13 comments

  • xx_ns 1 hour ago
    "No successful PHP2Shell exploits seen so far"... in the wild, specifically in Wiz's honeypot. The vulnerability itself has been successfully exploited, most notably for the "Steal my Bitcoin" challenge [1] as one example.

    Dan Guido, of Trail of Bits, claims they have an "universal" exploit [2]. Knowing their track record, I don't currently have a reason to doubt this claim.

    [1]: https://stealmybitcoin.com/

    [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50226010

    EDIT: The HN title has been changed since posting this comment.

    • cimi_ 37 minutes ago
      More details about stealmybitcoin in LiveOverflow's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhNiMWtOutw

      This is the winner: https://github.com/KillaBoi/StealMyBitcoin-PoC

      The challenge website was not exploitable at launch because it wasn't actually running PHP; it got cracked in two hours aftewards

      In the video, LiveOverflow shows his exploit that reliably gets RCE from two requests.

    • paxy 1 hour ago
      It's funny that when stealmybitcoin.com was posted on HN (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50224916) there were hundreds of top voted comments saying "see no one has been able to steal it, the reported vulnerability was fake, it's all AI marketing" etc.

      Since it was successfully exploited there has been zero further discussion, and I bet most people who participated in the original thread aren't even aware.

      • fwlr 37 minutes ago
        As one of those comments I dispute your characterization of it as the reported vulnerability being fake, very few people were saying that. The main thing being called fake was the narrative that with AI it was trivial to exploit the vulnerability.

        It has not escaped me that the successful exploit did in fact just say “codex, exploit this” and got it.

        I had assumed the rash of commenters saying “lol I am not revealing my AI’s exploit for a measly 500 bucks” were saying that because their AI attempt failed. Now I know they didn’t even try!

      • syshyk 1 hour ago
        The main kickback was against the hype and it was "so easy for AI" and would take "15 minutes to compromise everything".

        Either way, this was not true.

        • Tadpole9181 57 minutes ago
          The author didn't even have an accessible PHP server at first. When they actually added one, it got cracked in 2 hours.
          • milkshakes 54 minutes ago
            also it was under hn load which makes this much harder
            • NorwegianDude 28 minutes ago
              HN load isn't exactly a high load for a server. The automated traffic was most likely much higher, but not high, as the server used the super slow single threaded php dev http server, so high traffic was not possible, everyone had to wait their turn.
              • elysianfields 15 minutes ago
                The vulnerabilities kinda rely on having to make quite a number of requests to exploit + can crash the process as I understood, so if many people try to force their way in at once 2h doesnt seems like a long timespan.
          • jgalt212 25 minutes ago
            yes, but 70% of the world's websites were (and many still are) accessible PHP server(s) that hand not been patched.
      • howunfortunate 58 minutes ago
        To be fair, he hasn't had time to do the write up yet. When he does I fully expect it to hit the front page.
      • ForHackernews 1 hour ago
        Two things can be true:

        1) A motivated human eager for $500 and internet cred can exploit a vuln (perhaps using AI tooling to help)

        2) The vuln is not easily exploitable at scale by driveby bots.

        • NitpickLawyer 1 hour ago
          IIUC, the first setup couldn't be exploited because the site didn't run any php. You kinda need the server to run some php if you're gonna use a php vuln. It got solved ~2h after they added a php-version.php ...
    • idoubtit 27 minutes ago
      As far as I know, there has been no proven vulnerability on a modern PHP (production) stack. The "Steal my Bitcoin" challenge was a toy project. The "lab" target used the embedded PHP server (`php -S`) which is for development only.

      > Warning. This web server is designed to aid application development. [...] It should not be used on a public network. https://www.php.net/manual/en/features.commandline.webserver...

      There are 3 main PHP interfaces (SAPI):

      1. mod_php which is obsolete and requires Apache prefork (which should also be avoided)

      2. php-fpm (FastCGI) which has been the default for more than a decade.

      3. FrankenPHP is a new official interface much more suitable for containers.

      There were 2 vulnerabilities.:

      1. "OOM corruption". The advisory says there was a proven exploit with mod_php, but only for that obsolete SAPI. "Source analysis therefore supports FPM as a susceptible, though *no complete FPM exploit* has been demonstrated for this SAPI."

      2. "stale global state". The advisory is The last PHP release (8.5) was vulnerable when the debug parameter fatal_error_backtraces was on. There was a suspicion that an exploit could exist in the session code for php-fpm, but it was unproven and probably unrealistic.

      The "evidence" given at the end of the article seems old news to me. The honeypot was based on Apache-prefork + mod_php. As stated in the CVE, there is a proven exploit for that (obsolete) stack.

    • NorwegianDude 31 minutes ago
      The steal my Bitcoin challenge was nothing like a realistic common PHP setup. It was a extremely unrealistic and stupid setup, using the built in php dev server. It's even explicitly stated that it should never be exposed to the internet.

      If it needs to hit the same worker to get it to work, that is a whole other problem, and that was not a part of the steal my bitcoin challenge. And what if pm.max_requests is set to 1? Is it then 100 % safe, as it respawns for each requests, making any statement for an universal exploit completely BS, or is a single requests exploit possible?

    • nubinetwork 1 hour ago
      Just last week companies were saying php2shell has been rampant for months, but if that were the case, wouldn't we all have strange errors in our logs? Something seems fishy to me.
      • minitech 1 hour ago
        Which companies? The earliest claim of an exploit attempt in the wild I had heard was October 17th, and that was “extant”, not “rampant”.

