TechRepublic : A ZDNet Tech Community

IT Security

Host: Chad Perrin
Contact

Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability

In a surprise move this year, Microsoft has decided to quietly install what amounts to a massive security vulnerability in Firefox without informing the user. Find out what Microsoft has to say about it, and how you can undo the damage.


Microsoft pushed out its .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 update this February. The “List of changes and fixes” article about this update says:

The .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 is a full cumulative update that contains many new features. These new features build incrementally upon the .NET Framework 2.0, the .NET Framework 3.0, and the .NET Framework 3.5. It also includes cumulative servicing updates to the dependent .NET Framework 2.0 and .NET Framework 3.0 subcomponents. This update should be applied as an important update for the .NET Framework 2.0 and later versions, and it is recommended for all other supported operating systems.

The article then goes on to list a dizzying array of changes delivered by the update.

According to Annoyances.org, however, it does something that isn’t listed there — it installs the Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant extension for Firefox, silently, without informing the user. If you had Firefox on your computer when this update was installed, you may be subject to some dire consequences. In Remove the Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant (ClickOnce) Firefox Extension, Annoyances.org says:

This update adds to Firefox one of the most dangerous vulnerabilities present in all versions of Internet Explorer: the ability for websites to easily and quietly install software on your PC. Since this design flaw is one of the reasons you may’ve originally choosen to abandon IE in favor of a safer browser like Firefox, you may wish to remove this extension with all due haste.

Yes, that’s right — the long-time, well known security hole present in Internet Explorer that consists of essentially letting Websites install dangerous, untrusted code on your computer willy-nilly has now been shoehorned into your MS Windows install of Firefox without your knowledge or permission.

Worse yet, Microsoft isn’t satisfied with just giving you vulnerabilities without your permission or even you knowledge. It has also gone out of its way to ensure that you’ll have a difficult time removing the vulnerability from your system if you should happen to become aware of it. The Uninstall button for this extension in Firefox has been deactivated. In Uninstalling the Clickonce Support for Firefox, Microsoft employee Brad Abrams says:

We added this support at the machine level in order to enable the feature for all users on the machine. Seems reasonable right? Well, turns out that enabling this functionality at the machine level, rather than at the user level means that the “Uninstall” button is grayed out in the Firefox Add-ons menu because standard users are not permitted to uninstall machine-level components.

Brad Abrams explains that an update has been produced, in response to a lot of negative reaction from people who realized that MS was monkeying around with their Firefox installs without permission or notification, that turns the extension into a “per-user component”. Of course, he thoroughly downplays the negative reaction, saying:

Clearly this is a bit frustrating for some users that wanted an easy way to uninstall the Clickonce Support for Firefox.

Reading some of the Slashdot commentary, I’d say it was far worse than “a bit frustrating” for some user. It was downright enraging for some, and I don’t blame them.

He claims turning the .NET Framework Assistant into a per-user component makes uninstalling it “a LOT cleaner”. In some respects, this is true. The process for a full uninstall that was necessary to get it out of your hair as a standard system user can be pretty scary for someone who isn’t a bona-fide expert computer user. Even most so-called Power Users should be vary leery of following those instructions. Those of us who have actually gotten to the point where we edited registry keys for a living (yes, I had a job a few years back that included that unenviable task, and I got quite good at doing so quickly and safely), on the other hand, should find it pretty simple.

On the other hand, making it a per-user component means that when one user uninstalls it, another can still have it. If you’re uninstalling it for security reasons, this should set off a warning klaxon in your head, complete with flashing red lights. If you’re the only person who ever uses your computer, this might mitigate the problem somewhat, but anyone who manages to remotely exploit your system as another unprivileged user account may then be able to make use of the security hole represented by the .NET Framework Assistant to increase his or her hold on the system (among other nightmare scenarios that may spring to mind).

