GNU/Linux systems with an RCE. As someone who’s

evilsocket

@wdormann

A user on the victim system must print something to a printer that mysteriously appears on the system that has never been there before.

i'm kinda wondering about this part - it makes sense from the vuln description, but on evilsocket's demo it happened automatically, did he actually omit the part where the exploit requires active input from the user? lol

@ptrc
Somebody wanting to make something seem more important than it is will hand-wave over the part that they don't like.

@ptrc @wdormann

On this evil guy’s write up he mentions print job being sent twice before he shows the video.

“Wait for a print job to be sent to our fake printer for the PPD directives, and therefore the command, to be executed.”

‘Inject the *cupsFilter2 : "application/pdf application/vnd.cups-postscript 0 foomatic-rip line directive to instruct CUPS to execute /usr/lib/cups/filter/foomatic-rip when a print job is sent.’

@fellows @ptrc
Yeah, it's the video that is apparently misleading.
TBH, I didn't have the mental fortitude to watch it myself.
@wdormann @ptrc I personally didn’t watch it, I did read however.
@ptrc @wdormann wondered about that too.