In late 2022 and early 2023, Project Zero reported eighteen 0-day vulnerabilities in Exynos Modems produced by Samsung Semiconductor. The four most severe of these eighteen vulnerabilities (CVE-2023-24033 and three other vulnerabilities that have yet to be assigned CVE-IDs) allowed for Internet-to-baseband remote code execution. Tests conducted by Project Zero confirm that those four vulnerabilities allow an attacker to remotely compromise a phone at the baseband level with no user interaction, and require only that the attacker know the victim's phone number. With limited additional research and development, we believe that skilled attackers would be able to quickly create an operational exploit to compromise affected devices silently and remotely.

You may need to turn off Wi-Fi calling and VoLTE for a bit.

Although this looks like the real My Vodafone carrier app available in the App Store, it didn't come from the App Store and is not the real application from Vodafone. TAG suspects that a target receives a link to this app in an SMS, after the attacker asks the carrier to disable the target's mobile data connection. The SMS claims that in order to restore mobile data connectivity, the target must install the carrier app and includes a link to download and install this fake app.

Although this looks like the real My Vodafone carrier app available in the App Store, it didn't come from the App Store and is not the real application from Vodafone. TAG suspects that a target receives a link to this app in an SMS, after the attacker asks the carrier to disable the target's mobile data connection. The SMS claims that in order to restore mobile data connectivity, the target must install the carrier app and includes a link to download and install this fake app.

Whenever there’s a new in-the-wild 0-day disclosed, I’m very interested in understanding the root cause of the bug. This allows us to then understand if it was fully fixed, look for variants, and brainstorm new mitigations. This blog is the story of a “zombie” Safari 0-day and how it came back from the dead to be disclosed as exploited in-the-wild in 2022. CVE-2022-22620 was initially fixed in 2013, reintroduced in 2016, and then disclosed as exploited in-the-wild in 2022. If you’re interested in the full root cause analysis for CVE-2022-22620, we’ve published it here.

Whenever there’s a new in-the-wild 0-day disclosed, I’m very interested in understanding the root cause of the bug. This allows us to then understand if it was fully fixed, look for variants, and brainstorm new mitigations. This blog is the story of a “zombie” Safari 0-day and how it came back from the dead to be disclosed as exploited in-the-wild in 2022. CVE-2022-22620 was initially fixed in 2013, reintroduced in 2016, and then disclosed as exploited in-the-wild in 2022. If you’re interested in the full root cause analysis for CVE-2022-22620, we’ve published it here.

Information about 0-days exploited in-the-wild!

Information about 0-days exploited in-the-wild!

A Year in Review of 0-days Used In-the-Wild in 2021

A Year in Review of 0-days Used In-the-Wild in 2021

Google's Project Zero has published a report showing that organizations took less time to address the zero-day vulnerabilities that the team reported last year.

Google's Project Zero has published a report showing that organizations took less time to address the zero-day vulnerabilities that the team reported last year.

* In 2021, vendors took an average of 52 days to fix security vulnerabilities reported from Project Zero. This is a significant acceleration from an average of about 80 days 3 years ago. * In addition to the average now being well below the 90-day deadline, we have also seen a dropoff in vendors missing the deadline (or the additional 14-day grace period). In 2021, only one bug exceeded its fix deadline, though 14% of bugs required the grace period. * Differences in the amount of time it takes a vendor/product to ship a fix to users reflects their product design, development practices, update cadence, and general processes towards security reports. We hope that this comparison can showcase best practices, and encourage vendors to experiment with new policies. * This data aggregation and analysis is relatively new for Project Zero, but we hope to do it more in the future. We encourage all vendors to consider publishing aggregate data on their time-to-fix and time-to-patch for externally reported vulnerabilities, as well as more data sharing and transparency in general.

* In 2021, vendors took an average of 52 days to fix security vulnerabilities reported from Project Zero. This is a significant acceleration from an average of about 80 days 3 years ago. * In addition to the average now being well below the 90-day deadline, we have also seen a dropoff in vendors missing the deadline (or the additional 14-day grace period). In 2021, only one bug exceeded its fix deadline, though 14% of bugs required the grace period. * Differences in the amount of time it takes a vendor/product to ship a fix to users reflects their product design, development practices, update cadence, and general processes towards security reports. We hope that this comparison can showcase best practices, and encourage vendors to experiment with new policies. * This data aggregation and analysis is relatively new for Project Zero, but we hope to do it more in the future. We encourage all vendors to consider publishing aggregate data on their time-to-fix and time-to-patch for externally reported vulnerabilities, as well as more data sharing and transparency in general.