I guess you have to admire the sheer chutzpah of someone like Brad Abrams trying to put a bright, happy face on this situation. It takes real courage to stand out front telling users about this major hose-job and try to find a way to spin it so the users won’t turn into a lynch mob. At least he has the decency to tell us how to do the work necessary to remove the unwanted Firefox extension. Go read his Weblog post (linked above) now, and make the necessary changes, if you’re using Firefox on MS Windows.

I recommend you do the registry hacking necessary to carve this thing out of the guts of your system, get rid of Firefox entirely and use one of the other third-party Web browsers that isn’t known for screwing its users, or just get rid of MS Windows entirely, at this point. Do you remember when I listed 5 characteristics of security policy I can trust? Yeah. Anything that Microsoft can modify from afar like this doesn’t even begin to satisfy my criteria, and this incident is an excellent example of that.

It looks like the biggest security vulnerability in Mozilla Firefox this year is Microsoft.

Chad PerrinChad Perrin is an IT consultant, developer, and freelance professional writer. He holds both Microsoft and CompTIA certifications and is a graduate of two IT industry trade schools. Read his full bio and profile.

Print/View all Posts Comments on this blog

Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability apotheon | 06/02/09
The evil empire mcfant | 06/02/09
Well all I can say is Tony Hopkinson | 06/03/09
and most of the EULA has the legal backing of the spoken word Deadly Ernest | 06/03/09
EULA would have to be legally binding Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
Not going to do you any good when you've already been boned Tony Hopkinson | 06/03/09
What happened to "Trustworthy Computing"? bpsull@... | 06/03/09
how do i ... rossstilwill@... | 06/29/09
I just followed the procedure in the link, however Tony Hopkinson | 06/29/09
How to remove the .NET Framework Assistant for Firefox Jwagdy | 07/05/09
This is typical MS fare darpoke | 06/03/09
There is! DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
BSA? apotheon | 06/03/09
Yepp... DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
you say that as if.. gavin142 | 06/03/09
two things apotheon | 06/03/09
The difference with MS is they've already Deadly Ernest | 06/04/09
Wait there's More.... DaemonSlayer | 06/04/09
People refer to these entities as cartels darpoke | 06/04/09
I had been done over Tony Hopkinson | 06/03/09
I feel like I've been raped in my sleep Sterling "Chip" Camden | 06/03/09
No Fix Here AlexNagy | 06/04/09
Thanks for the heads up Michael Jay | 06/04/09
thank you pgit | 06/04/09
Conficker wdewey@... | 06/04/09
Bullet proof since version 1.0 Johanoslo | 06/04/09
No it wasn't Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
Seen this nonsense before! PromptJock | 06/04/09
Can't Get Rid of "last of Firefoxexe."? teret@... | 06/04/09
Apparently MS has an update for this mudpuppy1 | 06/04/09
Hmm Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
Yep mudpuppy1 | 06/04/09
Just Disable that Add-on? bbarnes@... | 06/04/09
"disable" doesn't solve all problems apotheon | 06/04/09
Typical MS rhgarne1@... | 06/09/09
I really wish people would keep up to date... Marty R. Milette | 06/09/09
ROFLMAO Tony Hopkinson | 06/09/09
That does not, in any way, excuse what MS did in the first place as Deadly Ernest | 06/09/09
mentioned in the article apotheon | 06/09/09
well this just tickles me. Jaqui | 06/02/09
taste in browsers apotheon | 06/02/09
lynx. ~nt~ Jaqui | 06/03/09
Text only. Palmetto | 06/03/09
it's not just that Jaqui | 06/03/09
That's not the only problem. apotheon | 06/03/09
Not all non-windows browsers are text-only rmerchberger@... | 06/09/09
