Method check
has a Cognitive Complexity of 19 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def check
sysinfo_value = sysinfo['OS']
if sysinfo_value !~ /windows/i
# Non-Windows systems are definitely not affected.
return CheckCode::Safe('Target is not a Windows system, so it is not affected by this vulnerability!')
- Read upRead up
Cognitive Complexity
Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.
A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:
- Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
- Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
- Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"
Further reading
Method initialize
has 61 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def initialize(info = {})
super(
update_info(
info,
'Name' => 'Background Intelligent Transfer Service Arbitrary File Move Privilege Elevation Vulnerability',
Method check
has 41 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def check
sysinfo_value = sysinfo['OS']
if sysinfo_value !~ /windows/i
# Non-Windows systems are definitely not affected.
return CheckCode::Safe('Target is not a Windows system, so it is not affected by this vulnerability!')
Method exploit
has 35 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def exploit
# Step 1: Check target environment is correct.
print_status('Step #1: Checking target environment...')
if is_system?
fail_with(Failure::None, 'Session is already elevated')
Method check_windowscoredeviceinfo_dll_exists_on_target
has a Cognitive Complexity of 11 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def check_windowscoredeviceinfo_dll_exists_on_target
# Taken from bwatters-r7's cve-2020-0688_service_tracing.rb code.
#
# We are going to overwrite the WindowsCoreDeviceInfo.dll DLL as part of our exploit.
# The second part of this exploit will trigger a Update Session to be created so that this DLL
- Read upRead up
Cognitive Complexity
Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.
A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:
- Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
- Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
- Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"
Further reading
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Detected('Vulnerable Windows 7/Windows Server 2008 R2 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1511 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Safe('The build number of the target machine does not appear to be a vulnerable version!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1703 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1607 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Detected('Vulnerable Windows 8/Windows Server 2012 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1803 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Detected('Vulnerable Windows 8.1/Windows Server 2012 R2 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1709 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1809 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Appears('Vulnerable Windows 10 v1507 build detected!')
Avoid too many return
statements within this method. Open
return CheckCode::Detected('Windows Windows Server 2008 build detected!')
Method check_target_and_payload_match_and_supported
has a Cognitive Complexity of 6 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def check_target_and_payload_match_and_supported(client_arch)
if (client_arch != ARCH_X64) && (client_arch != ARCH_X86)
fail_with(Failure::BadConfig, 'This exploit currently only supports x86 and x64 targets!')
end
payload_arch = payload.arch.first # TODO: Add missing documentation for payload.arch, @wvu used this first but it is not documented anywhere.
- Read upRead up
Cognitive Complexity
Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.
A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:
- Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
- Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
- Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"
Further reading
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
elsif version.build_number == Msf::WindowsVersion::Win81 # Includes Server 2012 R2
target_not_presently_supported
return CheckCode::Detected('Vulnerable Windows 8.1/Windows Server 2012 R2 build detected!')
elsif version.build_number == Msf::WindowsVersion::Win8 # Includes Server 2012
target_not_presently_supported
- Read upRead up
Duplicated Code
Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:
Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.
When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).
Tuning
This issue has a mass of 62.
We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.
The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.
If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.
See codeclimate-duplication
's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml
.
Refactorings
- Extract Method
- Extract Class
- Form Template Method
- Introduce Null Object
- Pull Up Method
- Pull Up Field
- Substitute Algorithm
Further Reading
- Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
- Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
- Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76
Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring. Open
if file?(wow64_target_payload_pathname)
print_warning("#{wow64_target_payload_pathname} already exists")
print_warning('If it is in use, the overwrite will fail')
unless datastore['OVERWRITE_DLL']
print_error('Change OVERWRITE_DLL option to true if you would like to proceed.')
- Read upRead up
Duplicated Code
Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:
Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.
When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).
Tuning
This issue has a mass of 25.
We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.
The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.
If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.
See codeclimate-duplication
's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml
.
Refactorings
- Extract Method
- Extract Class
- Form Template Method
- Introduce Null Object
- Pull Up Method
- Pull Up Field
- Substitute Algorithm
Further Reading
- Don't Repeat Yourself on the C2 Wiki
- Duplicated Code on SourceMaking
- Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code by Martin Fowler. Duplicated Code, p76