There are many CVE IDs assigned for various issues resulting in missing or improper Mark-of-the-Web (MOTW) propagation when extracting files from archives (#1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, and so on).
Some of these issues are disputed using the same template (inserted by MITRE):
- Mark-of-the-Web propagation can increase risk via security-warning habituation – in other words, users are tired of such warnings;
- the intended control sphere for file-origin metadata (e.g., HostUrl in Zone.Identifier) may be narrower than that for reading the file’s content – simply propagating the “Zone.Identifier” alternative data stream isn’t enough to adhere a possible security policy, although I haven’t seen any real-world examples of this not being enough, security policies (not to be confused with hunting rules) aren’t bound to fields other than “ZoneId”.
Microsoft treats MOTW in their software as a defense-in-depth feature which isn’t serviceable. Although bypasses observed in-the-wild get CVE IDs (e.g., CVE-2024-38217).
As a result, I’m not sure if MOTW is a security boundary, but here is another big issue…
Continue reading “Mark-of-the-Web: the rules changed, the tools didn’t”