Opera cbader@... | 06/03/09
Opera Rocks! etkinsd@... | 06/03/09
yuck apotheon | 06/03/09
More, definitely Sterling "Chip" Camden | 06/03/09
why? pgit | 06/04/09
Well . . . apotheon | 06/04/09
yep pgit | 06/05/09
Galeon and Epiphany -- ugh. apotheon | 06/05/09
Opera DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
re: Chrome apotheon | 06/03/09
I'm still using Chrome as my default browser Sterling "Chip" Camden | 06/03/09
Chrome gavin142 | 06/03/09
Wow . . . apotheon | 06/03/09
Browsers LarryBoy2 | 06/04/09
Like Chrome? Try SRware Iron... EkaInfinitos | 06/09/09
meh apotheon | 06/09/09
One Browser? AlexNagy | 06/04/09
ack apotheon | 06/04/09
Nope santeewelding | 06/02/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability gassyandy | 06/03/09
"...now they screw with open source." Palmetto | 06/03/09
~lol~ Jaqui | 06/03/09
Their feature is our security hole bboyd@... | 06/03/09
It's just a plugin Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
of course if you don' t use .NET at all it's not a problem Deadly Ernest | 06/03/09
business requirnment unfortunately Neon Samurai | 06/04/09
small problem with that apotheon | 06/03/09
armor DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
The fault is with Firefox inet32@... | 06/05/09
Gee the Windows systems must be wider open that I thought Deadly Ernest | 06/05/09
Really????? LarryBoy2 | 06/05/09
Who said MSFT did anything unique? inet32@... | 06/28/09
quibbles apotheon | 06/28/09
Hmmm Tony Hopkinson | 06/05/09
To those who hold Mozilla harmless, ... deepsand | 06/05/09
It isn't but Tony Hopkinson | 06/06/09
Since FF uses the Chrome system for its local store, ... deepsand | 06/07/09
How can you secure anything from the authority level Tony Hopkinson | 06/07/09
Why not local encryption? deepsand | 06/07/09
Doable Tony Hopkinson | 06/07/09
encryption vs. OS apotheon | 06/08/09
Yep more 'secure' than a simple registry entry Tony Hopkinson | 06/08/09
the best solution apotheon | 06/08/09
A nice change to the caption Tony Hopkinson | 06/08/09
Not massively hot on the necessary knowledge darpoke | 06/09/09
re: Little Brother apotheon | 06/09/09
All deepends on how much trouble the 'bad guys' want to go to Tony Hopkinson | 06/09/09
apotheon : Access to decrypted data not a problem. deepsand | 06/09/09
no forging needed apotheon | 06/17/09
The application would issue its own CAs that are different; ... deepsand | 06/17/09
Why does the OS reverse engineering things come into this? apotheon | 06/18/09
Without knowing what the application is trying to do, ... deepsand | 06/18/09
So? apotheon | 06/18/09
Going in circles? deepsand | 06/18/09
I could be wrong darpoke | 06/19/09
bring it all together apotheon | 06/19/09
Still missing the point deepsand | 06/20/09
It's still on the system Neon Samurai | 06/20/09
Each permitted BHO/etal. would have its own CA, ... deepsand | 06/20/09
What? apotheon | 06/20/09
CA = Certificate of Authority. deepsand | 06/20/09
You aren't making as much sense as you probably think you are. apotheon | 06/21/09
No one else seems to have trouble understanding my meanings. deepsand | 06/21/09
You're kidding . . . right? apotheon | 06/22/09
No, I am not kidding. deepsand | 06/22/09
an application's secrets apotheon | 06/23/09
Of course it's a cat and mouse game. deepsand | 06/23/09
Questions santeewelding | 06/23/09
I'll knock my head against this wall a little more. apotheon | 06/23/09
That, santeewelding | 06/23/09
Why? apotheon | 06/24/09
On matters of theory we agree. deepsand | 06/24/09
ahem apotheon | 06/25/09
ahem, redux deepsand | 06/26/09
Some of your questions seem to indicate you're not paying attention. apotheon | 06/28/09
Obscuration of an operating system santeewelding | 06/29/09