        I don’t suppose you’re thinking of when the issue was discovered? That was August 1st, according to https://calif.io/php2shell/#the-discovery.

        • nubinetwork 1 hour ago
          Amazon said 4 days prior to patch, but I'm pretty sure the other one was cloudflare, I can't find the link in my browser history.
          • minitech 1 hour ago
            So was “months” a typo for “4 days” or what?
      • jagged-chisel 1 hour ago
        Should we expect logs from a compromised system to be truthful?
    • slowin 1 hour ago
      [flagged]
      • yurishimo 1 hour ago
        What does being from a particular country have to do with a verified CVE?

        It’s not like it was their first rodeo and they got lucky. There are lots of competent security companies located in countries all around the world, including ones you may not politically agree with.

      • wazzaps 53 minutes ago
        So was the Intel/Apple-silicon/Nvidia chip your PC is likely using. Consider judging companies based on their actions and not their ethnicity
        • slowin 40 minutes ago
          Yes, they are also highly suspect. "Israeli" is not an ethnicity. I judge Israeli companies based on their actions, their ideology and their history. There is zero reason to trust an Israeli source. Do so at your own peril.
  • pizlonator 6 minutes ago
    This is all it takes to port PHP to Fil-C and according to our tests this turns all of the exploits into DoS

    https://github.com/pizlonator/fil-c/blob/deluge/projects/php...

  • CircuitsFit44 11 minutes ago
    For teams still working through the patching, the practical first step is an inventory of which internet-facing hosts and containers actually run an affected PHP version, since that list is often incomplete. Patching also does not remove anything already planted, so on exposed hosts it is worth checking web roots and upload directories for new or modified PHP files and reviewing access logs from before the patch date. Honeypot data showing few successful attempts is a useful trend signal, but it says little about whether your own servers were hit.
  • denysvitali 31 minutes ago
    > but these scanners did successfully exploit Adel Karimi's honeypot, which was a likely contributing factor to CISA’s decision to include PHP2Shell in their KEV list.

    Adel is doing an amazing job. Both in open source (https://github.com/perplexityai/bumblebee, https://github.com/perplexityai/numbat, https://github.com/0x4D31/galah) and with his reports.

    So proud of him!

  • rprouse 1 hour ago
    And at the same time Bleeping Computer is saying it has been successfully exploited, https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/php2shell-sec...
    • devmor 17 minutes ago
      Bleeping Computer also reported that PHP 6 was among the vulnerable versions. I’m not exactly sold on their verification standards.
  • paaloeye 11 minutes ago
    Everyday is a zero-day nowadays
  • makmanalp 1 hour ago
    This has been my hyperfixation for the last few days, and I've been trying to keep together a detailed and timestamped timeline of the evolving situation:

    https://claude.ai/artifact/5cZex56WutyVnpMBrWXxzV

    TLDR is multiple entries that show successful exploitation against particular setups (quite often honeypots that were kinda set up to be exploitable e.g. single worker mod_php or lab setups that are unclear on how well they match real deployments), one claim from dan guido / trail of bits about a broad exploit (but few details), millions of attempts in the wild but very little evidence of actual compromise (unit 42 withdrew theirs).

  • 6_7 1 hour ago
    I'm so sorry, exposure is down how many percent?
  • EGreg 1 hour ago
    A lot of PHP environments were set up years ago, and run versions below PHP 8.1. If they don’t do something, eventually, they might be exploited, and turned into botnets or worse. A lot of the old PHP forums and other websites might get back door doors and impersonate people, etc.

    I developed a proxy that sanitizes input before it reaches PHP. I had to put it together quickly, but since then, I’ve made it a lot more user-friendly, including PHP installation scripts that automatically scan your Web server configuration, and suggest exactly how to install the proxy. The proxy itself is written in C, and I recommend running it under a Linux user that has absolutely no file permissions. All it’s supposed to do is transform input into safe output. I would argue that this proxy might even be safer than the patch, because it might prevent other vulnerabilities that researchers haven’t found yet.

    It’s just a generally good idea to sanitize input before it reaches your app servers anyway. But if you are running and older PHP environment, I don’t think there are any other good options than this…

    https://github.com/Qbix/proxy

    • doctoboggan 52 minutes ago
      Maybe a grey hat should scan for all the vulnerable servers they can find, exploit them, and then patch them.
      • ghostbrainalpha 37 minutes ago
        That's the definition of a White Hat to me.
        • pizzafeelsright 25 minutes ago
          If there was a well known company, TrustedExploitAndPatch Inc, that had faces and contact info and dropped an 'oh by the way.txt' file with the details, screen recording, etc. after patching showing they didn't exfil all the coins - would people be happy?

          Even if someone finds your wallet and returns it, full of its original cash, they still would have had time to snag your credit card numbers, figure out your address, what coupons you have.

          The alternative is a guy in a suit walking up and saying "I saw your wallet in the bushes on 144th and 132nd."

    • minitech 27 minutes ago
      - please stop spamming this

      - but anyone who deploys thousands of lines of vibe-coded C that implements a transforming HTTP proxy from scratch instead of a patch (hey, it “might even be safer than the patch”!) deserves what they get

      edit: shocker https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50199456

  • larahawkinsauth 1 hour ago
    Great Breakdown
  • jehykyle 51 minutes ago
    [flagged]
  • phplovesong 38 minutes ago
    PHP just sucks so bad.