Your position, apotheon, rests on the assumption that ... deepsand | 06/29/09
I guess you've given up directly addressing the issue at hand. apotheon | 06/30/09
In this case, I can make such assertions. deepsand | 07/01/09
here you go again apotheon | 07/01/09
The claim that OS developers can always thwart App. developers ... deepsand | 07/02/09
weird apotheon | 07/03/09
Try both reading more carefully and being less evasive. deepsand | 07/04/09
two things, then I'm done apotheon | 07/04/09
I'll take that as "I can't support my position, so ..." deepsand | 07/05/09
poppycock apotheon | 07/06/09
Evades that which you did. [eom] deepsand | 07/06/09
Yes, but . . . inet32@... | 06/28/09
not exactly apotheon | 06/28/09
Wasn't silent on mine Tony Hopkinson | 06/29/09
Was here, on several machines. [eom] deepsand | 07/01/09
Is anyone surprised by this? Deadly Ernest | 06/03/09
Not really LarryBoy2 | 06/04/09
Predator sk.dunnage@... | 06/26/09
It was an error, not a deliberate act. [eom] deepsand | 06/27/09
source, please apotheon | 06/28/09
Pretty please. santeewelding | 06/29/09
Citation to support implied counterclaim, please. [eom] deepsand | 07/02/09
What counterclaim? apotheon | 07/03/09
Well, then idle curiously or mere speculation? deepsand | 07/05/09
neither apotheon | 07/06/09
That's just your funny definition of "straw man." deepsand | 07/06/09
Curious, no add on Michael Kassner | 06/03/09
a couple of possibilities apotheon | 06/03/09
No to both Michael Kassner | 06/03/09
not in this case apotheon | 06/03/09
Strange Michael Kassner | 06/03/09
thanks apotheon | 06/03/09
using noscript rbees | 06/03/09
Thanks for the info Michael Kassner | 06/03/09
I had a thought . . . apotheon | 06/03/09
Not really Michael Kassner | 06/03/09
couldn't say rbees | 06/04/09
I can, though LarryBoy2 | 06/04/09
Me too Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
Passing strange seanferd | 06/03/09
Win XP SP3 Michael Kassner | 06/04/09
.NET SP mudpuppy1 | 06/04/09
Thanks and I do Michael Kassner | 06/04/09
Not just XP Datacommguy | 06/04/09
another possability, patches done previous to user setup Neon Samurai | 06/04/09
Not on my system either yogi_john@... | 06/05/09
Did you look in... DaemonSlayer | 06/06/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability noorman | 06/03/09
Hefty for MS is much higher than the club covercharge Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
they'll only put Win 7 up by another $10.00 a copy. Deadly Ernest | 06/03/09
Tone it down robkraft@... | 06/03/09
Wait a minute... lestertrad@... | 06/03/09
Strong Words sboverie@... | 06/03/09
Huh ?? Tony Hopkinson | 06/03/09
Think beyond MS sboverie@... | 06/03/09
What mistake? Tony Hopkinson | 06/03/09
Corporations are not human sboverie@... | 06/04/09
Kind of funny how corporations have turned out - historically Deadly Ernest | 06/04/09
If you did this as a private US citizen Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
sbovery, technically amoral or sociopath rather than psychotic Neon Samurai | 06/04/09
Corporations sboverie@... | 06/04/09
Hate? nah Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
Hell, no rational person would claim darpoke | 06/05/09
Well stated, darpoke! LarryBoy2 | 06/05/09
Thanks, Larry. darpoke | 06/05/09
I'm with LarryBoy2. apotheon | 06/05/09
On the other hand... DHCDBD | 06/03/09
If it was out of character, this would be different Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
Billion Dollar Mob bboyd@... | 06/03/09
no external conspiracy needed Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
Another Reason. . . lodestone | 06/04/09
Lovely advice, now please go and preach it at Redmond Deadly Ernest | 06/03/09
heck.. not the first time the've pointed guns at Mozilla even Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
Sure, no problem Tony Hopkinson | 06/03/09
Did M$ even care??? DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
I'm not one to call for class action law as a first reaction.. but.. Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
I agree entirely with this NotSoChiGuy | 06/03/09
AGREED!! Bebedo | 06/03/09
Disagreements. Palmetto | 06/03/09
we have autoupdates disabled Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
The first mistake here was to Deadly Ernest | 06/04/09
I'm back to my historical reconstruction plan also Neon Samurai | 06/04/09
Win 98 works perfectly on a Pentium 2 but not on a Pentium 3 Deadly Ernest | 06/04/09
I have a few local ideas but thank you for offering Neon Samurai | 06/05/09
I've installed 98 on a P3 mudpuppy1 | 06/05/09
Please DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
If an agreement is made with a gun at your head? aidplus@... | 06/09/09
I'll answer both questions - the EULA is not fully legal as the Deadly Ernest | 06/09/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability badgerous | 06/03/09
hp webprintin too RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability amj2006 | 06/03/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability SkyStrike2001@... | 06/03/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability kbc2811 | 06/03/09
more like your home building contractor Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability techrepublic.com@... | 06/03/09
Normally, it would warn the user Neon Samurai | 06/03/09
Won't disagree DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
I was wondering about that Michael Kassner | 06/03/09
Add-ons DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
It *Does* Notify You Of This Fevrin | 06/04/09
Well you can talk her through the patch Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
Actually Fevrin | 06/05/09
I sure hope Mozilla sue Microsoft on this one chaz15 | 06/03/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability rexrzer1238477@... | 06/03/09
You're on to something DaemonSlayer | 06/03/09
It only took a couple of minutes TaDaH | 06/03/09
Why would I want DotNet installed at all? seanferd | 06/03/09
uninstall it pgit | 06/04/09
Already there seanferd | 06/04/09
.net model wdewey@... | 06/04/09
Oh, it has got to be better than COM seanferd | 06/04/09
Built in to OS wdewey@... | 06/04/09
very good points pgit | 06/05/09
This is why! feral@... | 06/04/09
Microsoft is acting like a criminal harrylal | 06/04/09
They are being Tony Hopkinson | 06/04/09
Furthermore... RipVan | 06/04/09
Should have been released through standard method for extensions wdewey@... | 06/04/09
Now... melekali | 06/04/09
So why attack Firefox? walrus@... | 06/05/09
Nobody attacked Firefox. apotheon | 06/05/09
I Don't Know... Fevrin | 06/06/09
eliminating a little ambiguity apotheon | 06/06/09
So why attack Firefox? walrus@... | 06/05/09
Not a problem with a Dell Ubuntu machine... mikifinaz1@... | 06/05/09
3rd-party FF ClickOnce extension available. deepsand | 06/05/09
And seanferd | 06/09/09
Microsoft is Firefox's worst vulnerability Deadly Ernest | 06/08/09
indeed apotheon | 06/08/09
Oh, I'm sure I do, use FireFox on a non-Windows enrionment Deadly Ernest | 06/09/09
ahem apotheon | 06/09/09
good for you, keep it up. (NT) Deadly Ernest | 06/09/09
RE: Microsoft may be Firefox's worst vulnerability craigkra@... | 06/09/09
One answer for you Deadly Ernest | 06/09/09
Not necessarily so. deepsand | 06/17/09
All Fixed Now in FF V3.0.11 aockrim@... | 06/22/09
Not on the 5 machines I've checked. deepsand | 06/22/09
Wait for your next windows update Tony Hopkinson | 06/24/09
MS provided the fix, not FF deepsand | 06/26/09
yeah they did AFTER they created a problem that need never Deadly Ernest | 06/26/09
Not the point. deepsand | 06/27/09
Not true nikkineccle@... | 06/29/09
Lies? deepsand | 06/29/09
The Emperor's New Clothes. deepsand | 07/02/09
It's more a case of people telling the truth about the evil Stalin Deadly Ernest | 07/02/09
The Prince chose his own wardrobe. Deal with it. deepsand | 07/03/09
No he didn't, to make any application work with any version Deadly Ernest | 07/03/09
Not so. deepsand | 07/04/09
Sorry, but I'll believe what MS staff tell me on this one Deadly Ernest | 07/04/09
Maybe he likes making his OS crash. apotheon | 07/04/09
Gross exaggerations based on misrepresentations? deepsand | 07/05/09
I do NOT currently write apps for direct use with MS Windows Deadly Ernest | 07/05/09
The issue does not involve resource management by the OS. deepsand | 07/05/09
What? apotheon | 07/06/09
Your zealotry is showing. deepsand | 07/06/09
Gee, that's a strong argument. apotheon | 07/06/09
Study real hard, and you might yet get your wish. deepsand | 07/06/09
Just . . . wow. apotheon | 07/04/09
Through the Looking Glass deepsand | 07/05/09
It's all you, man. apotheon | 07/06/09
Down yet another rabbit hole. deepsand | 07/06/09
holy cow apotheon | 07/06/09
Lead by example. deepsand | 07/06/09
The truth comes out. apotheon | 07/03/09
I grow confused, now santeewelding | 07/03/09
I grow annoyed. apotheon | 07/03/09
I do say what I mean. santeewelding | 07/03/09
You speak of your own santeewelding | 07/03/09
not really apotheon | 07/03/09
Lay off the DSM santeewelding | 07/03/09
And yet, apotheon, you tolerate your own. deepsand | 07/04/09
Yeah . . . apotheon | 07/04/09
Well, that was certainly professional! deepsand | 07/05/09
Total BS. deepsand | 07/04/09
I do deal with it . . . apotheon | 07/04/09
Try dealing with it a little more professionally. deepsand | 07/05/09
three things apotheon | 07/06/09
You lost it at "troll." [eom] deepsand | 07/06/09
Why was Safari not so afflicted? deepsand | 07/05/09
update didn't include a plugin? Neon Samurai | 07/05/09
The update in question wasn't an IE update, but one for .NET3. deepsand | 07/05/09
FF uses the .net framework? Neon Samurai | 07/05/09
FF relies on and implicitly trusts the Registry Hive. deepsand | 07/05/09
isn't reading the registry a function of any Windows program? Neon Samurai | 07/05/09
An application need not use the Registry as its sole data store. deepsand | 07/05/09
That is something MS has to contend with Neon Samurai | 07/06/09
sharing apotheon | 07/06/09
Never said that FF was more or less vulnerable than others. deepsand | 07/06/09
The cake is a lie. apotheon | 07/06/09
WTF? deepsand | 07/06/09
if you'll accept a third party comment then I'm backing out of this Neon Samurai | 07/07/09
nope apotheon | 07/06/09
In theory, yes, deepsand | 07/06/09
In practice . . . apotheon | 07/06/09
Relevance? deepsand | 07/06/09
another example apotheon | 07/07/09
no apotheon | 07/06/09
So what? deepsand | 07/06/09
egad apotheon | 07/06/09
More so than you seemingly do to your own. [eom] deepsand | 07/06/09
Where's the /ignore button on this thing? apotheon | 07/07/09

What do you think?

White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

Recent Entries

TR on Twitter

Archives

TechRepublic Blogs



Quick Reference: Linux Commands
Reduce stress and speed up resolutions with the easiest command references right at your fingertips. You'll receive a PDF file covering Linux, packed with the most common commands you'll need and use daily.
Buy Now
Administrator's Guide to TCP/IP, Second Edition
Maintain your critical TCP/IP system and ensure reliable, safe remote access. Get the expert advice and solutions to handle Windows networking, Cisco routing, documentation, and troubleshooting.
Buy Now

SmartPlanet

Click Here